‘Undivided’ city in a divided society: explaining the peaceful coexistence of Albanians and Serbs in Kamenicë/Kamenica, Kosovo

ABSTRACT

The goal of this paper is to examine which factors have influenced interethnic relations between Albanians and Serbs in Kamenicë/Kamenica, which is significantly less hostile compared to other towns in Kosovo. Utilizing a multi-method research approach, we find these factors include historical-demographic, geopolitical, institutional, economic and cultural factors, as well as the work of the members of the international peacebuilding and peacekeeping missions deployed in the municipality of Kamenicë/Kamenica in June of 1999. Based on our findings, the concept of local-local hybridization is proposed as the main theoretical contribution to the theory of hybrid peace. This concept entails long-lasting interactions between ethnic groups in a local (post-conflict) community under different social circumstances and factors that affected their coexistence, whereby this must be supported by peacebuilding and peacekeeping activities adapted to the aforementioned concept if peace is to be sustained.

KEYWORDS:

• Kamenicë/Kamenica
• Kosovo
• hybrid peace theory
• local-local hybridization
• peacebuilding

Introduction

Kamenicë/Kamenica is a small town and the centre of the municipality with the same name, located in the eastern part of Kosovo. The town lies in the vicinity of southern Serbia and some distance from (Kosovska) Mitrovica – a symbol of interethnic tensions between local Albanians and Serbs – and the border with Albania. Based on secondary sources, there is an impression of a seemingly solid coexistence between Albanian and Serbian residents in Kamenicë/Kamenica. Several outlets have reported on the daily life of ‘ordinary’ people in Kamenicë/Kamenica (RTV 2011; Al Jazeera Balkans 2018; KoSSev 2019; Jutarnji list 2019; RTK2 2021). In these reports, one can see how the local Albanians and Serbs live together, sell groceries to each other at the local market, talk about their good inter-ethnic relations before, during, and after the 1998–1999 war in Kosovo, greet each other, and more.¹ In addition, the OSCE report concludes that ‘the general level of violence and human rights violations – including forced expulsions – in Kosovska Kamenica² was significantly lower than in other municipalities, but it is difficult to determine whether violence, as noted in other parts of Kosovo, was indeed absent, and if so, why’ (2001, 239).³ In addition, media reports on inter-ethnic incidents in this town are very rare, unlike in the rest of Kosovo.⁴

There is a wide array of books and scholarly articles about poor inter-ethnic relations in Kosovo (Boyle 2010; Björkdahl and Gusic 2013; Gusic 2017; Đorđević and Zupančič 2022) and failed attempts to build peace in Kosovo (Choedon 2010; Beha and Visoka 2010; Zupančič 2019; Jackson 2021), but little rigorous academic research on more positive relations in the region regarding what is known as ‘islands of civility’ (Kaldor 2012), ‘zones of peace’ (Saulich and Werthes 2020), ‘peacelands’ (Autesserre 2014), or ‘geographies of peace’ (Elfversson et al. 2023) in other post-conflict societies. In this study, we therefore aim to explore the factors that contribute to the coexistence between Albanians and Serbs in Kamenicë/Kamenica. The paper does not pretend to isolate factors that should be considered inevitable for the relative pre- and post-war stability in the town. Conversely, our primary focus was on the perception of our respondents and their interpretations of why Kamenicë/Kamenica is significantly different from other towns in Kosovo regarding inter-ethnic relations. Our study is among the few that explore examples of robust coexistence between Kosovo Albanians and Serbs, and indeed, the first research on that issue focusing on the area of Kamenicë/Kamenica.⁵

However, this paper does not assert that the inter-ethnic relations between Serbs and Albanians in Kamenicë/Kamenica are ideal. Rather, it highlights the presence of coexistence amidst the difficulties and simmering tensions faced by the local population, as well as the ethnically motivated attacks against Serbs and other non-Albanian populations with elements of ethnic cleansing occurring across almost the entirety of Kosovo (excluding the northern part) on the 17 and 18 March 2004.⁶

In our research, we follow the definition of agonistic peace, according to which ‘creating peace has nothing to do with ending conflict as such, but rather with developing ideas about how conflict can be channelled constructively, without resorting to violence’ (Strömbom 2020, 949).⁷ Accordingly, coexistence is construed as the opportunity for members of all ethnic communities to secure employment, to visit places for leisure and entertainment freely, regardless of ownership, and to speak their mother tongue without constraints.

This paper is grounded in the theoretical framework of hybrid peace theory. After analysing the existing literature on hybrid peace theory, we found a lack of extensive research on the myriad of factors influencing and shaping the relations among local populations and the overall interactions between them, both before and after the conflict. We label these local interactions and the context underpinning them ‘local-local hybridization,’ which represents the primary contribution of our paper to the hybrid peace theory. This concept entails long-lasting interactions between two or more ethnic groups under different social circumstances and factors that have moulded the local community, whereby this must be supported by the efforts of the international peacebuilding and peacekeeping missions aligned with the aforementioned concept if the goal is to build or maintain peace in a local post-conflict community.

