With his stunning1 reversals2 on Ukraine3, President Trump seems ready to give up his bid to halt Russia’s war on its smaller, beleaguered neighbor. He shouldn’t. Even with stepped-up US support for Kyiv, including expanded intelligence4, authority5, and ability6 to strike deeper into Russia, the grinding war and “savage strikes”7 from Moscow will continue. Trump can move the parties towards his original, correct goal of a ceasefire by turning to the Balkans – a nearby theatre of competition in which the US and its allies hold strategic leverage. With his trademark audacity, the US President can exploit Putin’s obsessions with Serbia and Kosovo, defining a path for a territorial settlement with Ukraine while summoning additional pressure on the Kremlin to accept it.
Instead of the amorphous, ineffective call for war-ending “land swaps”8, the White House can propose that Kyiv and Moscow accept an interim arrangement on the Donbas and other contested territory modeled on UN Security Council resolution 12449 – the Russian-backed terms for Kosovo following the NATO intervention a quarter century ago. Crucially for Ukraine, this resolution sidestepped the question of Kosovo’s sovereignty – envisioning a final settlement based ultimately on “the will of the people.”10 Establishing a purely “provisional … transitional” UN administration, resolution 1244 opened a trajectory for Kosovo to eventually secede from Serbia, without declaring or denying Pristina’s independence from Belgrade. Zelensky is far more likely to accept such an arrangement, which allows the Ukrainian President to tell his citizens that Donbas is still part of Ukraine and that the people of Donetsk and Luhansk (and agreed neighboring oblasts) will ultimately decide which country has dominion over them.
Benefitting Kyiv, demographics in the Donbas and other contested territories are far more mixed than in lopsided Kosovo, where any referendum on independence was a foregone conclusion. Aided by the US, Ukraine and Russia can negotiate modalities for displaced persons and refugees to vote in the final settlement referenda. As required under the Ukrainian11 Constitution12, final approval would rest on a referendum among all Ukrainian voters. As in Kosovo, overall administration of the Donbas would pass to the United Nations, or possibly the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE). Kyiv would see a halt to the intensive Russification of annexed Donbas, including the seizure of property, imposition of Russian passports, and military indoctrination of children. As in the Balkans, the UN or OSCE would set up property commissions, enabling displaced persons to assert their claims free from Russian barriers, fostering refugee return.
Crucially for Russia, the 1244 model would instantly sever Kyiv’s exercise of even symbolic sovereignty over the Donbas and environs, including in agreed areas that Russia does not control – and has little chance of controlling. In 1244, the Security Council implicitly mandated that there was ‘no going back’ – no reversion of Kosovo to Serbian control. Indeed, in November 2005, Russia, the US, and the three other members of the Contact Group set ”Guiding Principles”13 stipulating14 that “… Kosovo does not return to the pre-March 1999 situation.”
Russia, Ukraine, and the US could apply this model today, agreeing upfront on a broad “no return to the pre-war situation” principle, while expressly contemplating partition, union of Donbas with Russia, or a new form of integration within Ukraine, as the people of that region decide. Going beyond constructive ambiguity, the parties would set out defined, potential end-states that encompass Moscow’s position on sovereignty. Ratified at the Security Council, this represents a powerful inducement for the legalistic Putin. With a political template for the Donbas in hand, the vital discussion on security guarantees – the false promise of the Putin-Trump Alaska Summit15 – can begin. Like 1244, the US-brokered Security Council resolution will incorporate detailed security provisions, including on peacekeeping forces. Putin can hardly complain about employing the 1244 model. The Russian leader has religiously demanded “strict adherence”16 to Security Council resolution 1244 on Kosovo, while repeatedly invoking the “Kosovo precedent”17 as justification to annex Ukrainian territory. Speaking before the Duma in March 2014, Putin declared that the situation in Crimea “is absolutely the same18…as Kosovo’s secession from Serbia.”
