Atlantic Voices - Vol. 2 no. 2

ATLANTIC TREATY ASSOCIATION

Atlantic Voices Volume 2 Issue 2 1

Volume 2 - Issue 2, February 2012

Contents:

The Western Balkans on the Euro-Atlantic “Way”

Branko Lazic examines some of the recent developments in the Western

Balkans with regards to further NATO enlargement. Branko examines

levels of support for NATO membership within domestic populations as

well as some of the wider political questions which hold significant influ-

ence on the issue.

Balkan Euro-Atlantic Aspiration and Regional

Cooperation

Ilija Djugumanov and Jordan Tasev explore the state of the integration

of the Balkans into the wider Euro-Atlantic architecture. Examining the

importance of the region for European security, and also assessing the

importance of the region to Turkey and Russia.

THE BALKANS AND THE FUTURE OF EURO-ATLANTIC INTEGRATION

Atlantic Voices is the monthly publication of

the Atlantic Treaty Association. It aims to

inform the debate on key issues that affect

the North Atlantic Treaty Organization, its

goals and its future. The work published in

Atlantic Voices is written by young professionals

and researchers.

This issue of Atlantic Voices aims to exam-

ine the Balkans region. Assessing its im-

portance to the Atlantic Community, how far

the Balkans has progressed with integration

into this community, and what some of the

potential obstacles facing this integration are.

The issue utilises expertise from within the

Balkan region itself to explore these issues.

We hope you find the following pages

both informative and thought provoking, As

part of our goal in promoting and informing

the public debate upon these topics, Atlantic

Voices is happy to accept responses to the issue

and articles we have selected.

Admiral James G. Stavridis SACEUR, meets Artur Kuko, Permanent Representative of Albania to NATO and Arben Imami, Minister of Defence of Albania


Everybody is arguing that the world is changing, but why are

concerned about whether younger generations are prepared to

cope with its consequences?

Essential for any reflections, it is first and upmost essential to

acknowledge that my generation has been strongly influenced by

the 90s enthusiasm and revival for concepts like United Nations,

universal rights, rule of law and the fight for global justice, last

but not least the world community´s responsibility to protect.

This is a result of me and my generation being more or less iso-

lated from an existential threat, and thus raised in society whose

mentality implies that it is the universal values mentioned just

now that make the world a better place to be – as opposed to

more traditional strategic and realpolitikal terms as power, geo-

politics, balance, interests etc, and I´m afraid that we´re more

used to the exception rather than the rule when it comes to glob-

al politics. My generation is raised in an idealistic bubble.

The important question, however, is if this conflicts with

today´s spirit of the transatlantic community?

Well, if the spirit of the transatlantic community is based on

democracy and the rule of law, then it is obvious that we need

not to worry for the future of transatlantic values. Americans

have in fact emphasized democracy and rule of law when it

comes to justifying their foreign policy – and so have Europeans.

The result is common ground – shared values.

The problem, however, arises when conduct is more or less

explicitly disconnected from values or rhetoric, which I believe

is a “shocking” reality that I see many of my friends and fellows

are confronted with more and more, and which is a reality that

probably won´t get any better in the near future. Bottom line is:

the world isn´t what we expected, and I think the consequences

are that we´re distancing ourselves from “the interest-driven

world”, with NATO arguably serving as an arena for interests

rather than a “force for good”.

We, the future of decision- and policy makers, have been

indoctrinated in a “war is bad, peace is good” mentality, and thus

raising the bar for young professionals and students in relating

and engaging in anything to do with interests, NATO being no

exception.

What then can we do? I have to immediate thoughts. First of

all, I think today´s decision-makers have to be more honest on

why we do things. Take Afghanistan as example, submitting

allied troops to the ISAF mission was arguably value-driven

(democracy, governance, getting rid of opium, rule of law, kick-

ing out Taliban), but exiting seems to be based on everything

else than the initial value-based rhetoric. Second, my colleagues

and I in YATA clearly have to intensify our work in furthering

information about our field of study. We have to get better at

confronting our peers with the notion that security and defence

is unfortunately a necessary evil, a necessity that cannot be decou-

pled from the concept of interest.

Ideals are great, but by failing to also address or communicate

interests as an important driver, my generation´s confidence in

transatlantic cooperation (which is both interest and value driv-

en) will never get stronger in the future.

