 |
Prospects
for the Balkans and the Limits to Stability
Miroslav
Medjimorec
Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Croatia
The
results of the summit in Prague recently changed Europe
(and the world) forever. The acceptance of seven new
NATO members and the agreement on full EU membership
for ten additional members has reshaped the old continent.
The old post-Versailles and post-Yalta political order
is definitively over, and Europe is moving toward De
Gaulle's then visionary idea of a Europe united from
the Atlantic to the Urals. Giscard d'Estaing is proposing
a future confederal structure, in which Europe would
play a more important role in global issues, and be
united under common ideals, visions, standards and laws
in political life, economy, human rights, freedom of
movement, and education. Only one little corner, one
"enclave" (as Michael Steiner, UN representative
in Kosovo, has said), Europe's "backyard",
the Balkans, remains "pro futuro", excluded
from the process of Euro-Atlantic integration. Why?
What
are the prospects for countries considered part of the
"West Balkan region"? What must these "West
Balkan countries" do to become part of the European
family ?
Croatia
is strongly opposed to the "West Balkan" category,
for Croatia is a middle-European and Mediterranean country
(based on its history, tradition, culture, geopolitical
position, and self-determination). It is only the last
seventy years of common history with the peoples of
former Yugoslavia that have made it a Balkan country.
Croatia,
Bosnia-Herzegovina, Serbia, Macedonia, Montenegro (that
is, their politicians, businessmen, scientists, and
artists) try to explain the issues in historical terms,
but such explanations are greeted with scorn or lack
of understanding. European politicians attempt to ignore
our history, eradicate our differences, and destroy
our memory. We, on the other hand, believe history freed
from ideology explains the past and liberates the future.
European
politicians consider this part of southeastern Europe
a natural unit, which is true for Croatia and Bosnia-Herzegovina;
the shape of the two countries says more than hours
of historical explanations.
"You
use the same language, you can understand each other"
is a frequent comment. But language similarities do
not mean the language is the same. (The Serbo-Croatian
language does not exist) There are vast differences
that must be respected - historical, cultural, religious.
Differences in opinion must be accepted and valued (excluding
chauvinism, hegemony, racism), for through differences,
acceptance and common ground can be found. Pressure
and force are unacceptable. Time must be allowed for
wounds to heal; the process of conciliation cannot be
imposed.
The
West Balkan countries have been told that their individual
economies are small and inefficient, and that only as
a big, integrated region (i.e. former Yugoslavia) can
they be successful in the open market and a globalize
world economy. For this reason, it was argued, countries
of the region must gradually come together (joint custom
unions, integrated power resources, roads, pipelines),
create better ties with neighbors (regional cooperation),
form supranational structures, and unite with each other
before entering into a larger entity such as the European
Union.
Croatia
is not opposed to better relations and economic and
cultural exchanges with its Balkan neighbors, but would
prefer (as expressed by the President of the State,
President of the Government, Minister for European Integration,
and the general public) an individual approach and assessment
of achievements, instead of a role the European Union
wishes to impose upon Croatia.
Croatia
is not opposed to its neighbors; it is willing to develop
bilateral and multilateral ties with neighboring Balkan
countries through the Stability Pact, the Stabilization
and Association Process (SAP), the "Adriatic initiative"
(Macedonia, Albania, Croatia, and the three countries
which remain a part of the Vilnius group) and others,
but refuses to participate in the creation of the "new-old"
federal or confederal union of states, and to be part
of any future, supranational structure - be it West
Balkans, Yugoslavia, or South Slavia.
The
European Union has a specific framework for the region's
EU association. There are three political conditions:
full
and effective cooperation with the International Criminal
Court for the former Yugoslavia (ICTY);
effective
implementation of a refugee return policy;
active
policy against organized crime, corruption, and trafficking
in human beings, drugs and arms.
Non-compliance
with the following conditions means that the EU Council
and Commission would refuse to move to a further stage
of SAP, or totally suspend financial assistance to any
of the five countries. ICTY can be used as a political
tool; for example, transforming individual responsibility
for war crimes into an objective responsibility which
can lead to serious political repercussions. This perspective
equates the victim with the aggressor, aggression becomes
civil war, and Europe, having done its best, is relieved
of responsibility for allowing barbarism in its own
backyard.