In the wake of his February 2022 invasion, an emphatic Putin told UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres that the recognition of Kosovo as an independent state was the “precedent”19 for Russia to recognize independent Donbas. Putin is also on record conferring respect for the will of the people. Proposing annexation to the Duma in March 2014, Putin declared that Crimea had held “a referendum … in full compliance with democratic procedures and international norms.” In September 2022, Putin proclaimed that “referendums have been held … the ballots have been counted and … the people [of Donbas and neighboring regions] have made their unequivocal choice20 [to secede.]”
Right now, it doesn’t matter that the referenda were shams, that Putin’s words are cynical devices — or that the Russian leader’s aim remains turning Ukraine into a puppet-state. What matters is urgently reviving US-led diplomacy by forcing Russia and Ukraine to respond to constructive American proposals for a ceasefire. Putin’s devotion to 1244 and his endorsement of referenda create an opening. As Ukraine’s battlefield prospects improve with increased US support, so will the prospects for diplomacy – grounded in the practical, face-saving UN model for Kosovo that the Russian President has championed for over two decades. Putin’s bitter grievance21 over Kosovo22 also opens the door for a breakthrough with Serbia – one that can finally pull Belgrade from the Kremlin’s orbit and boost US leverage over Moscow. More than Slavic brotherhood, history, or anti-American antipathy, the Russo-Serbian relationship rests on staunch opposition by the Kremlin to Kosovo’s independence. Alongside China, Russia uses its Security Council veto to keep Kosovo out of the UN, in support of Belgrade’s hostility towards its former province. Isolating Kosovo remains Serbian President Aleksandar Vučić’s top foreign policy priority, underpinning Belgrade’s close relations with an array of malign actors, including Iran23 and Venezuela24, as well as Russia25 and China26.
In a rare, open rebuke, Serbian media in April 2022 accused27 Putin of a “stab in the back” after the Russian President told Secretary-General Gutteres that “the Kosovo precedent” allowed a seceding state to bypass the “central authorities”28, implying either Kyiv or Belgrade. “[Putin] has taken … the deciding step in recognizing Kosovo29…making it easier for Washington and the West to resolve it,” observed Srećko Djurić, former Serbian Ambassador to Belarus. Unlike President Biden, who missed the golden opportunity30 to sever Belgrade’s strategic partnership with Moscow at that time, President Trump can induce the decisive rupture by offering Serbia and Kosovo membership in NATO. Washington’s offer and Belgrade’s acceptance will have an immediate, transformative effect in and beyond the Balkans. Shattering its self-imposed taboo31 on joining the Alliance, the embrace of NATO by Serbia – Russia’s oldest, tightest friend in Europe – will deliver a swift, unsettling blow to Putin and a geopolitical setback for both Moscow and Beijing.
Unlike Belgrade’s dilatory EU membership charade32, the breathtaking commitment to join NATO – ending Serbian neutrality – is incompatible with Vučić’s multi-vectored foreign policy or his revival of Greater Serbian nationalism. For Belgrade, accepting membership in NATO – which bombed Serbia in the 1999 air campaign33 over Kosovo – means finally accepting the results of the aggressive wars launched under President Slobodan Milošević. With the largest, most destabilizing country in the Balkans finally in the Western camp, Trump can take credit for bringing the entire 35-year drama over Yugoslavia to a close. No longer will the unstable Balkans serve as a playground for Russian hybrid warfare, Chinese economic subversion, or languish as a ‘grey zone’ for organized crime, drug trafficking, and other security threats.
A dramatic about-face for Trump and an irreversible step when consummated, renewed expansion of the Alliance will resonate strongly with Kyiv, making its territorial concessions more feasible. The Administration’s34 security35 ‘assurances’36 will become more assuring to Ukraine, with the unequivocal US commitment to NATO demonstrated in the Balkans. Zelensky will take succor knowing that vital Serbian ammunition37 will flow directly to Ukraine, unimperiled by threats from Moscow. The offer of membership to Kosovo and Serbia will underscore Alliance agency, demonstrating that NATO makes strategic decisions, whether about the Balkans or the Eastern Flank, free from external pressure.
