These can be the consequences of territorial changes

In the case of mutual recognition between the two countries, of course, there will be a state border, some 400km. I hope we will have NATO's full support. We're going to have border correction, border demarcation, and under this process”, Thaci had said.

His Serbian counterpart, Alexander Vuciq, supported that idea.

“I engage and this is my policy, for redefining borders with Albanians, I want clear borders with Kosovo”, Vuciq said.

But, could there be border movement or exchange of territories under the Constitution of the Republic of Kosovo, the lawyer, university legalist Flamur Hyseni, shows.

According to Hyseni, these statements are of the political institutional character, and it is by no means easy to do so on the terms and provisions of the Constitution.

This is by no means easy to do, because, in the Constitution of the Republic of Kosovo, it is a very precise and strict provision in terms of the territory of the Republic of Kosovo, already internationally recognised as well. Article 1, paragraph 1, determines that, Kosovo's “Republic is an independent state, sovereign, democratic, unique, and inseparable”, while paragraph 3 says, the Republic of Kosovo has no territorial claims on any state or part of any state and will not seek to join any state or part of any state”. These are Kosovo's constitutional conditions in relation to other states and other states in relation to Kosovo. It is very unclear how, while this constitutional provision is in force, such topics are opened and even very sensitive themes”, Hyseni said of Indescline.

The law disputer, Flamur Hyseni, says there are international practices with which such agreements can be reached, but under other conditions and not in fragile reports like Kosovo-Serbia.

There are international practices where states reach such agreements, but those states in advance meet a very important condition, when they have long testified that they are in friendly relations between themselves and have contributed to peace first, among themselves, then in the region and beyond. In the case of Serbia reports, Kosovo, we have fragile reports, as a result of Serbia's positions and dialogue that has developed so far, there are other goals, but not the issue of state territory, which has been confirmed as such and its compatibility by the international community”, Hyseni added.

Furthermore, according to Flamur Hyseni, professor at the University of Pristina, reaching an agreement for territorial change would not create stability, but discontent in both countries.

“does not believe it will affect the stability of the two states reaching an agreement on territory issues, because this could only bring results when states would long be in good friendship and neighbourhood. While, through this declarative dynamic from the institutional carrier, it is intended to precede the issue of demarcation and reaching such an agreement, which will happen, according to all likelihood by 2025, this is more than natural than, the border line cannot happen exactly as we want it to and as they wish. It is a very long and habitable border, with private property and, of course, it will produce dissatisfaction with the inhabitants of the two states. With this dynamic, it is trying to prepare people of two states that, as it has been said, some villages will remain from Kosovo and some from Serbia...”, Hyseni said.

The arrival of a demarcation agreement is something else, unlike the deal to give and take territory. Already, we have the experience of the demarcation agreement with Montenegro”, he concludes.