Dialogue and peace are challenging alternatives to hostility

Kosovo is in the final phase of dialogue with Serbia. Policymaking is complex, ideas and conclusions are derived from major processes which require political activity and direct access to their rhythm and development.

Today, bold action is required, decisions that are seen as alternative and that at least seem to exceed any individual, group, social, etc. interest.

But to refer to history, we see how there are many examples. After major and bloody wars, in “the dialogue” ended Germans with the French, Israelis with Arab countries (peace of Kemp David), Croats and Bosniaks with Serbs, etc. More fresh today as a matter, Crimea and Trump plans for Israel and Palestine.

The cases may be similar but should not be addressed, but neither should we establish ideal solutions, but of historical importance has been that hostilities and a <x0mdus peace” on specific achievements (tracts, decisions, agreements, etc.) have been interrupted.

Our unconventional heading, must be Western. Noir should be allowed specific segments to undermine the balance of Kosovo's installed forces for manipulation of measures and opinion, with the main goal of prolonging the process in the name of eternal patriotism, come up in expression, and cause obstacles in this direction both that and power.

We should be pro-active and pragmatist towards decision-making regarding developments for the dialogue process.

We have to be a citizen of political action which then creates new realities. Our actions, first of all, should be in the inner interest and that they should be above opposition interests, and likewise.

We, at no cost should fail the international allies in charge of the United States. It is understandable and very difficult to be both transparent and to have right decisions to make peace and consensus in real time, but that does not necessarily mean that it is not possible.

Our international friends and allies want our state to be modern, powerful and strategic in international reports. The events that are happening in our society today require political and diplomatic vigilance because they do not seem to be random.

At the same time, whether the continuation of dialogue with Serbia or the transparency that this dialogue should have, it is logical that some phase has discrimination, reason and goal that does not jeopardise the decision-making strategy that would serve the long-term interest of the Republic of Kosovo, but does not even become the cause of a rejection in the dialogue.

It is clear that the tax is the obstacle enabling the talks, and the US is supporting such a demand by Serbia. Any move to lift the tax, maneuvering, should also consider its consequences, as well as the fact that Serbia disagrees and has expressed itself against reciprocity as a measure.

This means that Serbia requires the return of the previous situation -- that is, the first tax issue -- and therefore the return to such a format of dialogue (the first tax dialogue) and the indicators are that it is not very interested in the resultary dialogue, nor are serious and correct relations with Kosovo, at least before the end of the elections in Serbia. The tax should be suspended until the conclusion of reaching or failing to reach a Kosovo-Serbia agreement (resultation did not have to wake up much big discussion and would provide credit at the start of dialogue).

Dialogue with Serbia should be well prepared, clear, based on principles and with concrete results for implementing which in practice require international guarantees, especially US, which seems to have such seriousness.

International relations should be on guard because time is going backwards! The most rational and fair judgment, is not to avoid dialogue and aim for the achievement of peace.

One fact should be known, until today, no agreement has been reached or discussed without US presence. Kosovo's Rambobija-Liria, Vienna-independence talks in Kosovo and Brussels agreements, normalisation of relations with Serbia, and finally talks for mutual recognition! Today the dialogue has moved to Washington.

Now, when we are in the final phase of talks with Belgrade, the negotiating table is filled with various kinds of plans as a solution. But this has been described indirectly with proposals as the model of «border correction» except for the competency association “ek3>, stemming from the April 19th 2013 agreement.

The debate over this issue has developed in international decision-making circles that indicate that it is a correction of borders. Correcting-demarketing will occur, as a duty to international subjectivity that requires definition of interstate borders.

We should be aware that correction as a process cannot be done without mutually violating the territory of the two countries, with the fact that historical uncertainties and legal claims that can be distributed.

Throwing the ball into the opinion, with maximum demand that the Valley should enter within the state borders of the Republic of Kosovo, globally has turned the attention of world diplomacy as never after 1999 to the Pristina newsroom Belgrade.

As a topic, the correction of the border as a logical course shows that it has achieved the goal of fortifying existing borders when we consider international attitudes about Kosovo's sovereignty and territorial integrity.

The demand that the Presevo Valley be passed under the jurisdiction of the Republic of Kosovo, in the minds of world leaders, aroused the domino effect of border movements in the Balkans, which reached the significant point of its opposition, also clarified the attitude towards the integrity and sovereignty of the Republic from the influential western circles.

This in political and diplomatic terms has facilitated the negotiating table by reaching its goal in several ways:

The first, a great NO major movement of borders, is said to a great presence to the country's unitary system,

The second state must not become functional with demands affecting the Republic's political and judicial system, because such a thing would only delay the definition of borders in the Balkans.