Driven by unprecedented disagreements between all leading states institutions on the matters related to dialogue, political parties turned to the Parliament. Within a time, spam of little over two months, the parliament produced three particular documents, namely a resolution, draft law and platform. The three were responsible to facilitate a wide political consensus embedded in a single and exclusive unit, authorized and mandated from the Parliament to represent Kosovo in the dialogue, in which discussions on territorial matter are off the table. This policy analysis aims at pointing out why these documents have failed to achieve any significant results in relation to their core original responsibilities and how Kosovo still faces strong uncertainties regarding the process of dialogue.

First, the resolution failed to attain its main political purpose, since at no point did it manage to produce a wide political and social consensus it willingly promised pertaining matter related to dialogue.  Second, the draft law refutes all of its three public propositions. As a result, the State Delegation (1) is not the sole and exclusive authority that will frame, lead and conclude the process of Dialogue, (2) will not purse the principle of unanimity when it comes to decision making and (3) based on the decision-making model in place parliamentary opposition has no decisive role within the State Delegation. Third, the platform on dialogue failed to explicitly annul any possibility of including border revision talks in the Dialogue agenda, did not make it clear that the principles set in the document are representative of all state institutions expected to be part of the dialogue, and failed to determine a mechanism responsible for establishing a wide political consensus with regard to Kosovo’s negotiation position in the dialogue process.

Since current efforts have failed to produce a political consensus and reflect domestic political unity in the international domain, this policy analysis argues and recommends the following. First, in doing so, it recognizes organizing of new elections as a violable last resort. Second, it recommends the establishment of an informal core-parties consensus group responsible for engineering a political consensus that has the support and the approval of a qualified majority in the parliament. Last, this policy analysis recommends against an agreement that is comprehensive in its nature. The ongoing political dialogue between Kosovo and Serbia should revolve around and conclude in a political agreement that first and foremost addresses the main issues between the two states, that of reconciliation and mutual recognition. Other topics of more technical nature should defer to other secondary agreements that will follow once the two states have established full diplomatic relations.