The paper’s Brussels-based columnist Augustin Palokaj writes that border demarcation is not necessarily a precondition for membership in the EU and NATO and that there are countries, such as Croatia and Slovenia, which are part of these two bodies and have no border demarcation agreement. In fact, he adds, most of the former Yugoslav countries have amongst themselves unresolved border issues. “Border problems are so extensive and complex that it should be realized that there can be no quick solution,” writes Palokaj. And while Montenegro is an ally to Kosovo there is no reason why the border demarcation should be done in a hurry as was the case with the current agreement. As things stand, the agreement between Kosovo and Montenegro needs to be renegotiated and if the parties fail to agree, the issue can then be sought to be resolved through arbitration, suggests Palokaj. Montenegro, on the other hand, has also no reason to hurry up as settling the border demarcation with Kosovo is not a condition to join NATO. However, agreements with Serbia in Palokaj’s view are a different matter. “They are neither agreements, nor are they international nor do they have a third-party guarantor. They are only an undertaking of political duties from a “bizarre” process, writes Palokaj. Of course if Kosovo fails to implement these undertakings, it will face consequences but it will face even more serious repercussions if it does implement them. “There is a limit to how far any government of Kosovo can go,” he writes adding that the government of Kosovo and international representatives are mistaken if they measure the support for opposition’s demands with the number of protesters at the 28 November rally. “Internal order of Kosovo and competencies granted to a minority entity, as well as establishment of state borders, are things that cannot be decided through hasty procedures  for the sake of some international meetings but they require internal consensus,” concludes Palokaj.