This presentation followed and built on SEESOX’s research, seminars and workshops on the Berlin Process including, among others, a panel discussion in Oxford on 14 February, and a day workshop held in Thessaloniki on 16 March in cooperation with the British Embassy in Athens.
David Madden commented that 2018 was the year of the Western Balkans. In January the House of Lords published their report. On 6 February the European Commission set out their enlargement perspective for the region. This included specific initiatives, an action plan, and even an indicative date- 2025: though certain member states did not favour enlargement, and there were opposition to importing bilateral disputes. In July London will host the annual Summit of the Process. The Process had been launched in 2014. Back then, Chancellor Merkel was concerned by Russian action in the Crimea, socio-economic unrest in the Balkans, and protests in Bosnia-Herzegovina; and launched the initiative whereby a group of member states would focus on the region, and revitalise the waning process of European integration. The core agenda was economic connectivity, regional cooperation and civil society (the UK wished to concentrate also on security). It had got the largest countries of the EU involved, and ensured an annual focus on the priorities for the Western Balkans. But some questioned the inclusion of the UK and Poland next year, and the exclusion of some neighbouring South East European states.
Reporting on what's happening at SEESOX, the topics being discussed, the theories put forward, and the points made
Friday, 8 June 2018
The Berlin Process and the London Summit
SEESOX held events in Oxford, Thessaloniki and London in advance of the London Summit on 10/11 July.
On 14 February, we had a panel discussion in Oxford on “The Berlin Process: a bridge between the Western Balkans and the EU?” Tobias Flessenkemper considered the Process as a response to the brakes put on EU accession; Goran Svilanović its positive contribution to enhanced intraregional cooperation; Spyros Economides the need to look beyond “hard” security to developmental issues as a foundation for reconciliation and defence against organised crime and corruption; James Ker-Lindsay the limited relevance of the UK to the region outside any security agenda; Andrew Page to confirm the UK’s strong interest in stability in the region and its relevance to the UK’s national security agenda; and Marika Djolai underlining the welcome growing involvement and centrality of civil society in the Process.
Friday, 25 May 2018
Bosnia and Herzegovina: What’s happening now… and what’s next?
On 23 May 2018, SEESOX hosted Valentin Inzko (High Representative for Bosnia and Herzegovina). Discussants were Richard Caplan (Linacre College) and Jessie Hronesova (Aktis Strategy Ltd), with David Madden (St Antony’s College) chairing.
Inzko discussed the past and the future of the country, focusing on the role of international actors in Bosnia, their past achievements and future potential, and the pervasive role of corruption, captured institutions, civil society, the poor economy and the rise of extremism in the country.
Aiming to draw lessons for other contexts, Inzko reviewed the main obstacles international actors have dealt with in Bosnia both during his time in office (since 2009) and before, stressing particularly the lack of political will among the incumbent political elites to implement reforms, and the state of the rule of law, of reconciliation and of the economy. He stressed the unprecedented progress made in the first post-war years and the achievements of the office under Paddy Ashdown, implementing most of the state-building reforms by 2006 (e.g. one army, judiciary, tax system, flag&anthem). Despite the limitations of the Dayton Peace Agreement, which created a very complex and cumbersome state, the first ten years provided hope. However, the following period had only demonstrated the extent of the frozen conflict in the country and how ”local ownership” in Bosnia had mutated into state capture. Despite the vast amount of external support and funding, the peace that exists in Bosnia is far from secure and entrenched – instead, Bosnia remains a socially fractured state where the achievement of long-term societal peace may take generations.
Inzko discussed the past and the future of the country, focusing on the role of international actors in Bosnia, their past achievements and future potential, and the pervasive role of corruption, captured institutions, civil society, the poor economy and the rise of extremism in the country.
Aiming to draw lessons for other contexts, Inzko reviewed the main obstacles international actors have dealt with in Bosnia both during his time in office (since 2009) and before, stressing particularly the lack of political will among the incumbent political elites to implement reforms, and the state of the rule of law, of reconciliation and of the economy. He stressed the unprecedented progress made in the first post-war years and the achievements of the office under Paddy Ashdown, implementing most of the state-building reforms by 2006 (e.g. one army, judiciary, tax system, flag&anthem). Despite the limitations of the Dayton Peace Agreement, which created a very complex and cumbersome state, the first ten years provided hope. However, the following period had only demonstrated the extent of the frozen conflict in the country and how ”local ownership” in Bosnia had mutated into state capture. Despite the vast amount of external support and funding, the peace that exists in Bosnia is far from secure and entrenched – instead, Bosnia remains a socially fractured state where the achievement of long-term societal peace may take generations.