Facing the worst crisis38 of his twelve-year rule, Vučić has good reason to accept the offer. Trump’s astronomical39 popularity in Serbia – his highest40 in the world – makes the US President the one figure who can make NATO membership palatable in the country. The long-postponed decision41 by the Trump Administration to enforce Biden-imposed sanctions42 on Serbia’s national oil company, NIS (Naftna Industrije Serbia), opens a striking new phase in Serbia’s relations with Russia and the US. Belgrade will suddenly have to decide whether its continuing dalliance with Moscow – which has so far refused to withdraw Gazprom Neft from its ownership position in NIS – is worth the serious economic and political hit that Serbia will see. Among the options that Vučić must consider is forcibly exiting Gazprom Neft by nationalizing NIS. Such a dramatic breach with the Kremlin would set the stage for the decisive step to join NATO.
The long-postponed decision43 by the Trump Administration to enforce Biden-imposed sanctions44 on Serbia’s national oil company, NIS (Naftna Industrije Serbia), opens a striking new phase in Serbia’s relations with Russia and the US. Belgrade will suddenly have to decide whether its continuing dalliance with Moscow – which has so far refused to withdraw Gazprom Neft from its ownership position in NIS – is worth the serious economic and political hit that Serbia will see. Among the options that Vučić must consider is forcibly exiting Gazprom Neft by nationalizing NIS. Such a dramatic breach with the Kremlin would set the stage for the decisive step to join NATO.
Belying negative government narratives, Belgrade has cordial relations45 with46 NATO47, both in Serbia and Kosovo, where the KFOR peacekeeping force retains popularity. Coincidentally, the new Serbian Ambassador to Washington, Dragan Šutanovac, has vigorously advocated that Serbia “accept reality” and advance its economic and security interests by joining NATO. Trump will sweeten the offer with a hefty investment and defense package under the US-Serbia Strategic Dialogue launched by the Biden Administration48. The decision to join NATO will inject a new dynamic into the unyielding national protests49, chiefly over government corruption and lack of accountability, issues that have long since eclipsed Kosovo. While hardline nationalists will assail Vučić over NATO, his base – as obedient as Trump’s – will swallow their leader’s decision, actively promoted by compliant national media. The prospect of serious reform required by NATO, along with revived EU accession, will attract significant parts of the opposition. Suddenly, the early elections and electoral reforms that Vučić has resisted will no longer appear so daunting.
With his flair for spectacle, Trump will invite the leaders of Serbia and Kosovo to the Oval Office – as he did in his first term50 – to sign membership commitments (conditioned on NATO-required reforms and accession process) and the seminal peace agreement that has eluded all of Trump’s predecessors going back to President Clinton. The Historic President Trump Agreement between Kosovo and Serbia will also formally codify the dormant EU Normalization Agreement51 between Kosovo and Serbia, along with its Annex52. The offer of NATO membership alone – the alpha and omega for Kosovar Albanians – will convince any Kosovo Prime Minister, including the hardline caretaker Premier, Albin Kurti, to finally establish a measure of self-rule for Kosovo Serbs. Given a pathway to join NATO, Kurti or any Kosovo Prime Minister can satisfy Belgrade’s long-standing demand53 and sign the EU draft statute54 creating the “Association of Serb Majority Municipalities.”
Vučić will recoup the ‘Association’ without needing to formally recognize Kosovo, beyond the de facto recognition already attributed55 to Belgrade and Pristina. For all his government’s bluster, Vučić understands that the Serbian position on Kosovo has never been weaker. A series of audacious moves by Kurti in the Serb-dominated north have marginalized legacy Serbian institutions and undermined Belgrade’s hopes for partition.