Adapted from a speech by Sean Lobo, YATA Norway, given at the 47th

annual Leangkollen Conference in Norway

Comment: Bursting the Bubble of Idealism

About the Authors

Ilija Djugumanov and Jordan Tasev

Ilija Djugumanov is currently pursuing a Masters De-

gree in International Relations at the University of Göte-

borg, He is also currently president of the Youth Atlantic

Treaty Association of Macedonia.

Jordan Tasev is currently Secretary-General of the

Youth Atlantic Treaty Association of Macedonia, and cur-

rently studying at the Institute for Security, Defence, and

Peace Studies in Skopje.

Branko Lazić

Branko Lazić has studies international relations at the

faculty of Political Sciences of the University of Belgrade.

In addition Mr. Lazić has recently graduated from the

“Koca Popovic” Diplomatic Academy, Vienna. In addition,

Branko Lazić has been an active member of the Serbian

Atlantic Council.


by Branko Lazić

M ore than a decade after the end of period of

permanent hostilities on the Balkans peninsu-

la it is still difficult to speak about prosperous

and democratized region. There are many reasons why it is not

the case but it is obvious that some progress has been made in the

previous decade. Some Western Balkan states are already inte-

grated in the Alliance and one of them is going to become EU

member state next year. The years of violence are behind the

Balkans and it is unlikely to expect new tectonic moves within

the region but there are several very sensitive issues which need

to be resolved if the West wants to see a peaceful and developed

Western Balkans integrated in the NATO and the EU. NATO

membership seems easier to be achieved but that might be

wrongly perceived because some countries still can’t rebuild

relations with the Alliance even though it was expected at the

beginning of 2000’s.

After the adoption of the NATO’s New Strategic Concept in

November 2010 it is clear to everyone that NATO’s doors re-

main open to any European country in a position to undertake

the commitments and obligations of membership. Primarily it

can be directed toward Western Balkan countries which are

already deeply involved in the process of Euro-Atlantic integra-

tion. Albania and Croatia already reached the goal of the NATO

membership on 1 April 2009 at Strasbourg-Kehl Sum-

mit. In December 2009 NATO foreign ministers decid-

ed to invite Montenegro to join the Membership Action

Plan. At the same time Bosnia and Herzegovina was

informed that it may join the Alliance once it has

achieved necessary progress in its reform efforts. Former

Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia (FYROM) is in the state of

‘frozen dialogue’ with the NATO and the EU because of the

country’s name dispute with Greece. The case of Serbia remains

controversial because of Kosovo’s dispute and NATO interven-

tion in 1999, however Serbia still tries to re-establish good rela-

tions within region and with the Western states. Serbia has had a

lot of success in the building of good relations with its neighbors,

especially with Croatia and Bosnia-Herzegovina. Of course, it is

not an easy task especially after most of the EU and NATO

member states, but also most of neighbor states, recognized

unilateral declaration of Kosovo’s independence in February

2008.

Discussing the issue of the Western Balkans Euro-Atlantic

integration demands dealing with the fact that NATO member-

ship for most of the European countries was one step before

their EU membership. It is sort of unofficial pre-condition for

the EU membership if we take a look at the EU integration of the

former communist countries. All Western Balkan countries be-

long to that category and they hardly can be compared with non-

communist EU entries. Serbia, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Monte-

negro and Albania definitely belong to the group of countries

which need to carefully balance their Atlanticism with their Eu-

ropeanism.

The European Union and NATO strongly cooperate within

the Western Balkan area. Berlin Plus is just one of the modalities

of their cooperation. The European Union has continued to build

peace and stability in Bosnia-Herzegovina since December 2004

within operation Althea. In FYROM EU has been leading opera-

tion Concordia after NATO finished its Operation Allied Har-

mony. European Rule of Law Mission in Kosovo (EULEX) rep-

resents a mission which has a goal to achieve legal and adminis-

trative improvements within Kosovo’s society. At the same time

NATO leads KFOR mission in the still fragile area. It must be

underlined that EU at its

summit in Thessaloniki in

2003 declared that “the

future of the Balkans is

within the EU”. This was

a signal of strong support

to the Western Balkans that they were on their European way.

If we take a look at the concrete developments with individ-

ual countries it can be concluded that there are several groups of

Western Balkan states dealing with NATO integration. Albania

and Croatia already fulfilled their membership goals. Montene-

gro is well on the way towards membership of the Alliance.