Monday, 7 May 2018
6th Annual Ambassadors’ Forum
On 3 May, SEESOX hosted its annual Ambassadors’ Forum at St Antony’s College, Oxford. This was the sixth in the series: in the well-established tradition of inviting to Oxford and presenting its work to all the diplomatic missions from the region of South East Europe in London. This year the working lunch was attended by nine Heads of Mission, two Deputy Heads of Mission and one First Secretary and the SEESOX group.
SEESOX briefed on the main themes which it addressed during the academic year 2017-2018, concentrating in particular on EU integration and the European Commission’s new strategy for the Western Balkans, the region’s geo-political challenges, the Berlin Process and the political economy of the region, including the impact of Brexit and other macro-economic challenges. The Bulgarian Ambassador briefed on the priorities for the Presidency and the Sofia Summit on 16/17 May, with the focus on the Western Balkans, and the themes of connectivity, regional cooperation and good neighbourly relations. There was general round table discussion of these issues, and on the forthcoming summit meetings in July (Berlin Process in London, and NATO in Brussels). Our Forum discussed the future of the Berlin Process, the meaning of the London Summit and what messages this gives now that the UK is leaving the EU, especially regarding a range of security concerns.
SEESOX briefed on the main themes which it addressed during the academic year 2017-2018, concentrating in particular on EU integration and the European Commission’s new strategy for the Western Balkans, the region’s geo-political challenges, the Berlin Process and the political economy of the region, including the impact of Brexit and other macro-economic challenges. The Bulgarian Ambassador briefed on the priorities for the Presidency and the Sofia Summit on 16/17 May, with the focus on the Western Balkans, and the themes of connectivity, regional cooperation and good neighbourly relations. There was general round table discussion of these issues, and on the forthcoming summit meetings in July (Berlin Process in London, and NATO in Brussels). Our Forum discussed the future of the Berlin Process, the meaning of the London Summit and what messages this gives now that the UK is leaving the EU, especially regarding a range of security concerns.
Friday, 4 May 2018
Greek-Turkish tensions: Impending Conflict?
On Monday 30 April 2018, a panel discussion on ‘Greek-Turkish tensions: Impending Conflict?’ took place in the European Studies Centre. The panellists talked about the present tense climate in Greek-Turkish relations, potential risks for escalation, and related wider geopolitical considerations in the region. David Madden (SEESOX) chaired the session, Ezgi Basaran (SEESOX) began with an overview of recent developments in Greek-Turkish relations, Othon Anastasakis (SEESOX) talked about the Greek context, Mehmet Karli (SEESOX) presented the Turkish perspective, Katerina Dalacoura (LSE) spoke about relevant developments in the Middle East, Yaprak Gürsoy (Aston University) focused on the role of NATO and the US, and Kalypso Nicolaidis (SEESOX) ended with some final comments on the probabilities of conflict.
Basaran spoke about the Greek-Turkish tensions that began on 15 July 2016, with the eight Turkish soldiers who landed at the Alexandroupolis airport the day after the attempted coup in Turkey, asking for asylum from Greece. Turkey sought their extradition, which the Greek Supreme Court denied. On 7t December 2017, the first official visit by a Turkish president to Greece in six decades took place. However, in 2018 relations between the two countries worsened, with numerous incidents in the Aegean, and further escalated with the imprisonment of two Greek soldiers after they got lost and crossed into Turkish territory. She stressed the point that tensions with Greece are not high on the public discourse agenda and although it is hard to guess how things will turn out, Erdogan would not gain very much in domestic politics if there were an escalation in the crisis. She added that in Greece a considerable number of Golden Visas are given to Turks.
Basaran spoke about the Greek-Turkish tensions that began on 15 July 2016, with the eight Turkish soldiers who landed at the Alexandroupolis airport the day after the attempted coup in Turkey, asking for asylum from Greece. Turkey sought their extradition, which the Greek Supreme Court denied. On 7t December 2017, the first official visit by a Turkish president to Greece in six decades took place. However, in 2018 relations between the two countries worsened, with numerous incidents in the Aegean, and further escalated with the imprisonment of two Greek soldiers after they got lost and crossed into Turkish territory. She stressed the point that tensions with Greece are not high on the public discourse agenda and although it is hard to guess how things will turn out, Erdogan would not gain very much in domestic politics if there were an escalation in the crisis. She added that in Greece a considerable number of Golden Visas are given to Turks.
Monday, 23 April 2018
The Balkans in the wider European context; the Slovene view
On the first day of Trinity Term, SEESOX hosted a seminar given by Iztok Mirosic, State Secretary for European Affairs in the Foreign Ministry of Slovenia. He gave a wide-ranging overview of current and future developments in the Western Balkans, and their relationship with the EU, complemented by an extensive Q & A session. The seminar was chaired by Othon Anastasakis.
