has to be reviewed and redefined in order to reflect the world as it is today. This may also mean that the role of the state should be reviewed, in light of these changes. What is certainly clear, theoretically and in practice, is that national security is linked with human security and that to preserve national security states must safeguard the human security as well as the societal security of its population. This means that ultimately, people who live within a state should be provided the space and tools to have their human security needs met as well as preserve their ethnic, cultural, religious and national identity, as a way to preserve national security. In this sense, the responsibility for the provision of such a space and tools falls to the political leaders in place, whose ultimate responsibility as elected o cials should primarily be to cater to the needs of the population they have been elected to represent. Furthermore, even their political decisions should be based on setting priorities right, starting with how their political decisions would a ect the people they are meant to represent first, before how they would a ect their political agendas. Only switching a mindset that shifts how local political leaders function, from a"political party figure" to a "statesman" that is capable of putting"the people" first, when it matters, can the vicious cycle of political instability and stagnation be put to a halt. combines the traditional Realist view of security and the significance of threats to the state, with a present day broad concept of security and where threats to people are considered. This way, by addressing human security, greater priority would be given to the people and their wellbeing, at the same time diminishing an internal threat to the state, as the primary agent in the international relations, increasing the chance for stability, peace, and order. Yet, none of the above mentioned can even begin to happen without the desperately needed political stability. In this sense, it is the responsibility of the Kosovo political leaders, in the short term, to adopt a mindset that focuses more on what Kosovo and its people actually need, and what is vital for this country's survival and self-sustainability then the interest of the political parties they belong too. In the short term, only a conscious decision to shift the political mindset could possibly break the vicious cycle of political instability that Kosovo has been plagued with. In conclusion, lack of political stability and in consequence of human security puts the states' legitimacy at great risk, weakening national security. Therefore, the vicious cycle of political instability should be immediately addressed as a way to unlock the"progress limbo" and be able to allow the country to develop. In this sense, it is of vital importance to also adopt a security concept that is more fitting to the current global security environment, and that 13