Whilst FYROM and Bosnia and Herzegovina are blocked because

of several disputes. Finally, Serbia decided to declare military

neutrality in 2007 and even though it participates in the Partner-

ship for Peace Programme there are no signals that Serbia will

The Western Balkans on the Euro-Atlantic “Way”

...NATO membership for most of the European countries was one step before

their EU membership.


nal (ICTY) and because of misunderstandings with the most of

EU and NATO member states regarding the status of Kosovo

which Serbia considers as its southern province under UN con-

trol. In the meantime Serbia arrested all war crimes suspects

including Ratko Mladic and Radovan Karadzic. Serbia answered

on the EC’s legislative questionnaire in a shortest possible peri-

od. The Commission has now decided that Serbia has fulfilled all

technical pre-conditions to become EU candidate. The last de-

velopments regarding Belgrade-Pristina dialogue have delayed

Council’s decision to grant Serbia candidate status. Serbia now

hopes to receive full candidate status in March this year. The

main obstacle towards EU accession of Kosovo is in the different

position of the EU members on the Kosovo’s 2008 declaration of

independence. Five of the EU member states still don’t recog-

nize Kosovo’s independence and there is no space for official

dialogue between Brussels and Pristina. Kosovo remains very

fragile area with serious challenges related to the rule of law,

fight against corruption and organized crime, the strengthening

of administrative capacities and protection of the Serbs and other

minorities.

Looking toward future NATO enlargement the state with

the best chance of gaining full membership is Montenegro. Mon-

tenegro joined PfP in December 2006 together with Serbia and

Bosnia-Herzegovina. Since April 2008 the Montenegrin Govern-

ment has engaged in an Intensified Dialogue with NATO. The

next year in December 2009 Montenegro was invited to join the

Membership Action Plan. NATO’s Secretary General

Mr. Rasmussen in June 2009 commended Montenegro’s

political leaders for their courage and determination. He

encouraged them to continue their efforts saying that it is

of utmost importance to ensure that Montenegrin securi-

ty agencies and defense sector meet NATO require-

ments. He emphasized the need for further fight against corrup-

tion and organized crime in Montenegro. FYROM joined PfP

much before the other former Yugoslav republics. Macedonia

started to cooperate with NATO within the PfP framework since

1995. Because of long-standing name dispute with Greece there

is a serious impediment to Macedonia’s NATO membership

aspirations. Officially Athens demands that Skopje add a geo-

graphic qualifier in the country’s name to differentiate it from

Greece’s province of Macedonia. Several proposals have been

presented for FYROM to adopt the names such as the “Republic

choose membership policy. European Union membership is,

however, a common goal for all Western Balkan countries. Cro-

atia successfully concluded its accession negotiations with the EU

and on 1 July 2013 Croatia will become an EU member country.

FYROM applied to become an official candidate on 22 March

2004 and it was formally named as an EU membership candidate

on 17 December 2005, but there is no progress regarding open-

ing dialogue on the membership accession because of the previ-

ously mentioned country name’s dispute. Macedonia (FYROM)

also has some difficulties in reaching European standards on the

rule of law and the economy. Albania applied for EU member-

ship on 28 April 2009 but has not yet achieved candidate status.

Albania’s candidacy status was not recognized in December 2010

primarily because of long lasting row in the country. Regarding

Bosnia and Herzegovina there are many economic as political

problems which are interrupting Bosnia’s Euro-Atlantic integra-

tion. Bosnia concluded its Stabilization and Association Agree-

ment negotiations in December 2007 signing the SAA in 2008.

Their potential move toward EU membership can be described

in the former EC chairman’s words. Mr. Prodi stated that Bosnia

and Herzegovina has a chance of joining EU soon after Croatia,

but it is entirely dependent on the country’s progress. Of

course, that progress can be understood as a dialogue and com-

mon policy among Bosnia’s entity’s leaderships. Some steps

forward were taken in the previous years but there is still a lot of

room for improvement and that might be the main reason why

Bosnia and Herzegovina

didn’t decide to apply for

EU candidate status. Af-

ter obtaining independ-

ence in mid 2006 Monte-

negro very soon submit-

ted its EU membership application. Montenegro officially sub-

mitted its candidacy to the EC on 15 December 2009. After

successful fulfillment of the EC’s questionnaire Montenegro

gained candidate status on 17 December 2010. The largest

country in the region, Serbia has started its SAA negotiations

with EU in November 2005. On 29 April 2008 EU and Serbia

signed Stabilisation and Association Agreement and officially

applied for the EU membership on 19 December 2009. During

its stabilization and accession talks Serbia had many problems,

mainly because of the lack in cooperation with the Hague Tribu-

...the state with the best chance of gaining full [NATO] membership is

Montenegro.


of Vardar Macedonia” and the “Republic of Northern Macedo-

nia”. Within Macedonia there is strong resistance among the

Slavic majority (65% of population) toward a change of state’s

name, even if this stops further Euro-Atlantic integration. If we

take a look at the polls there is a strong support to NATO’s

membership of Macedonia and it is around 80%, so long as there

is no name dispute issue on the agenda.