Theoretical framework: hybrid peace theory

Regarding the hybrid peace theory, Belloni emphasizes that ‘hybrid’ refers to a state of affairs in which liberal and illiberal norms, institutions, and actors coexist (2012, 22). Hybrid peace theory can be described as a critique of both liberal and indigenous approaches to peacebuilding because it underscores that ‘the peacebuilding literature does not sufficiently take into account the idea that the global and the local are in constant confrontation and transformation with each other’ (Björkdahl and Höglund 2013, 292; also see Richmond 2011, 48; and Mac Ginty 2011, 51). Therefore, hybrid peace theory ‘aims at reconciling two visions of post-conflict peacebuilding: one that sees peace as being solely imposed by external actors and one that envisages it mainly as a purely homegrown process’ (Tardy 2014, 96). In this regard, ‘notions of hybridity move us away from the binary combinations that can seem attractive in helping to explain the social and political world: modern versus traditional, Western versus non-Western, legal-rational versus ritualistic-irrational’ (Mac Ginty 2010, 397). In addition, it is interesting to note that ‘actors are therefore never just local or international, but move along the spectrum between the two, with economic, political, social and cultural forces constantly (re)defining their position in the light of the “audience” for whom identity is being defined’ (Kappler 2015, 885). Mac Ginty (2011, 77–78) proposes a four-part model, according to which hybrid peace emerges from the interplay of the following factors: (i) the compliance power of the liberal peace, (ii) the incentivizing power of the liberal peace, (iii) the resistance of local actors, and (iv) the alternatives provided by local actors. Džuverović (2021) notes that Balkan countries are attempting to redefine their identities by distancing themselves from ‘the Eastern parts’ of their history, leading them to consider the local peacebuilding practices created and developed during the Ottoman Empire as outdated, unmodern, and even insufficiently civilized. Consequently, ‘context matters and in the case of the Balkans it suggests that locals do not prefer local peacebuilding strategies exclusively and place more importance on hybridity between liberal and coercive local practices’ (Džuverović 2021, 23).

In addition to the overarching determinants of the hybrid peace theory, scholars deepened this theory by proposing various valuable concepts, especially for comprehending the local context within the hybrid peace approach. For example, Gilbert discusses ‘local knowledge’ defined as ‘the everyday knowledge of a community of practice – the integrative frameworks, or collection of ideas and assumptions – that are used in a community of practice to guide, control, and explain actions within the specific setting’ (1997, 282). Richmond introduces ‘peace formation’ as a unique local answer to resolving conflict and defines it as “networks and relationships whereby indigenous or local agents of peace in a range of settings find ways of establishing peace processes and sustainable dynamics of peace’ (2013, 276). He explains that locals use their ‘customary, religious, cultural, social, or local government settings’ to achieve the mentioned goals (2015, 34). López López and Ingelaere (2021) propose ‘endogenous knowledge’ as a missing link in the hybrid peacebuilding approach and define it as the accumulated learnings of the people in a locale, generated from an amalgamation of dimensions that interact in constructing social life in a (post-)conflict setting. Although the authors note that this concept is conceptually closely related to the previously proposed local knowledge and peace formation, they argue it is ‘more useful in terms of the concrete operationalization of the emergence of hybridity’ (2021, 99).

The concepts mentioned are valuable for explaining the local context within the hybrid peace theory. However, we have found them insufficient for analysing how different factors in aggregate – mutually influencing one another – shape(d) the relations among local populations over time. We therefore propose an additional concept for the hybrid theory of peace – local-local hybridization, which entails multi-decade or multi-century interactions between two or more ethnic groups within the local community amidst different social circumstances and intertwined actions of various factors that influenced their coexistence. These factors encompass those significant for both the pre-war and post-war periods. Our research indicates that all factors recognized as significant are manifested in both periods. However, some factors exerted more influence in the pre-war period, while the role of others intensified in the post-war period. These factors are influenced by the evolving social circumstances (e.g., the war, changing political and administrative systems), which thus give precedence to certain factors at certain times.

Before proceeding to the analysis, it is important to briefly clarify the two layers of the term ‘local’ within the proposed concept. The first layer of ‘local’ refers to the conventional understanding of the term: local population and their way of life. This implies that all ethnic groups comprising the local community organize their daily life and inter-ethnic relations within a common physical space. The second layer encompasses all factors that, over time, shape the everyday life of the local population and their inter-ethnic relations. These factors are labelled local – not because they cannot be individually found in any other environment of the wider community, but because collectively, they give a distinct character to the local environment. Through their collaborative and intertwined effect on the local population and their relationships, they create a unique local context narrowly specific to that local community.

The proposed concept of local-local hybridization must be supported by the efforts of representatives from international peacebuilding and peacekeeping missions deployed in a local community after the end of war or armed conflict if the goal is to build or maintain peace. International mission representatives should recognize and acknowledge the factors that influence(d) daily life and coexistence among the local population, leverage these factors judiciously, and, finally, adapt their peacebuilding and peacekeeping activities accordingly.

Methodology and rationale

This research adopts a multi-method research approach. The initial step involved the analysis of primary and secondary sources related to the Kosovo town under study, including books, archives, and newspaper articles. Given the dearth of scientific literature on interethnic relations in this ethnically mixed community, only a limited number of history books and archives were available and used to study the general development of the city of Kamenicë/Kamenica and the wider municipal area. Newspaper articles are the only source of information regarding interethnic relations in the town. Consequently, these sources were instrumental in forming an initial understanding of interethnic relations to prepare the authors for further research.

Following a thorough analysis of these sources, the interview questions were formulated. The interviews were semi-structured with five main questions for Serbs and Albanians residing in in Kamenicë/Kamenica. The first three questions were: (i) how would you describe interethnic relations in Kamenicë/Kamenica, (ii) what do you think are the main reasons for such interethnic relations, and (iii) do you have opportunities to socialize with members of the other main ethnic group in the town. If the respondents’ answer to the third question was affirmative, we posed additional questions: (iv) in which language do you communicate with members of the other ethnic group,⁸ and finally, (v) do you occasionally host a member of another main ethnic group in your home, or do you from time to time visit the homes of members of another ethnic group? For respondents who are not residents of Kamenicë/Kamenica, but are knowledgeable about the topic, the first two questions were asked.