Mirosic began by stressing that, despite the Brexit vote, the underlying interests of the EU and the UK in the region remained the same – the preservation of stability. In geopolitical terms, the region was now at a crossroads. EU accession, as a process supporting stability, the rule of law and economic reform and development, alongside the region’s role as an energy transit route, meant that accession was in the mutual interest of both the EU and the countries of the western Balkans. This had been recognised at the Thessaloniki Summit in 2003, when the Western Balkan countries had been given a clear perspective of full membership, differentiating them from the EU’s eastern neighbours.
Mirosic began by stressing that, despite the Brexit vote, the underlying interests of the EU and the UK in the region remained the same – the preservation of stability. In geopolitical terms, the region was now at a crossroads. EU accession, as a process supporting stability, the rule of law and economic reform and development, alongside the region’s role as an energy transit route, meant that accession was in the mutual interest of both the EU and the countries of the western Balkans. This had been recognised at the Thessaloniki Summit in 2003, when the Western Balkan countries had been given a clear perspective of full membership, differentiating them from the EU’s eastern neighbours.
Rival power: Russia and South East Europe
On the 7th of March 2018, the last (chronologically) but not least session of the Hilary term seminar series, Dimitar Bechev (University of South Caroline, Chapel Hill) gave a talk on his most recent and very topical book “Rival power: Russia and South East Europe”.
In his excellent book, Dimitar discusses the different dimensions of Russia’s influence in the region and the specific spheres of influence, including energy, military security and soft power, through media, religion and culture. For Dimitar, the current competition between Russia and the West is not about the return to the Cold War, neither is Russia trying to establish an Empire in the region of South East Europe. Russia is not able to offer to the countries in the region a coherent model alternative to the EU’s more comprehensive one. But what Russia does very effectively is to play a disruptive game of influence by tactically exploiting both its own limited strengths and the weaknesses and divisions among the European players.
In his presentation Dimitar emphasised Russia’s impact in the energy sector which, while extensive, has weakened since its high point in the 2000s, especially given the decreasing significance of the region as an outpost or a corridor for Russian gas. He spoke about the rising close alliance between Russia and Turkey, the “marriage of convenience” as he calls it in his book: with the occasional intra-marital spat such as the fall-out over the shooting down of the Russian fighter. What we are witnessing, according to Bechev, is a Putin-Erdogan double act, where convergent country interests, especially in the energy field, have recently become highly personalised. He also spoke about other bilateral relationships, including with Greece or Cyprus; and pointed to the gap between Russia’s limited commitments, and the at times high expectations of the two states, most clearly witnessed during the Eurozone crisis. He also spoke about relations with Bulgaria, a bilateral bond with deep historical roots; but where, despite the current strong Russian lobby in the country’s economy and politics, Bulgaria’s political elite has clearly shown a commitment for the EU and NATO. Finally, in some Western Balkans, Russia has found some fertile ground for infiltration with divisive potential in Serbia, Republika Srpska (especially), Macedonia and Montenegro: but appears involved in tactical manoeuvring rather than following a strategic master-plan.
In his excellent book, Dimitar discusses the different dimensions of Russia’s influence in the region and the specific spheres of influence, including energy, military security and soft power, through media, religion and culture. For Dimitar, the current competition between Russia and the West is not about the return to the Cold War, neither is Russia trying to establish an Empire in the region of South East Europe. Russia is not able to offer to the countries in the region a coherent model alternative to the EU’s more comprehensive one. But what Russia does very effectively is to play a disruptive game of influence by tactically exploiting both its own limited strengths and the weaknesses and divisions among the European players.
In his presentation Dimitar emphasised Russia’s impact in the energy sector which, while extensive, has weakened since its high point in the 2000s, especially given the decreasing significance of the region as an outpost or a corridor for Russian gas. He spoke about the rising close alliance between Russia and Turkey, the “marriage of convenience” as he calls it in his book: with the occasional intra-marital spat such as the fall-out over the shooting down of the Russian fighter. What we are witnessing, according to Bechev, is a Putin-Erdogan double act, where convergent country interests, especially in the energy field, have recently become highly personalised. He also spoke about other bilateral relationships, including with Greece or Cyprus; and pointed to the gap between Russia’s limited commitments, and the at times high expectations of the two states, most clearly witnessed during the Eurozone crisis. He also spoke about relations with Bulgaria, a bilateral bond with deep historical roots; but where, despite the current strong Russian lobby in the country’s economy and politics, Bulgaria’s political elite has clearly shown a commitment for the EU and NATO. Finally, in some Western Balkans, Russia has found some fertile ground for infiltration with divisive potential in Serbia, Republika Srpska (especially), Macedonia and Montenegro: but appears involved in tactical manoeuvring rather than following a strategic master-plan.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)