Political Constellation and Decision-making – Case Study: Two Leaders in the Negotiation Process for the Normalization of Relations between Serbia and Kosovo

  • Agon HALABAKU UBT College
  • Nuredin LUTFIU
  • Valbona FISHEKU HALABAKU

Abstract

In representative democracy, citizens with free vote, mainly political parties, elect their representatives to legislate, supervise, protect and make decisions that are in their interest. Given this, political leaders express the thoughts, wishes and will of the voters and act as their representatives when defending interest and making decisions that are related to the quality and the fate of their lives. Supporting their decisions can often be decisive for success and failure in their political career. Thus, in this paper work, it will be given views on how their decision-making is influenced by: leadership position and support from the coming party, constellation of political forces in parliament, achievement of a common platform and political consensus among political actors, constitutional norms, and broad civic support.


The methodology used will be in harmony with the purpose of the study. Here will be an analysis of the behavior and actions of the two leaders within the constellation built in their country. In the course of this, this study will be oriented to the analysis of the political circumstances prevailing in the respective countries, the position of leadership within the party, the position and constitutional functions that favor one or the other, the distribution of political forces in the respective parliaments and many other moments. For this purpose, the interviews of the two leaders, the statements of the opposition leaders in the respective countries, the statements of prominent politicians, the other political and legal documents will be analyzed with which they will provide sufficient evidence on how they can be influenced in the process of the decision-making process during the Serbia-Kosovo Normalization negotiations.


 

References

1. Andric, G. (2018), “Serbia Not Transparent Over Kosovo Deals”, Transitional Justice in the Balkans, February, 15, pg.2.

2. Bashkurti, L. (2018), “Bisedimet Kosovë – Serbi: Tri kërkesa për t’u mbajtur parasysh nga Kosova”, Zëri Info, September, 4, pg.3.

3. Byron M. Roth, John D. Mullen, Decision Making: Its Logic and Practice, (Savage, Maryland: Rowman & Littlefield, 2002) 22.

4. Bytyqi, F. (2018), “Serbia’s Vucic says long road ahead in talks with Kosovo”, Reuters, September, pg, 1.

5. Constitution of the Republic of Kosovo, http://www.kryeministriks.net/repository/docs/Constitution1Kosovo.pd

6. Central Election Commission, http://www.kqz-ks.org/

7. Dukić M., (2012), “Narod koji ima najkraće pamćenje na svetu”, Preko Ramena, May, 10, pg.1.

8. Goldstein, Joshua. International Relations, (N.Y: Harper Collins College Publishers, 1994) p-137.

9. Holst.K J, International Politics, (New Jersey: Prentice Hall International Inc., 1995) p-375

10. Herbert, S. (1954) Administrative Behavior: A Study of Decision-Making Processes in Administrative Organization.

11. Hood, C. & Heald, D. (2012), “Transparency:The Key to Better Governance?” Oxford: Oxford University Press.

12. Jensen, L. (1982) Explaining Foreign Policy. London: Prentice-Hall, 13.

13. Kissinger, H.A., 1969, Nuclear Weapons and Foreign Policy, W.W. Norton, New York, USA.

14. KDI, “Kuvendi të Fuqizohet, Marrëveshjet e Dialogut të Zbatohen”15. September, pg.1

15. http://kdi-kosova.org/aktivitetet/sondazhi-i-kdi-kuvendi-te-fuqizohet-marreveshjet-e-dialogut-te-zbatohen.

16. Laxmikanth, M. Public Administration, (New Delhi: Tata McGraw Hill Publication, 2011) 15.

17. Lin, J. N., (2003), “The decision analysis” Beijing, China Beijing University of Posts and Telecommunications Publishing House

18. Maldonato, Mauro. Decision Making: Towards an Evolutionary Theory of Human Action, (Sussex: Academic Press, 2010) 8

19. Pillutla, M. and Nicholson, N. (eds). (2004). Negotiation: how to make deals and reach agreement

20. Marx, Karl. “The Eighteenth Brumaire of Louis Bonaparte” (Marx-Engels Library, 1852), https://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1852/18th-brumaire/ch01.htm.

21. Montero, José Ramón and Gunther, Richard (2002) Introduction: Reviewing and Reassessing Parties. Ch. 1 in Gunther, Montero and Linz (ed): Political Parties: Old Concepts and New Challenges. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Pg.4.

22. Odell, John S. Dustin Tingley et al, Negotiating Agreements in International Relations. Visited on 08.12.2018.

23. http://www.apsanet.org/portals/54/Files/Task%20Force%20Reports/Chapter7Mansbridge.pdf
24. Political Psychology Vol. 13, No. 3 (Sep. 1992), pp. 517-539.

25. Putnam. “Diplomacy and Domestic Politics: The Logic of Two-Level Games,” 434.

26. Renshon, Jonathan and Stanley Renshon. 2008. “The Theory and Practice of Foreign

27. Policy Decision Making.” Political Psychology 29(4): 509–536

28. Tetlock, Philip E. “Good Judgment in International Politics: Three Psychological Perspectives”523

29. Smith,Dan. Trends and Causes of Armed Conflict. Last visited on: 15.12.2018.

30. https://www.berghof-foundation.org/fileadmin/redaktion/Publications/Handbook/Articles/smith_handbook.pdf

31. Spencer, Herbert. (1896), The Study of Sociology, London: Appleton.

32. Winter, G. D., (2009), Personality and Political Behavior. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

33. Yukl, G. (2010), Leadership in Organizations, Prentice-Hall.
Published
2019-08-24
How to Cite
HALABAKU, Agon; LUTFIU, Nuredin; HALABAKU, Valbona FISHEKU. Political Constellation and Decision-making – Case Study: Two Leaders in the Negotiation Process for the Normalization of Relations between Serbia and Kosovo. PRIZREN SOCIAL SCIENCE JOURNAL, [S.l.], v. 3, n. 2, p. 11-20, aug. 2019. ISSN 2616-387X. Available at: <http://prizrenjournal.com/index.php/PSSJ/article/view/97>. Date accessed: 15 nov. 2019. doi: https://doi.org/10.32936/pssj.v3i2.97.
Section
Original Research Articles