Ljubljana, Slovenia
Good evening, distinguished guests, friends and colleagues,
It is my pleasure to welcome you all to the United Nations Kosovo Trust-Building Forum. I thank you for taking the time to join us here in Ljubljana and for your dedication to Kosovo and to building trust across communities.
I also warmly welcome Assistant Secretary-General Bintou Keita and my colleagues from the United Nations who have joined us from across Kosovo, including the UN Kosovo Team, Belgrade, and New York.
I would also like to thank our friends from the European Union, EULEX, and, of course, the OSCE. Today, nearly 19 years after the height of the conflict, the international community continues to support peace, stability, and security in Kosovo.
Under a shared legal umbrella, all organizations are mandated and remain committed to working to address the real challenges Kosovo faces, not simply through political negotiations but also at deeper levels—fostering relationships between people and community groups.
This gathering convenes an exceptional group of distinguished leaders, including both accomplished and emerging leaders. We join together to contribute to strengthening the foundations of an enduring peace and a sustained stable society.
We are not here at the negotiating table. The EU-facilitated political dialogue, aimed at the normalization of relations and seeking political agreements between Pristina and Belgrade, is not our focus here.
We are here to identify how, at the social and grassroots levels, municipal leaders, civil society, and the communities of Kosovo can advance long-lasting trust and mutual cooperation for their own future.
Can we assist in cultivating trust and a future that belongs to all?
We are here because we believe the answer is yes. The key question remains: how?
Mistrust across multiple communities in Kosovo still divides many people and prevents them from engaging in mutual efforts aimed at building a shared social platform rather than seeking unilateral advantage. The imprint of conflict and the subsequent waves of violence remain deeply embedded in people's minds and continue to complicate the way forward.
Even the younger generation is often unable to free itself from inherited perceptions of conflict and violence that occurred before they were born or before they could have been involved in the hostilities.
As we know, the history of loss of life, displacement, and persistent trauma cannot easily be set aside.
People have their own opinions, perceptions, and experiences—they are not simply spectators of conflict.
When war or conflict breaks out, reason is overwhelmed, and people become divided by differing views and interpretations. This is the foundation of mistrust.
If the organization of post-conflict political and social life does not chart a path toward a future acceptable to all, it becomes difficult for people to move forward, live together, and discover the contours of a new coexistence based on an agreed and acceptable social contract.
The work of this Forum, and the numerous meetings held last year, particularly through the focus groups over the last two months, will allow us to identify and better articulate areas of agreement, understand areas of disagreement, and combine needs and responses into a coherent approach where acceptance, compassion, and understanding help bring people together.
Without identifying and designing a way forward, fewer people will be able to live in peace and prosperity in either the short or long term.
It will be difficult to overcome the impact of a sorrow-filled history and to ease the suffering of people affected by conflict, but the objective of this forum is to create such an agenda—a workable framework to build trust and help guide the future.
Such a framework should capture social, political, cultural, and economic factors—all areas of mutual benefit and mutual interest.
We focus on how to build lasting and sustained trust between all groups of people living in Kosovo and restore normal relations between communities.
This is imperative, because without social reconciliation and trust-building involving people, communities, and civil society, even the best intentions and efforts to end conflict can leave a fragile situation vulnerable to renewed instability.
Today, the specter of war and conflict continues to affect many parts of the world. From Ukraine to South Sudan, from Colombia to Libya, from Syria to Yemen, from Iraq to Afghanistan and beyond, we continue to witness the consequences of conflict.
In the past three decades, most of you in this room, and myself included, have lived through turbulent times. These are experiences that shaped us directly, not lessons learned solely through books or study.
We have endured tragedies and lived through traumatic eras, and we have survived.
For many of us, these experiences have been dispiriting, shocking, and painful.
Allow me to share a few personal reflections.
I was born in peacetime, grew up during turbulent times, came of age in war, and am now growing older in an atmosphere of continuing conflict in my native country and elsewhere.
