30Received 28.06.2023. Revised 07.08.2023. Accepted 06.12.2023.
Acknowledgements. The article has been supported by MGIMO-University. Project no. 2025-04-07 “Trends of Destabilization in Europe: Socio-Economic, Political and Normative Aspects”.
Abstract. Since the launch of the Stabilization and Association Process in 1999, the European Union has become the main conflict mediator on the post-Yugoslav space. The EU’s policy towards the region of the so-called Western Balkans implies the juxtaposition of integration and conflict settlement goals, which was not the case during the previous enlargement waves. Besides promoting peacebuilding initiatives through traditional foreign policy instruments, Brussels has been practicing a complicated system of incentives and sanctions related to the European integration procedures. Progress of the post-Yugoslav republics in enlargement is conditional on their willingness to implement particular requirements. The article analyzes the efficiency of the European Union’s conditionality from the perspective of regional stability. The ambivalence of such approach lies in politicization of peacebuilding agenda as the EU advances its specific image of recent civil wars in the Balkans. Using the methods of retrospective analysis of European politics, including foreign policy documents, the author substantiates the political nature of the demands made by Brussels on the parties to the conflicts. The distinct feature of the EU enlargement policy is the hierarchization of actors in foreign policy processes, which provides various countries with different negotiating power. This conditionality, due to the value contradictions within the communities, leads to the point when the applied measures of settlement lead not to the expected normalization, but to the aggravation of the situation and polarization of the parties. Thus, the author identifies the discrepancy between the declared objectives of the European Union as a mediator and the practical results. This inconsistency has prompted the decay of neighbor relations on the post-Yugoslav space as the EU member states attempted to instrumentalize their position within the Union for the ultimate solution of bilateral disputes with candidate countries, blocking the integration process in general.
Keywords: post-Yugoslav space, integration, stabilization, conflict settlement, Europeanization, conditionality
REFERENCES
1. Fedorov M.S. EU and Crisis Management: Adaptation to New Challenges. Contemporary Europe, 2018, no. 5 (84), pp. 81-90. (In Russ.) Available at: http://dx.doi.org/10.15211/soveurope520188289
2. Cooley L. The European Union’s Approach to Conflict Resolution. Transformation of Regulation in the Western Balkans? Abingdon, Routledge, 2019. 229 p. Available at: https://doi.org/10.4324/9781351043489
3. Arbatova N.K., Kokeev A.M., eds. European Union and Regional Conflicts. Moscow, IMEMO, 2011. 143 p. (In Russ.)
4. Ejdus F., Juncos A. Reclaiming the local in EU peacebuilding: effectiveness, ownership, and resistance. Contemporary Security Policy, 2018, vol. 39, no. 1, pp. 4-27. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1080/13523260.2017.1407176
5. Hill C. The EU’s Capacity for Conflict Prevention. European Foreign Affairs Review, 2001, vol. 6, no. 3, pp. 315-333. Available at: https://doi.org/10.54648/383250
6. Schimmelfennig F., Sedelmeier U. Governance by Conditionality: EU Rule Transfer to the Candidate Countries of Central and Eastern Europe. Journal of European Public Policy, 2004, vol. 11, no. 4, pp. 669-687. DOI: 10.1080/1350176042000248089
7. Grabbe H. Europeanization Goes East: Power and Uncertainty in the EU Accession Process. Featherstone K., Radaelli C., eds. The Politics of Europeanization. Oxford, Oxford University Press, 2003, pp. 303-328. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1093/0199252092.003.0013
8. Lavenex S. EU External Governance in “Wider Europe”. Journal of European Public Policy, 2011, vol. 11, no. 4, pp. 680-700. DOI: 10.1080/1350176042000248098
9. Checkel J. Why Comply? Social Learning and European Identity Change. International Organization, 2001, vol. 55, no. 3, pp. 553-588. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1162/00208180152507551
10. Tocci N. The EU and Conflict Resolution. Promoting peace in the backyard. Abingdon, Routledge, 2007. 202 p. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-5965.2008.00797_17.x
11. Emerson M., Gross E., eds. Evaluating the EU’s Crisis Missions in the Balkans. Brussels, Center for European Policy Studies, 2007. 156 p.
12. Brsakoska Bazerkoska J., Dokmanović M. Learning by Doing: the EU’s Transformative Power and Conflicts in the Western Balkans. Croatian International Relations Review, 2017, vol. 23, no. 79, pp. 103-126. DOI: 10.1515/cirr-2017-0016
13. Vankovska B. Macedonia in NATO: lessons not learned from the geopolitics of the Balkans. Serbian political thought, 2022, Special Edition, pp. 221-244. (In Serb.) Available at: https://doi.org/10.22182/spm.specijal2022.8
14. Djurić D. Montenegro’s prospects for European integration: on a twin track. South East Europe Review, 2004, no. 4, pp. 79-106. Available at: https://www.jstor.org/stable/43293076
15. Džankić J. Cutting the Mists of the Black Mountain: Cleavages in Montenegro’s Divide over Statehood and Identity. Nationalities Papers, 2013, vol. 41, no. 3, pp. 413-430. DOI: 10.1080/00905992.2012.743514
SOURCES
1. Petersberg Declaration made by the WEU Council of Ministers. Bonn, 19.06.1992. CVCE. Available at: https://www.cvce.eu/en/obj/petersberg_declaration_made_by_the_weu_council_of_ministers_bonn_19_june_1992-en-16938094-bb79-41ff-951c-f6c7aae8a97a.html (accessed 17.04.2023).
2. EU-Western Balkans Summit Thessaloniki, 21.06.2003. European Commission. Available at: https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/detail/en/PRES_03_163 (accessed 17.04.2023).
3. Framework Agreement. 13.08.2001. Available at: https://peacemaker.un.org/sites/peacemaker.un.org/files/MK_010813_Frameword%20Agreement%20%28Orhid%20Agreement%29.pdf (accessed 17.04.2023).
4. Prespa Agreement. Available at: https://www.mfa.gr/images/docs/eidikathemata/agreement.pdf (accessed 17.04.2023).
5. Agreement on Principles of Relations between Serbia and Montenegro within the State Union. Belgrade, 14.03.2002. Available at: https://www.consilium.europa.eu/uedocs/cms_data/docs/pressdata/en/sg/69898.pdf (accessed 17.04.2023).
6. Brussels Agreement. 19.04.2013. Available at: https://www.srbija.gov.rs/cinjenice/en/120394 (accessed 17.04.2023).
No comments