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 rumpYugoslavia¥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 Aemrican plan there is no mention of this problem.

Both initiatives contemplate measures to deal with the financial aspects of the above process, which 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)