Serbia Launches New Propaganda Campaign Citing “Interethnic Incidents,” Says Fetoshi

Tensions between Kosovo and Serbia escalated this week as the Director of the Octopus Institute, Arben Fetoshi, issued a stark warning about what he describes as a coordinated propaganda campaign by Serbia that threatens regional stability.

In a detailed statement, Fetoshi claimed that Serbia has been systematically framing incidents in Kosovo as ethnically motivated attacks against Serbs, creating a dangerous narrative that portrays Albanians as aggressors and Kosovo’s institutions as sources of violence.

“Serbia is conducting a propaganda offensive that should raise alarms for Kosovo’s institutions and the international community due to the dangerous ‘victimization’ rhetoric being deployed,” Fetoshi stated in his analysis of the situation.

The warning comes amid already fragile relations between the two Balkan nations. Kosovo, which declared independence from Serbia in 2008, continues to face resistance from Belgrade, which refuses to recognize its sovereignty. This long-standing dispute has created persistent instability in the region, despite international mediation efforts.

According to Fetoshi, Serbian media and officials have been using specific terminology such as “wave of anti-Serb hysteria,” “ethnic attacks,” and “violence of Kurti’s phalanxes” – the latter referring to Kosovo’s Prime Minister Albin Kurti. This language, Fetoshi argues, serves a calculated purpose: to legitimize potential Serbian intervention in Kosovo while suggesting that the international community is deliberately overlooking these developments.

Security analysts note that such rhetoric has historical precedent in the region. Similar narratives of victimization were employed during the breakup of Yugoslavia in the 1990s, which ultimately led to a decade of devastating conflicts across the Balkans, including the Kosovo War of 1998-1999.

The Octopus Institute, a think tank focused on security and political developments in the Balkans, has been monitoring the escalation of tensions between the two countries. Fetoshi emphasized that the current propaganda strategy appears designed not only to criminalize Kosovo’s government internationally but also to inflame ethnic tensions within Kosovo itself, potentially creating pretexts for intervention.

“This coordinated propaganda aggression by Serbia must be treated as a serious threat, especially in the context of the ‘international siege’ it has been experiencing recently,” Fetoshi warned, alluding to Serbia’s increasingly complex geopolitical position as it balances relationships between the European Union, Russia, and China.

The current situation is further complicated by Kosovo’s demographic makeup, where ethnic Serbs constitute approximately 5% of the population, primarily concentrated in the northern regions bordering Serbia. These communities often find themselves at the center of political tensions between Belgrade and Pristina.

International observers have expressed concern about the deteriorating discourse. The European Union, which has been facilitating dialogue between Kosovo and Serbia for over a decade, has repeatedly called for both sides to refrain from provocative rhetoric and actions that could undermine stability.

Fetoshi concluded his analysis by emphasizing that Serbia’s “victimization” narrative serves as both an inciting instrument and a potential cover for intervention. He called for Kosovo’s institutions to respond effectively and for increased attention from the international community to prevent further escalation.

Regional experts suggest that the ongoing propaganda efforts highlight the limitations of the EU-mediated normalization process between the two countries. Despite numerous agreements, implementation has remained inconsistent, with both sides accusing each other of obstructing progress toward lasting peace.

As tensions continue to simmer, diplomatic efforts to defuse the situation have taken on renewed urgency, with calls for both Belgrade and Pristina to engage in constructive dialogue rather than inflammatory rhetoric.