Additional questions were posed depending on the natural progression of the conversation. First, we aimed to adopt a bottom-up approach: disentangle the individual perceptions of respondents regarding the factors contributing to the coexistence of Albanians and Serbs in Kamenicë/Kamenica. To select respondents, the research employed snowballing sampling, with several different entry points to mitigate biases and mutual influence. In other words, we gained access to our interlocutors through several smaller snowballing pathways, resulting in a total of 28 interviews. The observational method involved numerous informal conversations with several local Serbs and Albanians, yielding valuable anecdotal data that offer a wide array of small but interesting nuanced insights crucial for addressing the questions posed in this paper.⁹

We chose the town of Kamenicë/Kamenica as our case study for several reasons. Kamenicë/Kamenica stands out as one of the few multi-ethnic towns in post-war Kosovo; the war in this town was significantly less intense compared to other parts of Kosovo (for example, the central and western regions); the sources mentioned in the introduction indicate a degree of coexistence between Albanians and Serbs in Kamenicë/Kamenica.

Several examples confirm this observation. For instance, the former mayor and deputy mayor of Kamenicë/Kamenica started a language school where young Serbs learn Albanian and young Albanians learn Serbian (Jutarnji list 2019); they also launched and adopted an initiative for the restoration of a Serbian Orthodox church in a village in the municipality (Bojan Stamenković, personal communication, 13 May 2022). Furthermore, a local Albanian owns a factory where 70% of workforce is Albanians and 30% is Serbian (Al Jazeera Balkans 2018). It is worth noting that local Serbs can celebrate their national holidays, such as Vidovdan, in the town without significant disturbance (Bojan Stamenković, personal communication, 13 May 2022). Interestingly, there is graffiti reading ‘Serbia’ in Serbian Cyrillic on one building in the town, yet it appears to go unnoticed, as we saw this graffiti whenever we were in Kamenicë/Kamenica. Moreover, many local Albanians frequent cafes and restaurants owned by local Serbs, and vice versa. The authors do not claim that some of these elements do not exist in some form in other, possibly smaller places in Kosovo, but it is unlikely that they are as widespread or pronounced as in Kamenicë/Kamenica.

Explaining the (rare) coexistence of Albanians and Serbs in Kamenicë/Kamenica

All factors identified as essential for coexistence between Serbs and Albanians in Kamenicë/Kamenica are categorized into two groups: pre-war and post-war factors. This classification does not imply that, for example, factors categorized as pre-war are not relevant in the post-war period. However, based on the respondents’ answers and an analysis of existing sources, we deemed certain factors to be more significant in the pre-war period compared to the post-war period and vice versa. Although recognized as a separate factor, the specific role, approach and efforts of the representatives of international peacebuilding and peacekeeping missions in Kamenicë/Kamenica are not covered in a separate sub-chapter of this paper like other factors, but are reflected throughout the entire section discussing post-war factors.

Pre-war factors

When analysing the security situation in Kamenicë/Kamenica, it is imperative to consider the nature of inter-ethnic relations prior to the Kosovo Albanian uprising and the war with the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia in 1998–1999, as well as the overall deterioration situation in Kosovo of the 1990s, because ‘social structures, customs and (in)formal institutions, which existed long before international actors arrived, have influenced how the local looks today’ (Džuverović 2019, 149). Respondents from both Serbian and Albanian ethnic groups agree that inter-ethnic relations between the two communities were good before the 1998–1999 war, especially before the 1990s.

Accordingly, a high-ranking official in the Kamenicë/Kamenica municipality during the post-war time,¹⁰ for instance, claims that the United Nations Interim Mission in Kosovo (UNMIK) administration deployed to the town in June 1999 – after the Yugoslav forces and its administration had to leave Kosovo – found good inter-ethnic relations there, especially among older residents, and that these circumstances made their work easier (personal communication, 27 August 2022). This concurs with the statement of a high-level international security officer in the Kamenicë/Kamenica municipality during the post-war time,¹¹ who said, ‘I praised God when they sent me to Kamenica’ (personal communication, 3 December 2022). Jarstad and Belloni argue that ‘hybridity already exists before the deployment of an international peacebuilding mission and is shaped by decades of international-local interaction’ (2012, 4). In line with that statement, and according to the results of our field research, we conclude that hybridity as a ‘security driver’ has also been shaped by decades of local-local interactions. In the case of Kamenicë/Kamenica, good inter-ethnic relations were cultivated over decades of coexistence of Serbs and Albanians in specific social circumstances of the Yugoslav era characterized by above-average poverty and underdevelopment in the region. In this part of our research, we identify two main factors that contribute to the coexistence between local Serbs and Albanians: historical-demographic and geopolitical factors.

Historical-demographic factors

At the end of the 19^th century, Kamenicë/Kamenica was a village inhabited mainly by Serbs, with only five Muslim households (Stanković 1910). The first waves of Albanians settled in Kamenicë/Kamenica from the surrounding villages in the mid-1950s (Arbën, personal communication, 24 August 2022). Historical literature and school diaries corroborate that no Albanians lived in Kamenicë/Kamenica before the Second World War.¹² Alongside the Serb majority, there were also Roma and Gorani (Nemanja Vasić, personal communication, 14 May 2022). Until the 1960s, there were very few students with names commonly used by Roma and Albanians, making it difficult to discern their ethnicity. After the Second World War, in 1948, Kamenicë/Kamenica attained municipality status, and that is when it started to develop. Industrialization and improved living conditions made Kamenicë/Kamenica a more attractive place to live, drawing locals from the surrounding villages to settle there permanently. Even after the initial Albanian settlements, Serbs remained the majority (Nemanja Vasić, personal communication, 14 May 2022). In 1968, only 12 houses in the town were owned by Albanians (respondent 23, ethnic Albanian, personal communication, 27 August 2022).