Simplistic
wishful thinking and unrealistic political ideas imposed
on the people of this region by European politicians
has led to a stalemate in Bosnia Herzegovina; status
quo in Kosovo; and political instability in Serbia and
Montenegro.
The
position of Realpolitik analysts such as Henry Kissinger,
who opposed the liberal, utopian views of politicians
who have been reshaping and experimenting for years
with this part of Europe, was recently reiterated by
William Pfaff (International Herald Tribune, October
10, 2002: "Time to concede defeat in Bosnia-Herzegovina
"). Pfaff believes the policy of the international
community in Bosnia-Herzegovina has failed (has been
defeated) and must be reinterpreted, and that one more
partition (division) of Bosnia-Herzegovina would promote
democratic values. Realism demands such an option.
Many
fear a restructuring of the former Yugoslavia, so the
EU has opted for the name West Balkans, which is intended
to allay the fear of a former association. The Croatian
journalist and macro-economist, Ivo Jakovljevic, wrote
in Novi List, (October 16, 2002) "....within a
framework of regional cooperation, the West Balkan countries
of former Yugoslavia could again unite into an association
of countries (Yugoslavia, South Slavia, West Balkan)
under an international protectorate. They would become
colonies whose sovereignty lies in Washington and Brussels,
and in powerful banks, and telecommunications and media
firms....the strategic goal of the US is control and
recomposition of former Yugoslavia in order to maintain
secure and free access to the Caspian region and its
oil corridors, and the Kurdish route through Asia's
soft underbelly, and to utilize controlled chaos and
permanent crises as a geostrategic tool."
Members
of the European Stability Initiative-ESI, recently discussed
the topic "Assistance to the West Balkans, Cohesion,
and New European Borders: A call for reform of policy"
(October 5, 2002). It was argued there that imminent
political and economical chaos looms large over the
Balkans. Especially precarious is the position of Bosnia-Herzegovina
and Kosovo. Financial help from CARDS would decrease
within such a scenario, unemployment would soar, and
voters would turn to the right. Promises on the democratization
of the Balkans at the "Zagreb summit" were
hollow, for the gap between the EU and the West Balkan
countries will become even wider. The responsibility
lies in the failed policies of the EU. ESI believes
Croatia needs little time to adopt and harmonize itself
with European laws and standards.
We
must confront the truth. The international community
has placed Croatia in the West Balkans, and the main
purpose of the Hague Tribunal is to relativize the guilt
of the aggressor. Europe feels responsible for the crimes
committed in the wars in former Yugoslavia and wishes
to place the burden on the opponents of regional cooperation.
The
integration of the West Balkan countries into Europe
and the world is inevitable. Though September 11th
had an impact on the situation in Southeastern Europe,
Francis Fukuyama feels that this terrorist blow did
not initiate the beginning of a phase of history,
but that it was only a pause in the process of globalization.
He believes that his prophecies from "The End
of History" will still be realized. The consequences
for the West Balkan countries of this act of terrorism
are serious. Issues of security have made political
and economic associations much more difficult to achieve,
and living standards have fallen. Democratic development
and economic growth in the West Balkans are now being
monitored by many international organizations and
programs. But countries in the region act, as all
other states, according to their own interests in
the following areas:
-
Relations with the US-EU, countries in transition
(for instance, Rumania, which has a strategic partnership
with USA, ICC), stance toward the "axis of evil",
Iraq conflict, and forbidden trade relations with
so-called "terrorist states", are all dependent
upon issues of globalization and national interests;
-
Relationship to EU and NATO. Countries in transition
interested in entering the EU or NATO are in doubt
as to which side to take (that of the EU or the US);
-
Relationships
toward Muslim and Arab countries (Bosnia-Herzegovina,
Turkey, Greece, Israel, Russia-Chechnya, Macedonia
- Albania - SR Yugoslavia - Kosovo, Moldova - Transnjistria
- Russia), are also dependent upon national interests;
-
Unresolved national issues depend upon one's view
of the combatants. Are they national liberation fighters
or terrorists pretending to be freedom fighters?
