The Balkans of the Future


Reply-To: [email protected]
Sender: [email protected]
From: MINELRES moderator <[email protected]>
Date: Mon, 31 May 1999 20:46:40 +0300 (EET DST)
Message-Id: <[email protected]>
Subject: The Balkans of the Future

From: MINELRES moderator <[email protected]>

Original sender: Greek Helsinki Monitor <[email protected]>

The Balkans of the Future


*** THE BALKANS OF THE FUTURE: THE GERMAN INITIATIVE OR THE AMERICAN
INITIATIVE
 
AIM JUNIOR, TIRANA, MAY 26m 1999
 
While the bombing of Serbia goes on, European chancelleries and
various Western research institutes are drafting plans and projects
for the Balkans of the future.
 
In the profusion of plans and projects for the Balkans, which do not
seem to be too much dissimilar from one another, at least two of them
stand out, be it only for the weight and importance of the states that
have presented them: the German and the American plan.
 
Germany, which will for some weeks still have the rotating presidency
of the European Union, has tabled what  it calls a pact for the
stability of Southeastern Europe, which will come under discussion
soon. This pact  consists of a number of European and regional
proposals and initiatives intended to bring to the fore Europe and its
structures, displacing the presence in the region of other world
powers, including the United States, which apparently does not comply
with the interest of the one superpower left in the world.
 
As far as the resolution of the Kosova crisis is concerned, Germany
stands for a negotiated settlement. Together with its European Union
partners, Germany seeks to reach a consensus which, however difficult
it may be, should also deal with the future of the region, calling for
the conclusion of a pact of stability for Southeastern Europe.
 
According to the German project, the troubled Balkan region should
find the solution of its problems under OSCE trusteeship, which
envisages a role for the United States and Russia, too. Germany, which
after its reunion is the most powerful State of the European Union,
aspires to leadership in Europe or, at least, strives to strengthen
Europe's leading role, supplanting the United States in the region.
 
The German concept of a new political solution for the  Balkan region
differs from the American plan, as it  considers the region an area in
expansion, not a static one. While the German project emphasizes
European structures, especially the European Union and the OSCE, the
American project is based on the active commitment of those structures
to a permanent solution within a new trans-Atlantic political
framework. The American draft provides for a trans-Atlantic structure
which will rule the world, whereas the German idea, which finds
support among political factors not only in Europe, but also in the
Balkans, envisages the solution of the problems and the future of the
region from an almost exclusively European standpoint.
 
Still, the United States reserves for itself a prime role in the
cooperation between West-European and Balkan countries. The aim of the
United States is, through a long-term, stable and broad solution of
the Kosova crisis, which in the last analysis is a European crisis, to
create a precedent that, in turn, might eventually be extended to
other conflict areas of the world as well.

On the other hand, the German concept for the resolution of the crisis
does not go beyond the borders and barriers of Europe, nor is it
intended to create new precedents. It is a reflection of Europe's
several years of hesitation before intervening in the Bosnian crisis,
which reached its solution, imperfect as it may be, only through
American commitment, which culminated in the Dayton Agreement.
 
Positive in the German commitment is the fact that today's Germany has
surmounted all the inhibitions arising from the territorial problems
it had with its neighbors (its problems with Poland over the
territories beyond the Oder-Neisse line or with the Czech Republic
over the Sudetenland). This is a positive experience which is not less
important than that achieved through the establishment of friendly
relation with its former rival - France. Today many are not sure if
Strasbourg lies in Germany or France, as Alsace-Lorraine, which was
among the causes of two disastrous world conflicts, has now become a
symbol of a new Europe with transparent borders.
 
The German initiative has found support also among some other European
and Balkan States, which see in it greater possibilities to play a
major role in the region. As the Franco-German duo is making itself
ingreasingly heard in Continental Europe, one may suppose that this
initiative, among other things, is also intended to open up the
markets of Southeastern Europe.
 
It must also be taken into account that Germany has very good
relations with Russia and is among the countries that are more
interested in Russia's fragile political and economic stability.
Hence, a solution proposed by Germany would be welcomed by Russian
foreign policy, for it would elude American preponderance and provide
a greater role for Europe.
 
Among the means proposed for the solution of the crisis and the
creation of a region without crises and conflicts is the
institutionalization of a number of political instruments. Germany has
proposed a round table with the participaton of the countries of the
region and representatives of the international community. For their
part, the United States have suggested a European summit which
initially might be sponsored by the European Union but then might also
be transformed into a World Conference. It is intended that the first
step for a  negotiated settlement toward a new future for the Balkans
will be taken by Europe, although it has  more than once proved
incapable of breaking away from its history of confrontation and
conflict that has plagued it through the centuries. If this happens, a
new, higher, institution sponsored and led by the United States will
emerge.
 
The German proposal clearly expresses the stance of the European Union
on the inalterability of borders by force and strikes a fair balance
between the right to self-determination and co-existence in a
multi-ethnic State. Germany was the first European State to recognize
the division of former Yugoslavia and establish diplomatic relations
with the former Yugoslav republics. Likewise, Germany was the
Croatia's main supporter in the conflict between Croatia and
Yugoslavia. However, Germany has grown more cautious and is insisting
on the inalterability of borders, whereas the United States has left a
window open for the further territorial erosion of rump Yugoslavia
(contemplating the probable secession of  Montenegro).
 
Germany, and along with it the European Union, calls for rump
Yugoslavia's rapid integration into international structures and for
its economic reconstruction. Germany considers the European Union and
OSCE the garantors of peace and stability in Southeastern Europe,
pushing aside NATO, which has played an important political and
military role sofar. It is accepted, however, that NATO should be
present for a long time in the region.
 
In the field of integration, too, the Germans are for a more gradual
integration than the Americans, who call for speeding up the
integration of the Balkan countries into Transatlantic structures,
starting with NATO. One must not forget that the Vishegrad countries
have to thank the United States if they will become members of NATO
sooner than of the European Union.
 
One of the important points of the German plan is aimed at restricting
the number of causes which impel people to emigrate, as Europe is
facing an ever growing influx of refugees. The Schoengen Agreement
makes control on immigration even more important, as it has has an
influence on the demographic structure of European society and, what
is more important, has negative social consequences. In the American
plan there is no mention of this problem.
 
Both initiatives contemplate measures to deal with the financial
aspects of the above process, which run into huge sums and must be
paid for. In both cases a more active commitment of such organizations
as the World Bank,  IMN, etc. is envisaged.
 
Both plans  coincide in calling for a global instead of partial
solution. Apparently, there will not be an incomplete solution of the
Dayton type, which has gone a long way toward destabilizing the
region, but a global solution, which is supposed to have long-term
stabilizing effects. All instruments of regional cooperation,
initiated and backed up by the United States and Europe, will assume
special importance.
 
Albania, as one of the countries more directly affected by the crisis
and its consequences, has much to gain from its geo-strategic position
by becoming a major center of stability for the whole region. Albania
will play a role of crucial importance, among other reasons, also
because it will always be surrounded by territories inhabited by
ethnic Albanians.
 
# REZI NIKA (AIM Junior)
 
------------------
balkanhr mailing list
To unsubscribe please send mail to [email protected] with the
word "unsubscribe balkanhr" (without the ") in the subject.
Please report abuse at [email protected]

-- 
==============================================================
MINELRES - a forum for discussion on minorities in Central&Eastern
Europe

Submissions: [email protected]  
Subscription/inquiries: [email protected] 
List archive: http://www.riga.lv/minelres/archive.htm
==============================================================