At this point, Serbia could only accept Kosovo’s independence, which would allow it to join NATO and the UN. That’s why it should perhaps wait, analysts have told Sputnik.

Dialogue and discussion about the solution of the Kosovo and Metohija issue is needed. The only question is the approach to this problem. The state can only gain from the passing of time, analysts say.

It is a mistake to assume that time does not work for Serbia, that the country supposedly always gained less by waiting more, and therefore has to reach some kind of satisfactory solution for Kosovo as soon as possible, says diplomat Vladislav Jovanovic, and claims that time is not working in favor of the Western powers who carried out the separation of Kosovo from Serbia by force, and helped it get prompt recognitions.

The West has created a state monster in the heart of Europe, a kind of Taiwan, which is not recognized by the home state of Serbia, says Jovanovic – and the West no interest in keeping the issue open for a longer period of time. Therefore, it is very keen to speed up the process of “maturing awareness on the side of Serbia” and considers it necessary that Serbia, too, contributes to the solution.

“Discussing Kosovo internally is something that is always good and I wish it happened before President Boris Tadic transferred the competencies of the UN Security Council to the European Union, and even more so five years ago when a new government took over the responsibility for the country,” Jovanovic said.

The interests of Serbia, the diplomat suggests, is not to hurry to finalize the issue, but to wait for the sponsors of Albanian independence to find themselves in even greater difficulties and, therefore, have to offer Serbia much more favorable negotiations, with both sides making gains as the final result.

This is about a search for a long-term solution that would allow the Balkans to function and where a regional security framework would be defined, Dusan Prorokovic from the Center for Strategic Alternatives, notes.

The Kosovo case is burdening not only the Balkans, but also international relations as a whole, he says.

“The issue of resolving this case should be left for later because at some point – whether in two or in twenty years – the criteria to solve such cases must be determined. Many of the rules and principles established in 1991 have been destroyed in Kosovo. Among them is Badinter’s, which played a key role during the disintegration of the Soviet Union, Yugoslavia and Czechoslovakia,” Prorokovic stresses.

It is necessary to strive to establish new rules globally or at least regionally, Prorokovic adds, because partial solutions according to which one principle is valid for Bosnia-Herzegovina, another for Kosovo and Metohija, a third one for Macedonia, will not produce long-term and sustainable solutions.

“At this moment, Serbia cannot expect more than to, hypothetically viewed, carry out some sort of partition, at the same time recognizing Kosovo and allowing its membership in the UN. This brings with it great, enormous risks, which primarily concern Kosovo’s fast-track NATO membership, violation of the concept of Serbia’s military neutrality, further pressure for the sake of creating a unitary Bosnia-Herzegovina,” Prorokovic points out.

In the long-term, Serbia would remain closed inside the West Bank construct, where out of six states Albanians would have three votes, and where it could do nothing without excessive appreciation of Albanian interests.

We need to talk about everything – but this takes time, so there should be no time-frame for the completion of the dialogue, the analyst concluded.