Within Montenegro there is still low support among

the Montenegrin population for full NATO member-

ship, though this is slowly rising, and it is now at 36% in

favor of membership with 34% of the population oppos-

ing it. The Montenegrin population (one third of which

declare themselves as Serbs), when asked whether they support

EU membership of Montenegro, answer with 66% of citizens

supporting the country’s EU membership. Obviously the Serbian

population in Montenegro favors the EU more than it favors

NATO. This is partly a reflection of the 1999 NATO interven-

tion against the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia.

Bosnia and Herzegovina were granted a conditional MAP in

April 2010. Bosnia has in its possession considerable stockpiles of

excess weaponry, including almost 70,000 rifles and pistols

along with explosive ordnance and ammunition in excess of

around 20,000 tons. Even though military infrastructure and

command were integrated in 2006 there is still lack in control of

military hardware. The two entities haven’t yet found a suffi-

cient compromise regarding this issue and it continues to cause

serious difficulties for Bosnia’s Euro-Atlantic path. If you add to

this the fact that Bosnia and Herzegovina remains a dysfunctional

state with weak central government it is clear why Bosnia still

moves only slowly toward the EU and NATO. With Bosnian

Muslims demanding strong central government, Bosnian Croats

demanding more autonomy for Croats within Federation Bosnia-

Herzegovina (Muslim-Croat entity covering 51% of Bosnia and

Herzegovina), and Bosnian Serbs frequently asking for secession

of its entity (Republika

Srpska which covers 49%

of Bosnia and Herze-

govina), the domestic

political situation is con-

flicted. If Bosnian Mus-

lims continue to insist on the state’s centralization it is very diffi-

cult to expect any reforms within this multi-ethnic country. In

the case of Bosnia around 70% of the population, fully or partly,

support the country’s membership of the NATO Alliance.

The Serbian Government pursues a policy of building good

relations with the West, but at the same time declares Kosovo to

be under its sovereignty. This has caused serious disturbances in

Serbia’s relations with a majority of NATO and EU member

states since 2007, when the Serbian Assembly adopted a Resolu-

tion on the military neutrality of Serbia, and especially after Ko-

sovo’s declaration of independence in February 2008. Even

though officially Belgrade declared a neutrality policy there have

been taken some important steps toward NATO admission of

Serbia. The Serbian parliament recognized the 1995 massacre of

more than 7,000 civilians in Srebrenica during the Bosnian war,

recognizing that there were large numbers of non-Serb victims in

The Serbian Government pursues a policy of building good relations with the West, but at the same time declares

Kosovo to be under its sovereignty.

NATO Military Committee, Led by Admiral Giampaolo Di Paola, visits Kosovo on 8 September 2011.


NATO’s position regarding the future Alliance enlargement

within the Western Balkans area can be described with the

NATO Secretary General Anders Fogh Rasmussen’s words:

“NATO’s vision for the Western Balkans region is clear: Euro-

Atlantic integration is the best guarantee for peace, progress and

prosperity…It is up to political leaders across the West-

ern Balkans to demonstrate the courage and determina-

tion to create better future for their own nations, and for

the entire region.” These words definitely show NATO’s

willingness to strengthen its presence in the region.

However any discussion of this demands open dialogue

regarding several important issues. Alongside this it must be

recognized that further integration will also require the willing-

ness of regional governments to fight against widespread corrup-

tion, and accepting the fact that Russian Federation has strong

influence in the region, with Moscow officially not in favor of

further NATO enlargement. Finally Western Balkan countries

must resolve their internal disputes which are still present. That

means that the any solution must be a compromise where, for

example, Serbia will not be required to lose everything, nor

should Kosovo Albanians be perceived as receiving everything.

This can be achieved by constructive dialogue and with support

of Western allies. The same must be done in case of Macedonia’s

name dispute. With the policy of compromise and sustainable

regional development Western Balkans can be fully integrated in

the community of developed democracies.