According to our interviewee, inter-ethnic relations in Kamenicë/Kamenica before the 1990s were good (Arbën, personal communication, 24 August 2022). One of the several reasons cited for their peaceful coexistence is the fact that Serbs and Albanians have been living together for several decades and ‘got used to each other, because they were all natives there’ (respondent 12, ethnic Serb, personal communication, 14 May 2022). There was no in-migration from other areas of Kosovo to Kamenicë/Kamenica,¹³ and ‘the very pronounced hatred during the war did not come from the local people, but from people who came to the town from other areas’ (Rada Trajković, personal communication, 20 September 2022). That is why in Kamenicë/Kamenica they ‘found a model of how to live in a dignified way’ (Rada Trajković, personal communication, 20 September 2022). Respondent Azem Vllasi, a well-known Yugoslav politician of Albanian nationality born in Kamenicë/Kamenica and an outspoken critic of Slobodan Milošević, confirmed in our interview that there was no immigration to the area that today belongs to the municipality of Kamenicë/Kamenica after 1912, and points out that ‘it is well-known fact that, in general, so-called newcomers have had a more challenging time establishing relationships with locals’ (personal communication, 27 August 2022). The ethnic balance until the 1990s and the fact that the local population here is primarily indigenous and characterized by a tradition of cohabitation were identified as key factors fostering good inter-ethnic relations in Kamenicë/Kamenica during that period.

More precisely, the numerical proportion of Serbs and Albanians remained relatively similar until the 1990s. Even then, Serbs made up about 30% of the total population in the municipality,¹⁴ so ‘neither Serbs nor Albanians could dominate or harm the other community’ (Nebojša Simić, personal communication, 13 May 2022). In addition, the longstanding multigenerational cooperation among residents of different origins in Kamenicë/Kamenica over many years was another significant contribution (respondent 17, ethnic Albanian, personal communication, 24 August 2022).

An additional explanation regarding the demographic issue is warranted. The majority of Serbs emigrated from the town of Kamenicë/Kamenica between the 1950s and 1980s. More precisely, in 1953, according to the Bureau of Statistics of the Republic of Serbia (hereafter BSRS), there were 3,272 residents of Serbian nationality (BSRS 1953), whereas in 1981, this number decreased to 1,679 (National structure of population in SFR Yugoslavia). The main question arises: did the Serbs leave Kamenicë/Kamenica because of insecurity, or was their mass exodus a consequence of other factors? Our respondents of Serbian nationality emphasize several reasons for this, but, in their opinion, there was no direct threat or pressure from local Albanians towards local Serbs. Rather, economic and political factors intertwined, leading to an increasingly untenable socioeconomic situation, and the constitutional changes of 1974 gave the Albanians many advantages, making it significantly easier for them to secure employment, which resulted in many Serbs simply choosing to leave Kamenicë/Kamenica (Nemanja Vasić, personal communication, 14 May 2022).

The provincial decision on employment using the ethnicity key as an affirmative advantage -at one point the final ratio amounted to 7-to-1 in favour of ethnic Albanians- led to the fact that in the period from 1978 to 1982, 1,588 workers were employed in the Novobërdë/Novo Brdo mine (16 km from the town), with only 13% being Serbs, despite the Serbs constituting the majority population in the settlements around the mine during that time (Milić 1982). Local Serbs recount witnessing several buses bringing Albanians from the rest of Kosovo to work in the Novobërdë/Novo Brdo mine every day, while they were sitting at home without employment opportunities, which ‘forced them to migrate’ (local Serbs, personal communication, May 10–14, 2022).

In 1985, the Constitutional Court of Serbia, however, ruled that the employment decision based on the ethnicity key was unconstitutional (Ramet 2002, 17). However, by that time, the decision had already greatly contributed to the outmigration of Serbs from that part of the Kosovo province, including Kamenicë/Kamenica. Therefore, the primary responsibility for the large outmigration of Serbs in that period lies with the Serbian communist leadership and their state policy towards Kosovo. Hence, ‘a somewhat calmer situation in Kamenica gave people the “luxury” to delay their departure’ (respondent 3, ethnic Serb, personal communication, 11 May 2022).

In addition to the historical-demographic factor previously described, the geopolitical factor also exerted a great influence on shaping everyday life ‘outside of everyday politics’ and largely by its own rules.

Geopolitical factor

Kamenicë/Kamenica has historically been situated far from major roads. Such a geographical position and a weak economic situation in the surrounding region make the area strategically unimportant. The transport infrastructure was notably inferior. For example, the BSRS annual report from 1974 shows that the municipality of Kamenicë/Kamenica had no first-class roads and only nine second-class roads (Municipalities in SR Serbia 1974).¹⁵ Sources indicate that two-thirds of the territory of Kamenicë/Kamenica consists of hills and mountains, rendering the land uncultivated or challenging to cultivate. In the remaining third of the territory, the majority of the population, accounting for over 95%, primarily engaged in agriculture and livestock farming (Trajković 2009). Due to poverty, ‘people were preoccupied with helping each other, which united them, there was no room for other topics and distancing’ (Bojan Stamenković, personal communication, 13 May 2022).

Therefore, the town’s location held little significance for politicians, resulting in its absence from important political events. In Kamenicë/Kamenica, the war between the Kosovo Albanian rebels and the forces of the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia was less intense because the main war activities and battles took place in the central and western parts of Kosovo (the Drenica and Dukagjini/Metohija regions) (respondent 14, ethnic Albanian, personal communication, 22 August 2022), which are close to mountains and Albania, the source of weapons for the Albanian rebel forces in Kosovo. So, it would be possible for Albanians and Serbs to live together in peace in other parts of Kosovo, such as Gjakova/Đakovica, Peja/Peć, Mitrovicë/Mitrovica, had politics not interfered (respondent 23, ethnic Albanian, personal communication, 27 August 2022). In the central and western parts of Kosovo, there was much more bloodshed on both sides due to killings, retaliations and counter-retaliations (respondent 20, ethnic Albanian, personal communication, 25 August 2022). However, this was not the case in Kamenicë/Kamenica, as there was no significant animosity (respondent 20, ethnic Albanian, personal communication, 25 August 2022). Respondent 1, an ethnic Serb, concludes with the words ‘We are not Mitrovica; no one wants us. Serbia does not want us either, let alone Kosovo’ (personal communication, 10 May 2022). Hence, the strategic insignificance of Kamenicë/Kamenica spared the town and its community from the bloodshed experienced by other regions (respondent 3, ethnic Serb, personal communication, 11 May 2022).