There are good reasons for the mercurial56 Trump, who once scorned tiny Montenegro’s57 accession to NATO, to change course on Kosovo and Serbia. Unlike in Ukraine, the burden and risks of expanding the Alliance in the Balkans – separated from the Russian landmass by a gauntlet of NATO countries – are virtually nil. NATO retains absolute supremacy across the region. Only three countries in the Balkans are not Alliance members: Bosnia-Herzegovina, Kosovo, and Serbia, the only one to rule out membership. In every other country, NATO accession has boosted stability, reduced net costs to the U.S, and increased American influence and investment prospects.
NATO expansion to Kosovo and Serbia would further reduce America’s security burden. NATO forces, including US troops, are already saddled with protecting Kosovo. Trump himself has repeatedly58 underscored the volatility of the situation, claiming at the UN59 General Assembly, at the NATO Summit60, and in the Oval Office that he stopped Serbia from “a big time war on Kosovo.” A Serbia-Kosovo agreement grounded in NATO membership will instantly calm tensions, allowing NATO and US troops to reduce their presence right away, and eventually to leave altogether. Republican members of Congress grasp the logic of NATO expansion in the Balkans. Brian Mast, the conservative Chair of the House Foreign Affairs Committee, has introduced legislation61 directing the State Department to “support … Kosovo’s …membership in NATO” and, “to encourage … Serbia to reduce or cease strategic engagement with the Russian Federation and … China”.
As Kosovo and Serbia prepare to become Allies in as soon as three years, formal recognition will become far less contentious. Like Greece and Turkey, Greece and North Macedonia, and Croatia and Montenegro, the transformative and tangible prospect of joining NATO – along with a reduction in tensions and an increase in trade – will assuage even Pristina and Belgrade. With the help of the adroit NATO Secretary-General Mark Rutte and his able Deputy, Radmila Šekerinska, former Macedonian Defense Minister, Washington can persuade the North Atlantic Council62 to offer the pathway to NATO for Kosovo and Serbia. Trump’s diplomatic breakthrough with the feuding Balkan parties, along with some legal sophistry, will win over even the four NATO Allies63 that do not recognize Kosovo. Long-awaited Greek64 recognition of Kosovo will likely follow the White House signing ceremony of the Trump agreement, boosting pragmatism in Romania, Slovakia, and Spain – none of which needs to immediately recognize Pristina.
By going outside the box in the Balkans, the Administration can achieve an outsized impact in Ukraine. Drawing on Putin’s convictions on Serbia and Kosovo, Trump can win valuable leverage over Moscow, viable concessions from Kyiv, and the serious consideration of the Nobel Committee.
References
[1] “Trump Suggests Ukraine Can Win Back All Territory Lost to Russia.” Fox News, September 24, 2025. https://www.foxnews.com/video/6380039408112.
[2] Phillips, Morgan. 2025. “Trump Finds New Leverage in Ukraine Fight with Tomahawk Threat and Long-Range Strike Authorization.” Fox News. September 29, 2025. https://www.foxnews.com/politics/trump-finds-new-leverage-ukraine-fight-tomahawk-threat-long-range-strike-authorization.
[3] Comerford, Ruth, and Anthony Zurcher. 2025. “Kyiv Can Win All of Ukraine Back from Russia, Trump Says.” BBC News, September 24, 2025. https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c07vm35rryeo.
[4] Pancevski, Bojan, Alexander Ward, and Lara Seligman. 2025. “U.S. to Provide Ukraine With Intelligence for Missile Strikes Deep Inside Russia.” Wall Street Journal, October 1, 2025. https://www.wsj.com/world/europe/u-s-to-provide-ukraine-with-intelligence-for-missile-strikes-deep-inside-russia.
[5] Volodymyr Ivanyshyn, “‘There Are No Such Things as Sanctuaries’ — Ukraine Can Conduct Strikes Deep Within Russian Territory, Kellogg Says,” Kyiv Independent, September 29, 2025, https://kyivindependent.com/ukraine-can-conduct-strikes-deep-within-russian-territory-kellogg-says/.