These
categories often overlap and can also be influenced by
pressure imposed by the US, EU, or NATO; one's position
toward membership in EU or NATO; open national or territorial
issues, i.e. the tempo of democratization in Macedonia,
Albania, Kosovo, Moldova, Chechnya; issues from the past
regarding boundaries, succession, property, and war victims
(Croatia, Bosnia-Herzegovina, Serbia, Kosovo); and terrorist
activity (Kosovo, Macedonia, BH, Chechnya, and Georgia).
On the eve of possible war with Iraq, the following
must be taken into consideration:
Increase
in Arab-Muslim solidarity;
Opposition to individual American action and questions
about the role of the UN (Russia, France, China);
Preparation of Al Qa'ida for counterattacks;
Israeli response to defend its existence;
Human rights in the US and some European countries endangered;
Pressure from the US regarding the International Criminal
Court (ICC);
Misuse of the fight against terrorism in order to gain
advantage in territorial disputes; i.e., Macedonia, Chechnya,
Transnjistria;
Unresolved national problems (Kosovo, Moldova, Macedonia,
Kosovo, Chechnya, Georgia).
The struggle against terrorism, whether to support or
oppose war against Iraq, and relations toward the US and
ICC are dependent on each country's national interest
assessment.
The
future stability of the Balkan countries will be determined
by:
-
Bosnia-
Herzegovina issue; that is, whether there will be
a "Dayton Two", a partition, or renewed
dialogue between the three constituent peoples, conducted
without pressure or preconditions;
-
Kosovo:
will there be independence or expanded autonomy within
the Socialist Republic of Yugoslavia?;
-
Macedonia.
Is it an oasis of peace or will there be a new round
of confrontations?
-
the
Albanian question. Although the majority of Albanian
politicians (Conference in Lucerne, November 15-16th
) rejected the idea of a "Great Albania ",
new militant organizations have replaced the older
ones. The most recent was founded in Tirana, ("United
Albanian National Front", with links to ANA);
-
obstacles
on the road to full democracy in Serbia-Montenegro.
Nationalistic forces are still strong; even President
Koštunica talks of unification of Republika Srpska
with Serbia proper.
Croatia
is vitally interested in good relations with all its
neighbors, and especially with Bosnia-Herzegovina. Lack
of stability in these countries can spill over to Croatia.
Instability in Serbia-Montenegro, Kosovo, or Macedonia
could jeopardize its political and economical stability.
What
are the prospects?
-
the
EU must understand and respect reality, provide more
economic assistance, and develop civil societies and
democracy;
-
there must be full regional cooperation - bilateral
and multilateral - free of any institutional preconditions
(new associations), and based on individual state
(national interests) of each individual country;
-
peace,
security, ethnic tolerance, free market economy, and
European standards (acquis communitaire) must be instituted.
The
prospects for Croatia depend upon several factors. European
standards and laws (harmonization) must be implemented,
full cooperation with the Hague Tribunal (individual
responsibility not objective) is necessary, and full
privatization must occur. Infrastructure, globalization
processes, and preservation of national and cultural
differences must also be addressed. Relations with neighbors,
democracy, civil society, and NGOs are other issues.
As Otto von Hapsburg, president of the Pan-European
Union, said recently at his 90th birthday celebration:
"......there are two challenges facing enlargement
of the EU. It must negotiate with every possible candidate,
and those with different views or opinions should not
have the European door slammed shut on them…Croatia
is such an candidate, and Europe is neglecting Croatia!"
He advised Croatia to apply for full EU membership in
spite of differing views.
Doris
Pack expressed her position at a Hamburg conference
("EU enlargement - is Croatia the next candidate
for the EU?). She said the EU has pursued an erroneous
policy toward Croatia, that suspension of the PHARE
program in 1995 led Croatia into isolation, leading
to a slowdown in democracy, and that there was no harmonization
with the EU. She called on the EU to consider a new
strategy for the region.
An
upcoming conference in Solun would define future EU steps
towards the region. The document "Directions for
strengthening EU coordination and communications in the
West Balkans between EU operatives on the ground"
is replete with criticisms of past methods; therefore,
it appears that the EU is aware of its faults and wrongdoings
in the Balkans. Hopefully, the EU will rethink and redefine
its future policy towards the West Balkan countries, allowing
individual countries to enter the EU and NATO on their
own merits.
|
|
 |
|
|