It is noteworthy that some of the most prominent leaders of the illegal separatist nationalist groups in Yugoslavia (in the narrower sense in Serbia) in the second half of 20^th century were born in the municipality of Kamenicë/Kamenica (e.g., Rexhep Mala, Kadri Zeka, Nuhi Berisha, Bajram Kosumi) and its surrounding area (Hydajet Hyseni) (Ristanović 2020, 142). However, these individuals operated in other parts of Kosovo, such as Prishtinë/Priština. In addition, the OSCE pointed out in its report that ‘for sure, the municipality was one of the most distant zones in which KLA took actions, which was certainly one of the reasons that affected the general security situation’ (2001, 239).

The ‘pre-war heritage’ in the form of positive inter-ethnic relations, embodied by the two factors described in the preceding chapter, proved insufficient to sustain a relatively peaceful coexistence after the end of the war in June 1999. However, it laid the groundwork for coexistence in the new social circumstances. This is best reflected through what we identify as post-war factors, which are institutional and economic. The remaining Serbs in Kamenicë/Kamenica continued their lives (seemingly) accepting the new circumstances (for post-war political and administrative changes, see Đorđević and Zupančič 2022), which was well received by their now far more numerous Albanian compatriots.

Moreover, the representatives of the international peacebuilding and peacekeeping missions benefitted from the ‘pre-war legacy’ because it was notably easier to work in Kamenicë/Kamenica than, for example, in the central and southern regions of Kosovo. Nonetheless, challenges persisted, as elaborated in the following chapters. It will be demonstrated that the representatives of the international missions in Kamenicë/Kamenica were able to recognize the factors that shaped the inter-ethnic relations in this city at certain critical moments, which may not have been the case for some other international engagements in Kosovo (Zupančič et al. 2018) They tailored their peacebuilding and peacekeeping efforts accordingly and thus achieved significant results. The authors do not assert that the endeavours of these missions were always infallible, but acknowledge the cautious approach adopted at certain critical moments. This, among other things, was also widely acknowledged by our interlocutors.

Post-war factors

Through the interviews, we realized that although interethnic relations were solid decades before the conflict, this alone would not have been sufficient to sustain stable coexistence between Albanians and the remaining Serbs in Kamenicë/Kamenica after the end of the war if some other conditions were not met. Furthermore, the mere presence of UNMIK, KFOR and some other international organizations could not be enough to preserve peace.

More precisely, the ethnic Serbs in Kamenicë/Kamenica believe that the only reason why they are still there, even though the Serbian population has been reduced to insignificance, is the effective organization and dedication of the members of the Russian KFOR contingent, which was present in the municipality from the end of the war until 2003. Their efforts were particularly vital in the months immediately after the withdrawal of the Yugoslav troops, which was perhaps the most challenging time for the Serbs (local Serbs, personal communication, November, 2021 and May 10–14, 2022).¹⁶ Local Albanians also expressed their satisfaction with the presence of Russian KFOR ‘because that was good for the Serbs’ (local Albanians, personal communication, September, 2022). One study of a hybrid peacekeeping intervention in Kosovo shows the negative consequences of such an approach as the alignment of UNMIK and KFOR with the KLA ‘proved unstable when ethnically motivated riots erupted in 2004’¹⁷ (Simangan 2018, 10; also see; Ker-Lindsay 2012).

Such international failures in building peace that can be traced back to an inadequate approach and insufficient commitment to their work by the representatives of the international missions cannot be an excuse for abandoning that approach. A case in point: the representatives of UNMIK and the Russian contingent of KFOR in the municipality of Kamenicë/Kamenica had the most difficult task in that area immediately after the war, which was to prevent the expulsion of the remaining Serbs and non-Albanians from the municipality of Kamenicë/Kamenica by the members of the so-called Liberation Army of Preševo, Medveđa and Bujanovac (Ushtria Çlirimtare e Preshevës, Medvegjës dhe Bujanovcit – UCPMB) (HOKMDPT, personal communication, 27 August 2022). UCPMB was predominantly operating just over the mountains in Serbia with a majority Albanian population, only a few kilometres from Kamenicë/Kamenica, making it relatively easy for them to target this town. However, the members of the Russian contingent of KFOR in Kamenicë/Kamenica succeeded in preventing the penetration of members of the UCPMB with organized and systematic actions (HOKMDPT, personal communication, August, 27, 2022).

This required exceptional commitment, a commitment that other municipalities throughout Kosovo more or less lacked (HOKMDPT, personal communication, 27 August 2022). In one instance, British KFOR members allowed KLA members to pass through Mitrovicë/Mitrovica a month after the end of the war, which resulted in incidents every two to three days (HLISOKMDPT, personal communication, 3 December 2022). Also, members of the UNMIK police, despite being obliged to provide protection, entrusted the maintenance of security to the Kosovo police in the municipality of Istog/Istok (the western part of Kosovo, near the town of Peja/Peć) as early as in 2001 (officer in the municipality of Kamenicë/Kamenica during the post-war period, personal communication, 12 January 2023). That certainly caused fear and insecurity among the remaining Serbs and other non-Albanians in the area, hindered the return of the expelled, and contributed to the almost complete exodus.¹⁸

Therefore, the presence of international organizations, such as UNMIK and KFOR, is best reflected in the following two factors that we recognize as the reasons for the solid coexistence of Serbs and Albanians in Kamenicë/Kamenica after the end of the war: institutional and economic factors.¹⁹