I lived through multiple wars in Afghanistan, including the Soviet invasion, and I left the country when extremists took power.
Waves of internal conflict devastated people, the state, and the country itself.
I experienced arrest and torture and suffered through different phases of war and conflict. I became displaced and homeless, lost everything I owned, became a refugee, and was eventually adopted by another country—all despite my efforts to report, write, and contribute to restoring normality where I lived.
I joined efforts after 2001 to end a continuous war and unite different groups with the hope of sustaining peace in a country that had suffered immense devastation.
Despite those efforts, I now witness the return of ongoing conflict.
I often wonder whether I will live long enough to see peace and stability in my homeland.
I share this to express that I understand what it means to survive calamity and the immense challenges involved in building trust in a society recovering from tragedy.
I am not a stranger to the pain many people in this room may have experienced. I say this with all my heart.
Distinguished guests and friends,
War and conflict are not only personal experiences. It is equally important to understand how conflicts affect societies and how people can collectively contribute to shaping a different future.
Let me begin with an obvious observation: the most recent conflicts in the Balkans were triggered during the breakup of Yugoslavia in the 1980s and 1990s.
Paradoxically, these events followed the fall of the Berlin Wall and the collapse of the Soviet Union during a period of widespread optimism that some even described as “the end of history.”
This contradiction shocked many people. The return of conflict in Europe stood in stark contrast to the hopes associated with the end of the Cold War.
Many factors contributed to the disintegration and wars of Yugoslavia, including a crisis of federal authority, the rise of nationalism and ethno-nationalism, and economic instability.
What is perhaps most relevant today is recognizing that ideologies centered on ethnic national boundaries nurtured new nationalist movements and that ethnic nationalism became a major mobilizing force behind many conflicts.
This pattern has echoed across numerous post-communist transitions and conflict zones over the last three decades.
Some observers from outside the region incorrectly attributed Yugoslavia’s wars to a supposed “Balkan logic” or a unique regional tendency toward conflict and intolerance.
Such views were simplistic and prejudiced.
To understand these wars properly, it is necessary to recognize how ethnic nationalism functions and how ethnicity became an important political tool, particularly in the post-Cold War period.
As I have described, war and upheaval produce pain, hatred, and the breakdown of human relationships. Conflict distorts perceptions of the past and breeds intolerance.
While we cannot ignore history, what matters most is that we recognize and understand it truthfully. We must not reinterpret it at the expense of our present and future.
The past may sometimes seem beyond recovery, but the future can still be imagined and shaped.
While it is wrong to expect people simply to forget the past, it is right to promote the possibility of a better common life and a shared future.
Wars and conflicts continue even at a time when humanity possesses unprecedented technological capabilities and opportunities to shape the world for the better. This paradox demands collective wisdom and leadership.
Despite global progress, ethnic nationalism remains one of the major forces challenging stability and contributing to conflict around the world.
Throughout modern history, nationalist and ethno-nationalist forces have contributed to many devastating conflicts.
Research indicates that while only about 20 percent of wars between 1815 and 1919 resulted from ethno-nationalism, nearly 50 percent of wars from 1919 to the beginning of the 21st century had roots in ethno-nationalism.
Since the collapse of the Soviet Union, approximately 75 percent of conflicts have been classified as largely ethno-national in character.
The impact of nationalism and ethno-nationalism on modern Europe is therefore historically significant.
At the same time, ethnic diversity does not inevitably lead to conflict. Across Europe and around the world, many ethnically diverse societies have demonstrated that peaceful coexistence and prosperity are possible.
Identity politics can be managed peacefully when there is consensus around a shared future and a collective will to live together.
What, then, is the solution to the destructive effects of ethnic nationalism?
A changing world requires new ways of thinking. Experience in some parts of the world shows that an egalitarian approach—one that preserves equal rights while respecting distinct identities such as language and religion—can work effectively.
This approach has generally proven more successful than attempting to suppress differences or organize one group at the expense of another.