[6] Steve Holland, “Vance Says US Considering Tomahawk Missiles for Ukraine,” Reuters, September 29, 2025, https://www.reuters.com/world/vance-says-us-considering-tomahawk-missiles-ukraine-2025-09-28/.
[7] Marc Santora, “Russia Hammers Kyiv in 12-Hour Drone and Missile Assault,” New York Times, September 28, 2025, https://www.nytimes.com/2025/09/28/world/europe/ukraine-kyiv-russia-strikes.html.
[8] Tom Balmforth, “Outline Emerges of Putin’s Offer to End His War in Ukraine,” Reuters, August 18, 2025, https://www.reuters.com/world/china/outline-emerges-putins-offer-end-his-war-ukraine-2025-08-17/.
[9] United Nations Security Council. Resolution 1244 (1999). 1999. https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/274488?ln=en&v=pdf.
[10] International Court of Justice. Reply of the United States of America to Questions Posed by Judges Koroma and Cançado Trindade at the Close of the Oral Proceedings. December 22, 2009. https://www.icj-cij.org/node/105152.
[11] Yuliia Dysa, “Ukraine’s Constitution and Territory: Could Kyiv Hand Over Land to Russia?” Reuters, August 18, 2025, https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/what-does-ukraines-constitution-say-about-territorial-changes-2025-08-18/.
[12] Constitution of Ukraine. June 28, 1996. https://rm.coe.int/constitution-of-ukraine/168071f58b.
[13] Guiding Principles of the Contact Group for a Settlement of the Status of Kosovo. Contact Group, October 7, 2005. https://www.esiweb.org/pdf/kosovo_Contact%20Group%20-%20Ten%20Guiding%20principles%20for%20Ahtisaari.pdf.
[14] Bekim Sejdiu and Lulzim Peci, “Comparing the Incomparable: Kosovo’s Independence and the Russian Aggression Against Ukraine.” Kosovar Institute for Policy Research and Development (KIPRED), August 2022. https://kipred.org/wp-content/uploads/2025/02/Comparing-the-Incomparable-Kosovos-Independence-and-the-Russian-Aggression-against-Ukraine.pdf.
[15] Witold Rodkiewicz. Alaska Summit: A Victory for Putin, Concessions from Trump. Centre for Eastern Studies (OSW), August 18, 2025. https://www.osw.waw.pl/en/publikacje/analyses/2025-08-18/alaska-summit-a-victory-putin-concessions-trump.
[16] Vladimir Putin. Speech to the Russian Military Contingent of the International Peace-Keeping Force in Kosovo. President of Russia, June 17, 2001. http://en.kremlin.ru/events/president/transcripts/21267.
[17] Vladimir Putin. Address by President of the Russian Federation. President of Russia, March 18, 2014. http://en.kremlin.ru/events/president/news/20603.
[18] Bojana Barlovac. “Putin Says Kosovo Precedent Justifies Crimea Secession.” Balkan Insight, March 18, 2014. https://balkaninsight.com/2014/03/18/crimea-secession-just-like-kosovo-putin/.
[19] TASS, Russian News Agency. “Putin Cites Precedent of Kosovo in Explaining Recognition of DPR, LPR.” April 26, 2022. https://tass.com/politics/1443661.
[20] Vladimir Putin. Signing of Treaties on Accession of Donetsk and Lugansk People’s Republics and Zaporozhye and Kherson Regions to Russia. President of Russia. September 30, 2022. http://en.kremlin.ru/events/president/news/69465.
[21] Jade McGlynn. “Why Putin Keeps Talking About Kosovo.” Foreign Policy, March 3, 2022. https://foreignpolicy.com/2022/03/03/putin-ukraine-russia-nato-kosovo/.
[22] Dean B. Pineles. “How the ‘Kosovo Precedent’ Shaped Putin’s Plan to Invade Ukraine.” Balkan Insight, March 9, 2022. https://balkaninsight.com/2022/03/09/how-the-kosovo-precedent-shaped-putins-plan-to-invade-ukraine/.