The views expressed in this article are entirely those of the author. They

do not necessarily represent the views of the Atlantic Treaty Association,

it’s members, affiliates or staff.

that area. The Serbian government is showing serious efforts in

pursuing a policy of coexistence with Albania proof of which is

the ongoing dialogue between Belgrade and Pristina. Despite this

there is a still strong anti-NATO sentiment among the Serbian

people. It is mainly related to the NATO bombing campaign

against FR Yugoslavia in 1999 and it is obvious that this challenge

must to be overcome if

Serbia wants to join

NATO. A dialogue has

begun between Serbia

and Western partners on

the subject of Kosovo.

During his visit to Balkans in 2009 US vice president Joseph

Biden expressed the belief that the United States and Serbia

could ‘’agree to disagree’’ on Kosovo. Support for Serbia’s

membership in NATO is currently very low at only 15.6% in

favor of membership with 66.3% of the Serbian population op-

posing.

It should be underlined that the policy of military neutrality

of Serbia hasn’t been clearly defined either by a Resolution or by

any following documents outlining Serbia’s security policies such

as the National Security Strategy and Defense Strategy approved

by the Serbian Parliament in October 2009. Serbia is continuing

to reform its Army, doing so with great success following the

fulfillment of NATO standards. Serbia’s military industry is the

largest in region with around $400 million worth of sold weap-

ons, mostly in Iraq ($ 285 million). There are opinions that

NATO membership would allow Serbia to develop this industry

further. Serbia has also intensified its dialogue with NATO since

2008. Last year there was organized “NATO’s Strategic Military

Conference in Belgrade” which saw a gathering of 200 military

officials from 55 countries. At the same time there is a strong

cooperation between Serbian Army and the National Guard of

Ohio. One clear sign that Western Balkan countries are begin-

ning to play the role of peace facilitator is the fact that all West-

ern Balkan countries participate in international military mis-

sions. With exception of Serbia which participates only in UN

missions other Western Balkan states take part in the ISAF mis-

sion led by NATO in Afghanistan. Croatia has the largest troops

(312) deployed in Afghanistan followed by Albania (286) and

FYROM (163). Bosnia and Herzegovina participates with 55

troops and Montenegro has 37 troops in Afghanistan.

Source and Owner/Caption: ….. (if applicable)

...Western Balkan countries must re-solve their internal disputes which are still present. That means that the any

solution must be a compromise...


by Ilija Djugumanov and Jordan Tasev

T he Balkan region, famous of its constant turbu-

lence is a part of Europe that has seen massive

changes and transformations in the past dec-

ades. Historically speaking the Balkan Region is known for being

a region with many conflicts. These conflicts were responsible

for enormous loss of life in the past. Unfortunately, these kind of

events, only with smaller intensity, still continue even in the

newer history of the region. The smallest such incident in the

Balkans, has been shown to have the potential to raise external

tensions, and in more recent times, internal conflicts, which

occur even more often.

Such developments have imposed the fact that we should

strengthen our efforts within this region. From this region and

from outside, we should actively encourage sincere cooperation

between the different nations. Otherwise, the word “Balkans” in

people’s minds will always carry negative connotations instead of

indicating a place where peace, freedom, democracy, individual

liberty, and rule of law are the core elements of society.

Despite all of the prejudice and stereotypes, rivalries, mis-

understandings, the Balkans is a region that always finds the

strength to transform itself. Having all of this in mind, the Bal-

kans is still a crucial part of the Euro-Atlantic communi-

ty and that is where it naturally belongs.

After the fall of the Berlin wall and the changes

that started in Eastern Europe, this very same process

inevitably started in the Balkans and resulted with break

up and bloodstained end of Yugoslavia. After that this

region entered a process of massive transformation. Most coun-

tries turned themselves towards closer Euro-Atlantic integra-

tion.

A vital point in the total transformation and transition for

this region was the “Stability Pact”. It was launched in 1999 as

the first comprehensive conflict prevention strategy of the inter-

national community, aimed at strengthening the efforts of the

countries of South Eastern Europe in fostering peace, democra-

cy, respect for human rights and economic prosperity. The Sta-

bility Pact1 provided a framework to stimulate regional co-

operation and expedite integration into European and Euro-

Atlantic structures.

The act of signing the Stabilization and Association Agree-

ment2 of which Macedonia, Croatia, Serbia and Montenegro

were already part, marked a step forward for relations at an

international level. It meant opening up the possibility for even-

tual integration in the European and Trans-Atlantic structures of

these countries, with the strengthening of relations between

governments and mutual cooperation (Regional free trade, bor-

der cooperation, suppression of corruption and organized crime,

creation of electricity and gas regional markets, transport devel-

opment, energy and infrastructure, as well as political and parlia-

mentary cooperation).

