Post by Bozur on Dec 24, 2008 19:22:57 GMT -5
Croatia, Slovenia: An Indication of EU Difficulties in the Balkans
Croatia, Slovenia: An Indication of EU Difficulties in the Balkans
December 24, 2008 | 1224 GMT
Slovenians block the border with Croatia to demand the return of
disputed territory in Secovlje, Slovenia on April 26, 20
STRINGER/AFP/Getty Images
Summary
A border dispute between Croatia and Slovenia has hampered the progress of Croatia’s European Union accession talks. These latest developments foreshadow problems for the EU’s enlargement strategy in the rest of the Balkans.
Analysis
Croatian Foreign Minister Gordan Jandrokovic said Dec. 22 that Slovenia is purposefully derailing Croatia’s membership negotiations with the European Union. Jandrokovic’s comments were prompted by developments during an EU accession conference Dec. 18, when Slovenia vetoed progress on a significant portion of the Croatian EU accession talks due to a land and maritime border dispute between the two neighboring countries.
Despite Croatia and Slovenia’s shared history and previously correlated interests — both broke off from the former Yugoslavia in the early 1990s — relations between the countries have faced many difficulties. The focal point of their dispute has been their shared maritime border along the Adriatic Sea and access to fisheries. This has long strained relations between the two countries, both politically and economically. Now, Slovenia — which joined the European Union in 2004 — is citing the border dispute as a reason for complicating Croatia’s EU aspirations.
This dispute is of particular concern to the European Union, as expansion throughout the western Balkans is the centerpiece of its enlargement policy. The volatility stemming from civil war and various ethnic conflicts in the 1990s in the Balkan countries posed a security risk in Europe’s backyard and divided the continent over how to respond. The flood of refugees and asylum seekers also made the countries of Western Europe quite nervous. The Balkan imbroglio convinced the European Union that it was better to advocate Balkan membership in the European Union than face the danger of renewed conflict in the region. The bloc therefore aims to be the guarantor of political stability and economic growth to new member countries — something Croatia and its aspirant neighbors want.
Additionally, EU enlargement into the Western Balkans is intended to stem the influence of outside powers in the region, namely Russia. The EU does not want tensions in the Balkans to be an excuse for non-European meddling in the region — particularly in the form of Russia cozying up to Serbia or other similar moves. Brussels would like to consolidate its influence and limit any potential U.S. involvement as well.
However, Slovenia has blocked Croatian accession talks, putting Zagreb’s goal of concluding negotiations with the European Union by the end of 2009 — and its overall bid in general — in jeopardy.
These kinds of developments are not uncommon to the European Union accession process. Since every member of the bloc has a veto, prospective entrants must make peace with all existing members to gain approval. The United Kingdom, for example, had to give up most of its trade privileges with the Commonwealth before its accession in 1973, while Slovakia, Lithuania and Bulgaria all had to close down certain Soviet-era nuclear reactors as part of their accession talks. Turkey, if it ever reaches the point of accession, would be required to recognize Cyprus.
Croatia is therefore not coming up against a novel or unique hurdle. The negotiation process for EU accession takes the form of opening a total of 35 chapters on various issues, in which any existing member has the power to veto the European Union aspirant. (Zagreb was hoping to open another 10 chapters — seven are already completed — during this latest conference, but because of Slovenia’s objections, only one was opened.)
For the Balkans in particular, there are many potential areas of disagreement, such as legal issues arising from forced population movements, or prior acts of war or genocide. Furthermore, in the case of former Yugoslav republics, a number of legal issues are outstanding, especially those dealing with federal property, former Yugoslav People’s Army installations or status of companies and businesses operating in all republics.
The dispute between Slovenia and Croatia will therefore likely have a domino effect on future negotiations, as existing members will feel obligated to resolve differences they have with prospective countries by stalling or blocking the accession process. Assuming Croatia gets into the European Union in the next few years (and before Serbia), the Croatians will be quite vocal in their differences with their neighbors — including their own border disputes with Serbia and Bosnia, and possibly demands of war reparations from Serbia. It is quite likely that the current spat with Slovenia will encourage Croatia to be as demanding with its Balkan neighbors as Slovenia has been thus far.
All of these complications are giving Brussels a headache. For further Balkan accessions to work smoothly and avoid repeating the Slovenia-Croatia spat, they would need to be done simultaneously. But due to the slow and bureaucratic nature of the European Union accession process and the varying levels of readiness of the Balkan countries (some, like Bosnia, are decades away from membership), Brussels’ wish is quite unlikely to be granted. Zagreb will therefore have to bury the hatchet with Slovenia on Ljubljana’s terms, but it is very likely taking notes on how to pressure its neighbors — particularly Serbia — when it is their turn to ask for entry into the European Union.
www.stratfor.com/