[23] The Geopost. “Vucic Meets with the President of Iran and the Chinese Minister, Talks About Cooperation and Propagandizes About the Situation in Kosovo.” September 26, 2024. https://thegeopost.com/en/analysis/vucic-meets-with-the-president-of-iran-and-the-chinese-minister-talks-about-cooperation-and-propagandizes-about-the-situation-in-kosovo/.
[24] K.P. “Vucic Discussed with Maduro the Improvement of Relations Between Serbia and Venezuela.” Sloboden Pečat, August, https://www.slobodenpecat.mk/en/vuchikj-razgovarashe-so-maduro-za-podobruvanje-na-odnosite-megju-srbija-i-venecuela/.
[25] Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the Republic of Serbia. “Russia.” https://www.mfa.gov.rs/en/foreign-policy/bilateral-cooperation/russia.
[26] Xinhua. “China, Serbia Decide to Build Community with Shared Future.” Chinese People’s Political Consultative Conference (CPPCC), May 9, 2024. http://en.cppcc.gov.cn/2024-05/09/c_985473.htm.
[27] “Serbian Media Slam Putin Over Kosovo Statement.” Euronews Albania, April 28, 2022. https://euronews.al/en/serbian-media-slam-putin-over-kosovo-statement/.
[28] TASS, Russian News Agency. “Putin Cites Precedent of Kosovo in Explaining Recognition of DPR, LPR.” April 26, 2022. https://tass.com/politics/1443661.
[29] Zeljko Trkanjec. “Serbian Diplomat Says Putin Recognises Kosovo.” Euractiv, April 28, 2022. https://www.euractiv.com/short_news/serbian-diplomat-says-putin-recognises-kosovo/.
[30] Belgrade was at peak vulnerability to US and EU pressure in February 2022 as the West united over Putin’s massive invasion of Ukraine. Instead of insisting that Serbia – an EU candidate – align with the common EU stance and apply sanctions on Russia, the Biden Administration did the opposite. The US Embassy in Belgrade expressed approval of Serbia’s reaffirmed position supporting Ukraine’s territorial integrity. However, Serbia has maintained a contradictory and self-serving approach—voicing rhetorical support for Ukraine’s sovereignty due to the comparison with Kosovo, while simultaneously refusing to participate in EU sanctions against Russia. Within just three months, Vučić finalized a relaxed three-year gas supply agreement with Putin.
[31] TASS, Russian News Agency. “Serbia Not Joining NATO for Obvious Reasons, Says President Vucic.” January 30, 2023. https://tass.com/world/1569049.
[32] Edward P. Joseph. A Way Out of the Balkans Morass: Restoring US and EU Leverage in the Serbia-Kosovo Dialogue. Wilson Center, May 14, 2021. https://www.wilsoncenter.org/article/way-out-balkans-morass-restoring-us-and-eu-leverage-serbia-kosovo-dialogue.
[33] RFE/RL’s Ukrainian Service. “TV Tower in Kyiv Hit as Zelenskiy Again Calls for NATO to Impose No-Fly Zone.” RadioFreeEurope, March 1, 2022. https://www.rferl.org/a/ukraine-russia-kharkiv-kyiv-kherson-convoys/31729628.html.
[34] Gordon Lubold, Katherine Doyle, and Courtney Kube. “U.S. Could Take Lead Watching Ukraine Buffer Zone if Peace Deal with Russia Comes Together.” NBC News, September 5, 2025. https://www.nbcnews.com.
[35] Kylie Atwood, Haley Britzky, Zachary Cohen, and Isabelle Khurshudyan. “Rubio Doubles Down on Trump Pledge to Back Ukraine Security Guarantees but Says Europe Must Lead.” CNN, August 21, 2025. https://www.cnn.com/2025/08/21/politics/rubio-trump-ukraine-security-guarantees.