Managing diversity through inclusive and acceptable means can be complex, but it is achievable and should remain a key focus of governments.
I would also emphasize the remarkable cooperative tendency of humankind. Despite history’s many examples of brutality and violence, humanity possesses an extraordinary capacity to work together.
Ladies and gentlemen,
Achieving societal reconciliation after conflict can be especially difficult because relationships between groups have been deeply damaged and institutions often weakened or destroyed.
Moving from reconciliation to increased trust begins with acceptance of every individual’s right to coexist.
Even when tolerance and compromise are difficult in the immediate aftermath of conflict, they can be promoted through trust-building processes.
A trust-building framework should focus on fostering understanding and strengthening mechanisms for conflict resolution.
These objectives become achievable when people begin looking toward the future and free themselves from some of the burdens of the past.
Strengthening trust between groups requires belief in reconciliation and often depends upon the existence of a broader framework for cooperation, including democratic institutions, free and fair elections, power-sharing, good governance, justice and the rule of law, respect for human rights, and meaningful public discourse.
One of the most important lessons from conflict is ensuring that political agreements do not become empty shells that leave conflicts ready to resume.
Global experience demonstrates that societal reconciliation and trust-building are essential for preventing the recurrence of violence.
A widely cited example is South Africa’s Truth and Reconciliation Commission, which represented a departure from the model of “victor’s justice” associated with post-World War II Nuremberg.
This approach focused on restitution rather than revenge and became associated with the principle of “forgive, but do not forget.”
Equally important were the negotiations that ended Apartheid, known as the Convention for a Democratic South Africa (CODESA), which preceded the Truth and Reconciliation Commission.
Professor Mahmood Mamdani has argued that the key to the post-Apartheid transition was not an exchange of amnesty for truth but amnesty in exchange for a willingness to reform.
That commitment to reform created a viable path forward, both politically and legally.
According to Mamdani, the CODESA negotiations helped transform perceptions, encouraging former adversaries to move beyond demonizing one another and instead engage as peaceful political opponents.
This required both sides to move from their preferred outcomes to mutually acceptable alternatives.
In his view, this process involved multiple forms of justice—criminal, political, and social.
CODESA prioritized political justice focused on affected communities, while criminal justice focused on individuals. This enabled South Africa to move away from Apartheid by transforming enemies into political adversaries.
Mamdani’s emphasis on political and social justice can offer useful lessons when prioritizing the future.
Distinguished guests, ladies and gentlemen,
If people wish to protect their future, it is often more important to focus first on trust-building than on immediately establishing a shared narrative of history.
For Kosovo, and more broadly for the Western Balkans, it may still be too early to achieve agreement on a common historical narrative.
The focus today should be on the present and on laying stronger foundations for the future.
The world is large enough for all of us to live together and coexist.
We have a responsibility to ensure that our children do not experience the violence through which we have lived.
Let me emphasize once more that there is a fundamental relationship between overcoming mistrust and building trust, provided that the necessary conditions and mechanisms are in place.
A crucial step toward reducing mistrust is learning to manage differences rather than attempting to eliminate them, whether among majority or non-majority communities, large groups or small.
Finding the balance between peace and justice remains a significant challenge in every post-conflict society.
To prevent any return to conflict and violence, we must create a social climate that encourages understanding, promotes dialogue among all groups, and transforms enemies into political rivals—or even partners.
This process must be grounded in recognition of mutual needs, rights, obligations, and justice in its broadest criminal, political, and social dimensions.
The international community has helped the people and communities of Kosovo take important steps since the height of the conflict by promoting dialogue, understanding, grassroots peacebuilding, collaborative initiatives, and much more.
Now it is time to take those efforts to a new level.
Today we embark together on an initiative to build and define a framework for trust and cooperation. We are here to support and advance that endeavor.
But you are the people with the power to make it happen.
Leadership is indispensable for success.
Leading with compassion, understanding, and clarity is what is needed to build a better future—a future that can only be shaped by you.
It is time to organize the future, not simply to mourn the past.
