February 18th, organized by Bridgewater State University
*** Disclaimer: The views and opinions expressed in this presentation are those of the presenters and do not necessarily reflect the official policy or position of Bridgewater State University (BSU) or any of the event’s co-sponsors.***
Panelists:
Sidita Kushi, PhD, Assistant Professor of Politics at Mount Holyoke College and a Non-Residential Fellow at the Center for Strategic Studies at Tufts University.
Flora Ferati-Sachsenmaier, PhD, Political Scientist & Research Coordinator
Max Planck Institute in Germany
Jasmin Mujanovic, PhD, Senior Non-Resident Fellow at the Western Balkans Center, New Lines Institute in Washington DC.
Albulene Kastrati, PhD, Assistant Professor of Economics, Bridgewater State University
The presentation examined how global power competition among the United States, China, and Russia is reshaping the strategic future of the Western Balkans, a region situated at the intersection of major geopolitical and economic spheres.
US and EU policy in the region is traditionally defined by the paradox that the Western Balkans are too far to be overly concerned with the particulars of its governance, but too close to be ignored entirely. Thus, US and EU have usually focused on pacification first and foremost or what regional experts often call ‘stabilocracy’. This approach, when has minimized the long-term security benefits of substantive democratization, has most disadvantaged Kosovo and Bosnia and Herzegovina, which remain the key regional flashpoints due to the malign machinations of Serbia, Russia, China. For the EU, a far bigger threat to its regional posture remain internal spoilers such as Hungary, (in case of BH even Croatia) – rather than Russia, or China. Not because Moscow and Beijing are not threats, but because the former more directly undermine Brussels’ ability to act, even in its own interests.
Big question: Will the US and NATO remain steadfast security guarantors in the Balkans, despite the Trump administration’s recent abashment of the “delusion” of the rules-based international order?
For decades, the US has been deeply engaged in the Western Balkans, from diplomatic to militaristic statecraft – especially via its humanitarian military intervention and state-building role in Kosovo and its remaining KFOR presence (600 US troops serving in Kosovo today). The Western Balkans is a core geopolitical arena where US administrations constructed and enforced the post-Cold War version of the global order, promoted successful liberalization projects, and shaped “value-based” national interests, insulated in soft power despite existing contradictions. It is also where the US signaled NATO toward post-Cold War functionalities.
With an acceleration into multipolar realities, US foreign policy priorities have shifted from the Balkans and toward “spheres of influence” logic and conflict arenas in the Western hemisphere, East Asia, and Middle East. Recently, US foreign policy has also veered away from value-based justifications for militaristic pursuits abroad. As the National Defense and National Security strategies proclaim, the US will no longer be “distracted” by state-building operations or “cloud-castle abstractions like the rules-based international order.” “Warrior ethos” and “flexible, practical realism” now reign supreme. Whispers abound that the US is seeking to downsize its militaristic commitments to KFOR and the Western Balkans. Yet this approach risks eroding the US’s bipartisan commitment to Kosovo security and hastening the return of an era of “stabilitocracies” with all its discontents. Such outcomes are already underway and are not exclusive to the Trump administration. From the Biden era sanctions against Kosovo, to the Trump era suspension of the US-Kosovo strategic dialogue, sanctions relief for Milorad Dodik, and the recent US-Serbia strategic dialogue founded in “practical realism,” it appears that the democratic status and aspirations of partner countries are no longer important pillars for currying favor with the US.
Despite these shifts, countries like Albania and Kosovo recognize the existential importance of maintaining positive relations with the US across presidential administrations. Thus, they’ve joined Trump’s Board of Peace to strengthen direct connections to the political network, while simultaneously forging regional weapons deals and alliances, such as the Kosovo, Albania, and Croatia declaration of military cooperation. Nonetheless, paradoxical US policies may enflame Balkan instability. Kosovo is the West’s most successful state-building project, yet its partners appear willing to let this progress wither by favoring Serbia’s authoritarian government for mere short-term geopolitical and transactional gains. US foreign policy and broader Western diplomacy seem to have incentivized Serbia to “escalate to deescalate” tensions for reward. And with all regional actors bent on purchasing weapons for deterrence, within an anxious continent on the fast lane to military mobilization, the spiral of a classic security dilemma may lead everyone to graver conflict if they do not pay closer attention to such patterns and tread cautiously.
Despite three decades of transition reforms, the Western Balkan economies remain vulnerable due to institutional weaknesses, energy dependence, and incomplete integration into Euro-Atlantic structures. These vulnerabilities have made the region an attractive arena for rival powers seeking influence. Russia continues to leverage political ties, energy dependence, and hybrid tactics to obstruct EU and NATO consolidation, while China expands its presence through infrastructure financing, technology projects, and long-term economic leverage. At the same time, U.S. and EU policies – ranging from tariffs to energy transitions to evolving foreign-aid strategies – have generated new pressures and uncertainties for the region.
The speakers highlighted how these competing influences shape trade networks, energy prices, financial flows, and political stability throughout the Western Balkans. Serbia’s balancing act between Moscow, Brussels, and Washington, China’s Belt and Road investments, and the shifting priorities of Western governments all create a dynamic environment with direct consequences for regional security and economic development. Domestic challenges, such as corruption, democratic backsliding, ethnic tensions, and the failure of regional integration initiatives, further complicate the Western Balkans’ strategic positioning. Recent youth-led protests in Serbia and civil movements across the region underscore the population’s desire for accountability and democratic governance.
Looking ahead, the presentation emphasized that rapid and credible Euro-Atlantic integration remains the most effective path to stabilizing the Western Balkans and safeguarding it from external manipulation. Strengthening democratic institutions, resolving the Kosovo-Serbia dispute through mutual recognition, and boosting Western investment will be crucial for anchoring the region to the values of democracy, transparency, and state sovereignty. In an era of intensifying global rivalry, the Western Balkans stand at a pivotal crossroads—and the choices made in the coming years will determine whether the region becomes a corridor for stability or a battleground for competing powers.
SHORT VERSION:
“The Western Balkans and the Global Power Competition: Strategic Choices in the Era of U.S.–China–Russia Rivalry.” organized by Bridgewater State University. This topic could not be more timely or relevant. Over the past decade, the Western Balkans have reemerged as a critical crossroads in global politics, where major powers are competing not only for influence through military alliances or economic partnerships, but increasingly through the subtler arenas of diplomacy, investment, energy, technology, and soft power. As the global order becomes more multipolar, the region finds itself navigating overlapping pressures from the United States, the European Union, China, and Russia – each advancing its own vision for stability, governance, and connectivity. Today’s discussion brings together perspectives that examine these dynamics, from shifts in U.S. foreign policy and NATO’s evolving role, to the growing presence of Chinese and Russian economic and informational footprints. Our goal is to explore how these currents are reshaping the Western Balkans’ political and economic future and to ask what strategic choices lie ahead for the region in an increasingly contested global landscape.