[36] Andrea Shalal and Max Hunder. “US Would Help Assure Ukraine’s Security in a Peace Deal, Trump Tells Zelenskiy.” Reuters, August 19, 2025. https://www.reuters.com/business/aerospace-defense/us-would-help-assure-ukraines-security-peace-deal-trump-tells-zelenskiy-2025-08-19/.
[37] Reporting from Ukraine. “Frontline Report: Serbia’s Big Secret—Shells for Ukraine, Smiles for Moscow.” Euromaidan Press, July 27, 2025. https://euromaidanpress.com/2025/07/27/serbia-arms-ukraine-1-million-rounds/.
[38] William Booth. “Sustained Protests Push Serbia Toward a Defining Choice — Democracy or Drift.” The Washington Post, September 22, 2025. https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/2025/09/22/serbia-protests-vucic-government-corruption/.
[39] Julius Lehtinen. “U.S. Election: Europeans Would Vote for Harris if They Could—but There’s a Wide Gulf Between East and West.” Europe Elects, November 4, 2024. https://europeelects.eu/2024/11/04/u-s-election-europeans-would-vote-for-harris-if-they-could/.
[40] Snezana Rakic. “Why Is Support for the US President High in Serbia and What Do We Expect from Him?” Serbian Monitor, January 21, 2025. https://www.serbianmonitor.com/en/why-is-support-for-the-us-president-high-in-serbia-and-what-do-we-expect-from-him/.
[41] Tatyana Kekic. “US Sanctions on Serbian Oil Company NIS Take Effect.” bne Intellinews, October 9, 2025. https://www.intellinews.com/us-sanctions-on-serbian-oil-company-nis-take-effect-405546/.
[42] U.S. Department of the Treasury. “Treasury Intensifies Sanctions Against Russia by Targeting Russia’s Oil Production and Exports.” January 10, 2025. https://home.treasury.gov/news/press-releases/jy2777.
[43] Tatyana Kekic. “US Sanctions on Serbian Oil Company NIS Take Effect.” bne Intellinews, October 9, 2025. https://www.intellinews.com/us-sanctions-on-serbian-oil-company-nis-take-effect-405546/?source=croatia.
[44] U.S. Department of the Treasury. “Treasury Intensifies Sanctions Against Russia by Targeting Russia’s Oil Production and Exports.” Press Releases, January 10, 2025. https://home.treasury.gov/news/press-releases/jy2777.
[45] North Atlantic Treaty Organization. “Relations with Serbia.” Last updated May 23, 2022. https://www.nato.int/cps/en/natohq/topics_50100.htm.
[46] North Atlantic Treaty Organization. “Joint Press Conference by NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg with the President of Serbia, Aleksandar Vučić.” November 21, 2023. https://www.nato.int/cps/en/natohq/opinions_220213.htm.
[47] North Atlantic Treaty Organization. “NATO Secretary General Meets the President of the Republic of Serbia.” March 19, 2025. https://www.nato.int/cps/en/natohq/news_233876.htm.
[48] Richard R. Verma. “Remarks to the Press with President Aleksandar Vucic of Serbia.” US Department of State, January 11, 2025. https://2021-2025.state.gov/deputy-secretary-of-state-for-management-and-resources/releases/2025/01/remarks-to-the-press-with-president-aleksandar-vucic-of-serbia/.
[49] The Washington Post. “Sustained Protests Push Serbia Toward a Defining Choice.” September 22, 2025. https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/2025/09/22/serbia-protests-vucic-government-corruption/.
[50] Vivian Salama. “Serbia and Kosovo Sign Economic Normalization Agreement in Oval Office Ceremony.” CNN, September 4, 2020. https://edition.cnn.com/2020/09/04/politics/serbia-kosovo-agreement.
[51] EEAS Press Team. “Belgrade-Pristina Dialogue: Agreement on the Path to Normalisation Between Kosovo and Serbia.” European External Action Service, February 27, 2023. https://www.eeas.europa.eu/eeas/belgrade-pristina-dialogue-agreement-path-normalisation-between-kosovo-and-serbia_en.
