The Kurti-Osmani rift returns Kosovo to snap elections

Kosovo has increasingly become characterized by cycles of political instability, repeated snap elections,
and institutional paralysis. The most recent political crisis illustrates how internal power struggles can
undermine the functioning of democratic institutions and force the country back into electoral
uncertainty. The failure of the Assembly of Kosovo to elect a new president has now pushed the country
once again toward early parliamentary elections, revealing deeper fractures within the political
leadership and raising questions about the durability of Kosovo’s institutional framework.
At the center of this crisis stands the deteriorating relationship between Prime Minister Albin Kurti and
President Vjosa Osmani-once close political allies, now rivals whose conflict has reshaped Kosovo’s
political landscape. The breakdown of their partnership has not only paralyzed institutional processes
but has also exposed the fragility of political consensus in the country.
Institutional breakdown and the failed Presidential election
The Assembly of Kosovo recently failed to elect a new president due to the lack of a sufficient quorum.
Only 66 deputies were present in the plenary hall, while the Constitution requires at least 80 deputies to
be present in order to proceed with the voting process. Two candidates from the Vetëvendosje (LVV)
Glauk Konjufca and Fatmire Kollçaku were presented to the Assembly.
However, Speaker of Parliament Albulena Haxhiu announced that the session could not continue
because the constitutional requirement for quorum had not been met. Without the necessary number
of deputies present, the Assembly was unable to proceed with the presidential vote, effectively blocking
the election process.
This institutional failure has triggered a constitutional chain reaction. Since the deadline for electing a
president expired, following Kurti’s decision not to nominate her for a second term, President Osmani
issued a decree dissolving the Assembly of Kosovo, thereby initiating the process that leads to early
parliamentary elections. The decree, however, has been challenged by the Vetëvendosje, which has
submitted the matter to the Constitutional Court for interpretation, adding yet another layer of
institutional uncertainty.
The Constitutional Court has imposed a temporary injunction, effective until March 31, on the decree
issued by Vjosa Osmani dissolving the Kosovo Assembly. Consequently, the president is unable to
announce a date for new elections while the measure remains in force, and the Assembly is prevented
from continuing the session that began on March 5 to elect a president.
The political rift between Kurti and Osmani
The current crisis cannot be understood without examining the political rupture between Prime Minister
Albin Kurti and President Vjosa Osmani. For several years, the two figures represented a powerful
political alliance that dominated Kosovo’s political scene. Their partnership symbolized a generational
shift in Kosovo’s leadership and was widely perceived as a force capable of delivering political reform.
Yet the relationship gradually deteriorated. The latest rupture emerged when Kurti decided not to
support Osmani for another presidential term and instead nominated LVV’s foreign minister, Glauk
Konjufca, as the party’s candidate. In public discourse, this move has been interpreted by many
observers as an attempt to politically sideline Osmani.

The tensions between the two leaders have been further exacerbated by their differing political
trajectories. President Osmani has recently been actively engaged in rebuilding and strengthening
Kosovo’s relations with international allies. Her participation in major international forums, including the
“Board of Peace,” and her public recognition by U.S. President Donald Trump have elevated her
international profile.
In contrast, the relationship between Kurti’s government and certain segments of the international
community has often been marked by tension and disagreement. Within this context, Osmani’s growing
international visibility may have contributed to political rivalry within the domestic arena.
Escalating accusations and political fragmentation
The breakdown of the Kurti-Osmani partnership has been accompanied by increasingly harsh political
rhetoric. Members of the Vetëvendosje have accused Osmani of having reached the presidency
primarily through Kurti’s political support, while Osmani’s supporters have countered that Kurti’s rise to
power was made possible by her political backing.
More recently, President Osmani publicly criticized Kurti, accusing him of political irresponsibility and
warning about what she described as dangerous political intentions. These accusations have deepened
the political polarization surrounding the conflict and have further complicated the prospects for
institutional cooperation.
The conflict between the two leaders has therefore evolved from a political disagreement into a broader
struggle for influence within Kosovo’s political system.

A pattern of institutional paralysis

The current crisis is not an isolated event but part of a broader pattern of institutional paralysis. Kosovo
has repeatedly experienced prolonged political deadlocks over key institutional positions.
A recent example occurred during the formation of the Assembly leadership, when the election of the
Speaker of Parliament became a prolonged political dispute. Prime Minister Kurti insisted that Albulena
Haxhiu should hold the position, and the inability of political actors to reach consensus effectively
stalled the functioning of the Assembly for nearly a year. This period of institutional stagnation
ultimately contributed to the calling of early elections.
The present dispute over the presidency risks reproducing a similar cycle of political obstruction and
institutional delay.

Constitutional constraints and political strategy

In the midst of this crisis, various political strategies are being considered. One possible avenue for Kurti
and his party is to prolong the process through legal challenges in the Constitutional Court. Another
scenario involves attempts to amend the Constitution in order to change the method of electing the
president.
However, constitutional amendments in Kosovo are extremely difficult to achieve. Article 144 of the
Constitution requires a double majority: two-thirds of all deputies in the Assembly, as well as two-thirds
of the deputies representing non-majority communities. Amendments can be proposed by the
Government, one-third of the deputies, or the President.

Before any amendment can be adopted, it must also be reviewed by the Constitutional Court to ensure
that it does not diminish the fundamental rights guaranteed under Chapters II and III of the Constitution.
Certain provisions, including those related to the form of the state, the rights of communities, and
territorial integrity- are effectively unchangeable or politically almost impossible to alter. These
constitutional safeguards, while designed to protect democratic principles and minority rights, also
make institutional reform a complex and highly political process.
Security Implications of Institutional Instability
Beyond its immediate political consequences, the institutional crisis in Kosovo also carries important
security implications. Political fragmentation and prolonged institutional deadlock weaken the state’s
capacity to respond effectively to both internal and external challenges. When political leadership
becomes consumed by internal power struggles, strategic coordination between institutions—such as
the government, presidency, and security agencies, can become compromised. In a region where
geopolitical tensions remain present, institutional instability may create opportunities for external
actors to exploit political divisions through disinformation campaigns, diplomatic pressure, or political
influence. Moreover, repeated electoral cycles and governmental uncertainty risk undermining public
confidence in the state’s ability to maintain stability and protect national interests. In this context,
political crises are not merely domestic disputes but can evolve into vulnerabilities that affect Kosovo’s
broader security environment and its credibility as a stable partner within Euro-Atlantic structures.
Kosovo’s return to the brink of snap elections reflects more than a temporary political disagreement. It
exposes a deeper structural vulnerability within the country’s political system, where personal rivalries,
fragile coalitions, and institutional design intersect to produce recurring crises. The conflict between
Kurti and Osmani illustrates how alliances that once appeared capable of stabilizing the political
landscape can quickly transform into sources of instability.
As political actors increasingly rely on institutional mechanisms to outmaneuver one another, the
institutions themselves risk becoming arenas of political competition rather than pillars of democratic
governance. Whether Kosovo will emerge from this cycle with stronger institutions or simply repeat
another round of political confrontation remains uncertain.
What is clear, however, is that the persistence of such crises gradually erodes public confidence in
democratic governance and raises fundamental questions about the country’s political maturity and
institutional resilience. In this sense, the current deadlock may ultimately be remembered not for the
individuals involved, but for what it reveals about the unfinished project of democratic consolidation in
Kosovo.