Srebrenica

Srebrenica. The massacre happened 25 years ago. In Srebrenica, in Europe. About 8,000 victims, just because they were a bit different, a religion-based difference. And today, after so many years, the reconciliation and the cooperation between the Balkan States are still distant dreams. Dreams that the political leaders do not share. The region remains a powder keg within the European Continent.

It is a sad and dangerous situation.  

Supporting the Balkans

President Macron decided to veto the launching of enlargement talks between the European Union and two Balkan States, North Macedonia and Albania. I unreservedly disagree with the position he has taken. I see it as a mistake or part of his game to get some concessions from other EU countries. It was not inspired by the promotion of peace and stability in the region. And it is certainly not in the best interests of the EU.

These two countries are certainly far away from meeting the membership criteria. They have however implemented a few fundamental reforms and must be encouraged to pursue that same path.

President Macron’s decision is particularly difficult to accept in the case of North Macedonia. The country is a delicate politico-ethnic puzzle and at every moment requires cautious balancing of its populations’ specific interests. Macedonia’s current leadership has demonstrated seriousness and courage. It calls for demonstrable European support.

Japan and the EU, on the same side

I am not sure that Friday afternoon is a good time for great political moves. At least, from the perspective of public information and support. The weekend is around the corner and the media tend to go slow. If they mention the action, it will be in a lazy line that gets lost fast. On Monday, it is already an old story. And it would have been overtaken by events happening during the weekly break.

The deal signed on Friday between the President of the European Commission and the Prime Minister of Japan seems to have fallen into this trap. Jean-Claude Juncker and Shinzo Abe put their signature of approval on an ambitious agreement that will see both sides cooperating in different parts of the developing world, including in the Balkans and other countries of Europe outside the EU, to build infrastructure and promoting digital industries. A lot of emphasis will be placed on thorough development projects, sustainability, transparency, national ownership and partnerships with the recipient countries and the appropriate multilateral organisations.

They called it a connectivity partnership between the EU and Japan. It can work, if we consider these are two of the largest economies. Together, they represent over 23 trillion US dollars of GDP, which is larger than the US ($21 trillion). And much bigger than China (USD 9.2 trillion).

The point is about politics. Both sides must make this cooperation a priority when dealing with developing nations. And they will be competing with China’s offer, the fast-moving Belt and Road Initiative. That will not be an easy competition. The Chinese leadership are deeply invested in the Initiative. To compete, the Europeans and the Japanese have no choice but to insist on projects that have the support of the populations – not just of the political leaders in the concerned countries – and are financially sound and proper. These are no technical or money matters. They are about strategic political engagements.

Serbia: the little Russia at our doorstep

When it comes to party politics, media control, state propaganda, antagonism against civil society organizations and the biased narrative about the US and the West, Serbia looks very much like a smaller version of Putin´s Russia. It is however a candidate country to the EU. How can we and they understand that without deep changes, the membership is just a distant illusion? 

Austria, Hungary and the European Union

Today, I should put on record two events. They are both indicative of the state of mind that prevails in some political quarters in Europe.

The first took place in Vienna. The Austrian government invited nine foreign ministers from the Balkan states to a meeting to discuss the mass arrival of immigrants. Basically, the point was to agree on measures that would contain and reduce the transit of new waves of people through the now commonly called Balkan Corridor. The Austrians did not invite the Greeks and the Germans to the meeting. Greece plays however a critical role in the crisis. And Germany is by far the largest player in the region, including on migration issues. This disregard towards Greece and Germany should be seriously criticised. As we must also censure the fact that the European Commission was not properly involved.

Austria has sent a very simple message: we do not believe in a common European response.

The second event took place not far from Vienna. Next door, in Budapest. The Prime Minister, Viktor Orban, made an official statement, with all the pomp and ceremony, about the immigration and refugee issues. The key message was that a national referendum will be organised in Hungary on the acceptance of refugees. More specifically, to consult the Hungarians about the decision of the European Commission to share the burden through a system of quotas. The referendum will not take place until late in the year, most likely by October. It´s a smart move against the EU and a common approach. During the next few months, Orban will have an argument to remain outside any EU debate on the matter: he is waiting for the results of the popular consultation in his country. And nobody can say he is not right. It will sound as anti-democratic.

But we can say, in the meantime, that the State room where he made today´s statement was very well decorated. In the background there was a beautiful line of Hungary´s national flags. Plenty of them. And there was no EU flag around. It would have certainly spoiled the view.

On trust

The Bled Strategic Forum is taking place today and tomorrow. In Bled, of course, Slovenia. This is a new kid on the block of international strategic meetings but looks promising. The Slovenian government invests a lot on it. And it´s trying to make it the key annual event of the kind in the Balkans. It is also making use of it to promote Slovenia as a crossroads in that part of Europe, for politics and business.

This year´s event puts a lot of emphasis on trust. Trust is critical for good leadership. And it is rapidly disappearing from politics, commerce and social relations. That´s a major loss, and I agree with the proposition. No trust, no progress. No trust, no social cohesion.

The debate of matters like this one is important. They look soft but they are at the core of a better world. 

Iraq and the great divide

The Iraqi crisis reminds us of how difficult it is to assist a country that is deeply divided along ethnic and cultural lines. The fracture line between Sunnis and Shias cuts the country in two. This is a very high risk divide. It needs to be managed with great balance. Leaders from both sides of the line have to be brought together all the time. Our role, as international community, is to encourage them to cooperate, to help them to build the platforms that bring their interests together, to underline the common ground and look into the future from there.

In many ways, the experience tells us that to intervene in countries that are at the frontier of great divides is not a very easy thing. The best solution is to stay out, as much as possible. If that is not advisable, then the international community must act in a very well informed way, with great prudence and a strong sense of the risks.

That´s true in Iraq as it is also true in Sudan, Mali or Chad, in the Balkans, or any other country that has national communities that are very different, both from a physical point of view and from a religious or cultural perspective. These are countries with a very high risk of falling into major internal conflicts. Outside interventions that are just naive and ill prepared can only accelerate the hatching of the crisis. 

Uprooted and lost as a young man

In Western Europe, there are thousands of young men like the one that has been captured in Boston or his dead brother.

They are the children of immigrant families that came from afar. Most of those families just ran away from poverty. But many others have left behind violent conflict experiences, be it in the Middle East, in South Asia or in Africa. Or maybe closer by, in the Balkans or the Caucasus. Their sons – it’s indeed a boy’s problem – might have been born in Europe and raised in a peaceful and democratic context but some of them feel uprooted and excluded. They end up by aligning themselves with those who express extremist views about the West. For some, the war in Syria has been an opportunity to join what they believe to be a Cause. Others have been elsewhere, including in Pakistan. These fronts have made them harder and more willing to take action. As such, they represent a major security challenge to the Western European societies. And the experience has shown that this is a challenge that is difficult to match.