Institutional factor

To what extent do Serbs in Kamenicë/Kamenica accept the current political/institutional order and exhibit a willingness to participate in its functioning? The Serbs in Kamenicë/Kamenica were forced to be among the first to accept the new political and institutional order because, unlike, for example, Ranillug/Ranilug, where Serbs constitute the majority, Kamenicë/Kamenica is multi-ethnic and has a much larger Albanian population (respondent 3, ethnic Serb, personal communication, 11 May 2022). Thus, until the signing of the Brussels Agreement²⁰ in 2013, Serbs in Ranillug/Ranilug had a municipality financed by the Government of Serbia, affording them the opportunity to carry out projects and employ officials. On the contrary, the municipality funded by the Government of Serbia in Kamenicë/Kamenica ‘had only five people just sitting there, and they did nothing for the local Serbian population’ (respondent 3, ethnic Serb, personal communication, 11 May 2022). Some of our respondents attribute the positive inter-ethnic relations in Kamenicë/Kamenica in the post-war period to the fact that some Serbs joined newly established institutions immediately after the war to stay and improve the existing good inter-ethnic relations ‘so that all dissatisfaction we have can be identified and corrected in the institutions’ (Nebojša Simić, personal communication, 13 May 2022).

Although it should be noted that a lack of alternative employment opportunities increases the likelihood that individuals join institutions even if they have reservations about them (Zupančič 2019), the relatively quick acceptance of the new institutional order by a certain number of local Serbs helped the agonistic peace in Kamenicë/Kamenica. The geopolitical factor certainly contributed significantly, considering that even after the war, Kamenicë/Kamenica held little geo-strategic importance for both official Belgrade and official Prishtinë/Priština. Consequently, local Serbs were much less exposed to the influence of intra-ethnic relations than, for example, the Serbs in the north of Kosovo.

Moreover, the activities of local authorities are vital for the effective functioning of institutions because ‘customary law, traditional societal structures (extended families, clans, tribes, religious brotherhoods, village communities) and traditional authorities (village elders, headmen, clan chiefs, healers, bigmen,²¹ religious leaders) determine the everyday social reality of large parts of the populations in developing countries even today, particularly in rural and remote peripheral areas’ (Boege et al. 2009, 603). Accordingly, Begzad Sinani, former mayor of the municipality of Kamenicë/Kamenica, recounts a challenging situation when he ordered the Albanian and Serbs ‘who drank in bars together every night and attended meetings only to feign patriotism to leave a meeting, because they misrepresented the situation’ (personal communication, 24 August 2022). This instance highlights that Kamenicë/Kamenica was willing to take such actions when it was necessary, thereby contributing to calming the tensions at critical moments.

However, the inclusion of ethnic Serbs in post-war institutions, established following the UNMIK arrival in Kosovo in June 1999, did not go smoothly. Inadequate institutional organization and nepotism excluded the local non-Albanian population from participating in local institutions (HOKMDPT, personal communication, August, 27, 2022). Members of the UNMIK administration in Kamenicë/Kamenica undertook substantial efforts to ensure the proportional participation of all ethnic groups. More precisely, they nullified job advertisements that were not responded to by non-Albanians because they suspected that the local Serbs and other non-Albanian communities were not informed about the employment opportunities. Subsequently, they created bilingual job advertisements and personally distributed them in villages across the municipality of Kamenicë/Kamenica, thereby informing the people about the employment opportunities. Through these initiatives, the UNMIK administration in Kamenicë/Kamenica succeeded in making every local institution multi-ethnic (HOKMDPT, personal communication, 27 August 2022).

The only thing with a positive impact on the coexistence of Serbs and Albanians in the first years after the end of the war was constant employment of residents of different ethnic groups which impelled individuals to cooperate and, for example, learn each other’s languages to be able to do jobs they were paid for (HOKMDPT, personal communication, 27 August 2022). However, initiatives such as establishing NGOs and a Youth centre failed because in everyday interactions, ‘Serbs still socialized with Serbs, whereas Albanians still socialized with Albanians’ (HOKMDPT, personal communication, 27 August 2022). Apparently, the locals were aware of this, as confirmed by the statement of one of the interviewees that ‘third parties, such as UNMIK and NGOs gathered Albanians and Serbs to socialize, but it was an artificial friendship’ (Ardian Berisha, personal communication, 22 August 2022). The normalization of relations and everyday life, at least to the extent resembling pre-war conditions, would likely not have occurred without the aforementioned efforts and prudent approach to the post-war organization of public life by the representatives of the UNMIK administration in the municipality of Kamenicë/Kamenica. Without stable employment and a sense of belonging to the community, Serbs would have moved out of Kamenicë/Kamenica in significantly greater numbers.

The respondents expressed uncertainty regarding how inter-ethnic relations in Kamenicë/Kamenica would have evolved if there had been no need for active economic cooperation between Albanians and Serbs. In this sense, they noted that many friendships in Kamenicë/Kamenica are based on business and other mutual interests (local Serbs, personal communication, May 10–14, 2022).

Economic factor

All respondents agree that economic cooperation between Serbs and Albanians is one of the reasons for good inter-ethnic relations in Kamenicë/Kamenica. Respondent 21, an ethnic Albanian, emphasizes that everyday interactions are important if politics does not interfere and that in Kamenicë/Kamenica, economic cooperation is constantly discussed, but daily politics is not (personal communication, 25 August 2022). Also, he observes that to this day, Serbs and Albanians in Kamenicë/Kamenica can be seen sitting together in pubs, drinking, eating, and talking about ordinary matters but avoiding political topics (personal communication, 25 August 2022). Economic cooperation between local Albanians and Serbs in Kamenicë/Kamenica remains very active, mirroring the pre-war era (Nemanja Vasić, personal communication, 14 May 2022).

This is further illustrated by anecdotal evidence. In 2011, when the Kosovo government passed the decision that licence plates issued by the Government of Kosovo were required south of the Ibar River, Serbs in Kamenicë/Kamenica first boycotted the decision and exclusively rode bicycles for three months. As a result, many Serbs residing farther from the centre of Kamenicë/Kamenica were unable to access shops owned by Albanians, and the owners of those shops claimed that ‘if it takes a little longer, we will go bankrupt’ (respondent 3, ethnic Serb, personal communication, 11 May 2022).