[52] EEAS Press Team. “Belgrade-Pristina Dialogue: Implementation Annex to the Agreement on the Path to Normalisation of Relations Between Kosovo and Serbia.” European External Action Service, March 18, 2023. https://www.eeas.europa.eu/eeas/belgrade-pristina-dialogue-implementation-annex-agreement-path-normalisation-relations-between_en.
[53] Reporters. “Vučić: Dialogue with Kosovo Should Focus on the Association and the Rights of Serbs.” Reporteri.net, August 26, 2025. https://reporteri.net/en/NEWS/rajon/Vucic%3A-Dialogue-with-Kosovo-should-focus-on-association-and-rights-of-Serbs/.
[54] EWB. “EU Denies That a Statute of the Association of the Serb-Majority Municipalities Had Been Made Public.” European Western Balkans, November 13, 2023. https://europeanwesternbalkans.com/2023/11/13/eu-denies-that-a-statute-of-the-association-of-the-serb-majority-municipalities-had-been-made-public/.
[55] Xhorxhina Bami and Milica Stojanovic. “Kosovo, Serbia Verbally Agree on ‘Implementation Deal’ to Normalize Ties.” Balkan Insight, March 19, 2023. https://balkaninsight.com/2023/03/19/kosovo-serbia-verbally-agree-on-implementation-deal-to-normalize-ties/.
[56] Cecelia Smith-Schoenwalder. “Full Speed, Then Reverse: Trump’s Biggest U-Turns in His First 100 Days.” U.S. News, May 1, 2025. https://www.usnews.com/news/national-news/articles/trumps-biggest-policy-reversals-so-far.
[57] Guardian staff and agencies. “‘Very Aggressive’: Trump Suggests Montenegro Could Cause World War Three.” The Guardian, July 19, 2018. https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2018/jul/19/very-aggressive-trump-suggests-montenegro-could-cause-world-war-three.
[58] A2 CNN. “‘I Stopped It!’ Trump Repeats: Serbia Was Ready to Attack Kosovo.” A2 CNN, August 4, 2025. https://a2news.com/english/rajoni-bota/kosova/politike/une-e-ndalova-trump-perserit-serbia-ishte-gati-te-su-i1154745.
[59] ET Online. “Donald Trump’s Full Speech at UNGA: Here’s Everything the US President Said.” The Economic Times, September 23, 2025. https://economictimes.indiatimes.com/news/international/global-trends/donald-trumps-full-speech-at-unga-heres-everything-the-us-president-said/articleshow/124074972.cms.
[60] Nen Si. “Serbia Was About to Clash, but We Ended It,’ Trump: We Worked with Them and with Kosovo.” Euronews Albania, June 25, 2025. https://euronews.al/en/serbia-was-about-to-clash-but-we-ended-it-trump-we-worked-with-them-and-with-kosovo/.
[61] U.S. House of Representatives. Amendment to H.R. 5300 Offered by Mr. Mast of Florida. September 17, 2025. https://docs.house.gov/meetings/FA/FA00/20250917/118618/BILLS-119-5300-M001199-Amdt-65.pdf.
[62] North Atlantic Treaty Organization. “North Atlantic Council (NAC).” Last updated October 21, 2024. https://www.nato.int/cps/en/natohq/topics_49763.htm.
[63] Edward P. Joseph. From Crisis to Convergence: A Strategy to Tackle Balkans Instability at Its Source. Wilson Center, January 18, 2022. https://www.wilsoncenter.org/publication/crisis-convergence-strategy-tackle-balkans-instability-its-source.
[64] Hellenic Republic Ministry of Foreign Affairs. “Interview of Minister of Foreign Affairs Nikos Dendias in the Newspaper ‘Realnews’ with Journalist Giorgos Siadimas (04.07.2021).” July 4, 2021. https://www.mfa.gr/en/interview-of-minister-of-foreign-affairs-nikos-dendias-in-the-newspaper-realnews-with-journalist-giorgos-siadimas-04072021/.