Before the war, Serbs and Albanians worked together in factories, and this trend continued after the war. A notable example of their cooperation is the local market in Kamenicë/Kamenica. The local market was the first ‘multi-ethnic market’ in Kosovo to resume immediately after the war (in 2000). It was revived in Kamenicë/Kamenica, because the factories ceased working, leaving people without alternatives (Bojan Stamenković, personal communication, 13 May 2022).

This example also illustrates the significance of the dedication of the members of international missions to succeed in building peace. Although the inter-ethnic relations before the war were positive and the war period in the town was not characterized by atrocities widespread in other parts of Kosovo, encouraging Serbs and Albanians to sell their products together on the market again proved difficult. During that period, the UNMIK administration invested significant efforts to encourage the return of Serbs to the market. The Serbs never complained to the UNMIK administration about any threats from local Albanians, but they were simply afraid (HOKMDPT, personal communication, 27 August 2022).

This exemplifies how representatives of the UNMIK administration in Kamenicë/Kamenica leveraged the local market as a ‘pre-war legacy’, recognizing its multifaceted significance. Decades of good relations between the local Serbs and Albanians had fostered the existence of a market in the town even before the war, benefiting of the entire community. Representatives of the UNMIK administration found this out from conversations with locals. Recognizing the potential of this ‘fertile soil,’ they made efforts to restore what had already existed; what connected people before the war and what they had no aversion to.²² By successfully bringing the local Serbs and Albanians together again at the common market in the city centre, they played a pivotal role in normalizing relations and everyday life. Beyond its economic function, which is important for people who mainly make their living from agriculture, the market also held exceptional social importance. Here, local Albanians and Serbs meet, engage in conversations, share anecdotes, and thus cultivate a culture of dialogue and understanding essential for life in inter-ethnic environments.

Conclusion

This analysis sheds light on the historical period spanning from the beginning of the coexistence of Serbs and Albanians in Kamenicë/Kamenica – beginning with the aftermath of the Second World War – until the initial years following the end of the latest war in 1999. The flow of this paper emanates from the answers of the respondents, who emphasized this period in their explanations of the coexistence. They perceive these decades as crucial for them and their sense of community.

In this article, we explored in detail how the agonistic peace in Kamenicë/Kamenica was upheld by local-local hybridization. In addition, in the section on post-war factors, we have illustrated through several examples how external factors (UNMIK and KFOR), building upon the foundations laid by local-local hybridization, have effectively contributed to maintaining agonistic peace in this city. This case study shows it is necessary to understand which factors affect the functioning of the local community, how they shape it, and their impact on the daily lives and inter-ethnic relations of the residents. It is crucial to acknowledge the potential of the local community, which was created by local-local hybridization. This entails recognizing both positive and negative attributes of the local community. Only through a profound understanding of these elements – and not by strict imposition of ideas from above, i.e., from headquarters of peacebuilding and peacekeeping missions or even state capitals – can systematic peacebuilding and peacekeeping activities be designed effectively and so achieve meaningful results in fostering peace and interethnic coexistence.

The innovative nature of the concept we have proposed lies in the fact that it considers all factors influencing inter-ethnic relations in a local post-conflict environment. This does not necessarily mean that inter-ethnic relations are solid. There are many examples of local environments where inter-ethnic relations have deteriorated due to the combined impact of various factors. While the city of Kamenicë/Kamenica is a case study example of robust inter-ethnic relations, the concept we proposed goes beyond the case study in question and can also be applied to places characterized by poor inter-ethnic relations. We use the example of Kamenicë/Kamenica only to explain how different factors shape(d) the inter-ethnic relations of the local population through their intertwined action – a phenomenon we term ‘local-local hybridization,’ and how the representatives of international missions took that hybridization into account at critical moments. These factors are reflected both by positive examples, such as the local market and its longstanding tradition, as well as by negative examples, such as the geographical position of the town, which posed a great threat to the coexistence of Serbs and Albanians in Kamenicë/Kamenica after the end of the war in 1999, because the UCPMB attempted to expel the remaining Serbs from this town.

The existing concepts within the theory of hybrid peace recognize the contribution of locals’ actions to peacebuilding efforts, but the possibility of (relatively) successful post-war peace activities in environments that are taken as examples of traditionally bad inter-ethnic relations is overlooked. The authors of this paper argue that with an adequate approach to the local post-conflict environment, which implies considering local-local hybridization in the way that concept is defined, certain peace outcomes can be achieved in all local post-conflict environments. While we do not claim that these outcomes would be of equal intensity in areas characterized by robust inter-ethnic relations before the war, such as Kamenicë/Kamenica, and in areas characterized by poor inter-ethnic relations in the pre-war period, certain outcomes could certainly be realized, even if these outcomes amounted to basic security for members of endangered ethnic groups.

Acknowledgements

The authors acknowledge the financial support from the Slovenian Research and Innovation Agency (in English), specifically the project Anxieties in ‘divided cities’ in post-conflict societies: developing and testing innovative (experimental) approaches in peacebuilding (N5-0178), and the research programme Obramboslovje (P5-0206).

There are no financial or non-financial competing interests to report.

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).

Additional information

Funding

The work was supported by the Javna Agencija za Raziskovalno Dejavnost RS.

Notes on contributors

Andjela Djordjević

Anđela Đorđević is a PhD candidate at the University of Ljubljana, Faculty of Social Sciences. She is research assistant in the research project Anxieties in cities of Southeast European post-conflict societies: Introducing an integrative approach to peacebuilding (Anxious Peace). Her research interest is primarily focused on the post-conflict society of Kosovo, but she also conducted research in Bosnia and Herzegovina and Croatia within the project Anxious Peace.

Rok Zupančіč

Rok Zupančič, PhD, is Associate Professor at the University of Ljubljana, Faculty of Social Sciences. His expert sphere includes peacebuilding, conflict prevention, and regional security (Southeast Europe). He is the Principal Investigator in the research project Anxieties in cities of Southeast European post-conflict societies: Introducing an integrative approach to peacebuilding, which explores how different sort of anxieties in post-conflict societies affect body-minds of people, and how does this hinder the attempts to reduce the ethnic distance between the people previously involved in armed conflicts.

Notes

1. More on the ordinary life in Kamenicë/Kamenica in Diković (2021).

2. Косовска Каменица/Kosovska Kamenica is the official name of this town and the municipality as an administrative unit in the Republic of Serbia.

3. Interestingly, according to OSCE (2001, 239), ‘no refugees were complaining of human rights violations’.

4. For example, there is a report of Albanian boys attacking a Serbian boy in a schoolyard (KoSSev 2015, 2021; Kosovo online 2021). However, in such cases, any conclusions should be drawn with due care because there are numerous (if not daily) cases of teenagers clashing almost everywhere, meaning that this case was not necessarily motivated by inter-ethnic tensions.

5. The only scientific study to our knowledge that mentions Kamenicë/Kamenica (Jackson 2018) is focused on a comparative analysis of municipal administration in two Kosovo cities, Hani i Elezit/Elez Han and Kamenica.

Read more about the importance of making structural and experiential frames mutually reflexive in determining the outcome of interethnic relations in post-conflict societies in Kočan and Zupančič (2023).

6. 17 March 2004 was ‘the most serious setback since 1999 in the international community’s efforts to create a multi-ethnic Kosovo […] large ethnic Albanian crowds acted with ferocious efficiency to rid their areas of all remaining vestiges of a Serb presence, and also targeted other minorities such as Roma, including Ashkali who are Albanian-speaking Roma’ (Human Rights Watch 2004, 2).

7. Read more on the risks and promises associated with agonistic peace in Shinko (2022).

8. If Serbs responded negatively, we also asked if there are everyday situations in which they have to talk to Albanians, and, if so, in what language they communicate.

9. Interviews were conducted in Kamenicë/Kamenica in November 2021, May 2022, August 2022, and September 2022. One interview was conducted in September 2022 via video call. Another interview, also via video call, was conducted in December 2022. And last interview was conducted in January 2023 by telephone.

10. Hereinafter HOKMDPT.

11. Hereinafter HLISOKMDPT.

12. Nebojša Simić says that an Albanian friend told him that his research shows that a hundred years ago, there were only Christians in Kamenicë/Kamenica and its surrounding area (personal communication, May 13, 2022).

13. Kamenicë/Kamenica is characterized by so-called internal migration, which means that the largest number of “newcomers”are from other places within the same municipality (about 85%) (Trajković 2009). Respondent Arbën claims the same (personal communication, August 24, 2022).

14. According to the 1991 census, there were 12,761 Serbs and 38,096 Albanians in the Kamenicë/Kamenica municipality (BSRS 1995).

15. It is interesting to note that the railway was a reason for inter-ethnic conflicts in several towns across Kosovo during the Ottoman Empire in the second half of the 19^th century. Kamenicë/Kamenica was excluded from that conflict because no railroad ran through that area. More on that in Mikić (1988).

16. For example, inter-ethnic relations in Gjilan/Gnjilane during the war were robust, but turned disastrous after the war. Almost daily, grenades were thrown in the courtyards of Serbian houses because members of the American KFOR contingent, which was deployed in Gjilan/Gnjilane, were not well organized and committed to solving that problem (HOKMDPT, personal communication, August 27, 2022).

17. In the words of our respondents of Serbian nationality: ‘It was terrible that day, they wanted to expel the entire Serbian population’ (Milorad Filipović, personal communication, May 12, 2022). Our respondents of Albanian nationality condemn those events. For example, Azem Vllasi points out that 17 March 2004 was ‘a great shame for the Albanians. Unfortunately, it has not been discovered who organized it’ (personal communication, August 27, 2022).

18. Serbs in the part of Kosovo to which Kamenicë/Kamenica belongs (as well as across the entirety of Kosovo) did not immediately support the UN administration and expressed their dissatisfaction and uncertainty surrounding life under the UN administration (Zlatanović 2022). This is understandable if we consider the aforementioned inadequate efforts by the members of the international mission in many municipalities across Kosovo.

19. It is important to add that our respondents of Serbian nationality emphasized their perceptions of, as they call them, ‘new cultural patterns’ that, according to their opinion, Albanians started to develop after the war in 1999. They see these patterns as one of several reasons that contribute to the current robust inter-ethnic relations in Kamenicë/Kamenica. For example, the respondent Dejan Nikolić notices changes in the clothing of Albanian women and the attitude towards the birth rate policy and emphasizes the belief that ‘Albanians do not strive towards these goals anymore, as has been the case before’ (personal communication, 13 May 2022). Albanians have had a strong ethnic fascination from 1995/6 until 2010/12, and then realized that thieves had prospered, that people had died, and that nobody had anything else to do but live a miserable life (respondent 1, ethnic Serb, personal communication, 10 May 2022).

20. The so-called Brussels Agreement (First Agreement of Principles Governing the Normalizations of Relations, 2013), hailed as one of the main foreign policy achievements of the EU, which acted as its mediator, was signed between Serbia and Kosovo and was aimed at regulating legal and administrative issues. More on the agreement is available at: https://www.srbija.gov.rs/cinjenice/en/120394

21. The authors make a distinction between a bigman and a politician and explain that ‘a bigman has to affirm his customary status by distributing gifts to his followers, while a politician is obliged to act in the interest of the common good, pursuing the interest of citizens, not clients’ (Boege et al. 2009, 603).

22. Especially Serbs, who initially refused to cooperate with UNMIK (across the entire territory of Kosovo), because they considered them occupiers.