Nowadays, after a very long transformation, this region is

almost fully integrated into the EU and NATO. Already The

Balkans has six members in NATO.

Five of them are also members of the European Union.

There is a remainder of the countries that are not integrated and

each one of them is its own different case, it is in different state

and has different views. However, the fact remains that all of

them remain committed to the Euro-Atlantic vision and to inte-

gration.

Nevertheless, the full

transformation process

will be only be finished

when the whole region is

fully integrated.

The Balkans as a region, has always had different influ-

ences. Over the last centuries this region has witnessed shifting

alliances and partnerships. More recently, after the breakup of

Yugoslavia this region was guided through transition with the

help of the EU and NATO. Today it has to be said that with the

integration of some and the aspirations of others, this region

remains firmly within the sphere of the Euro-Atlantic region.

Despite this, historically this region belonged to the Otto-

man Empire and taking this fact into account it should be noted

that today Turkey has a natural role and influence on the Bal-

Balkan Euro-Atlantic Aspiration and Regional

Cooperation

...the Balkan Region is known for being a region with many conflicts...The smallest such

incident in the Balkans, has been shown to have the potential to raise external tensions


kans. It has to be emphasized that the role of Turkey becomes

crucial for the Balkans especially after the fall of the communism.

Turkey, also as a regional power, attaches special importance to

its relations with Balkan countries.

Today’s, basic elements of Turkey’s policy towards the

Balkans can be summarized as follows: developing relations to

the highest level with the

Balkan countries, with

which Turkey has histor-

ic, cultural and social

ties; enhancing the exist-

ing atmosphere of re-

gional peace and stability; keeping open the transportation con-

nection between Turkey and Western and Central Europe3.

Concerning peace and stability in the Balkans, Turkey con-

tributes with military and security staff to the international civil

(UNMIK, EULEX, and EUPOL) and military missions (KFOR,

EUFOR).

Whilst discussing foreign influence it is crucial to highlight

the ever present influence of the Russian Federation within this

region. Alongside this it is important to place this in the context

of the global rise of the Russian Federation. The feeling that

Russia will stamp its influence on the Balkans once again, is inev-

itable.

Looking more at the Russian influence it has to be noticed

that in the past years there have been massive investments in the

energy field. Russian energy interests is a key means enhancing

Russian influence in the region, and the Balkans and South East-

ern Europe are key parts of its energy strategy towards the EU.

Its main projects are:

South Stream gas pipeline

The Burgas-Alexandroupolis oil pipeline.

It’s interesting to point out that this is a crucial time for

this issue, the decision of the EU with regards to the

status of Serbia will be very, very important for the re-

gion and the balance of regional influences. How much

Russia will expand their influence in the wake of this

remains to be seen.

Related to the all of the previously said, the personal opin-

ion of the authors on this topic is that the Balkans as a region

should very much remain high on Europe’s global responsibility

list. Taking in consideration the present situation and the chal-

lenge of the numerous problems that it is facing, problems that

question some of the core pillars of the idea of the United Eu-

rope as a global factor, the Balkans has to remain a top priority.

In today's crisis, we often hear the question of the costs of being

or not being part of the EU.

This very same question has to be asked about this region

and in more global context, is it more cost-effective to fully

integrate this region with the fact of the enormous gap in the

development and standards, or is it worth taking the risk to al-

low the region to enter into new turmoil which inevitably will

have effects on the Euro-Atlantic region as a whole.

From this perspective the Euro-Atlantic region has to be

more dynamic and more flexible to answer the challenges and

the changes that are in front of it.

NATO – BALKANS

NATO’s active engagement with the Balkans began in the

early 1990s with its first major peace–support operation. Ever

since then the dynamics and diversity of operations have been

increased. It was during this time that the countries of the Bal-

kans had their first chance to see what NATO is and what NATO

can bring to the region with its own capacities and capabilities.

The other major point for the process of integration was

the Partnership for Peace (PfP)4 program that NATO applied. It

is clear that this program has made a major impact on the devel-

...the Balkans as a region should very

much remain high on Europe’s global responsibility list.

Figure 1: Partnership for Peace Programme start date by country.

(Source: http://www.nato.int/cps/en/natolive/topics_82584.htm)

Country Date

Albania 23.02.94

Bosnia and Herzegovina 14.12.06

Bugaria 14.02.94

Croatia 25.05.00

Montenegro 14.12.06

Romania 26.01.94

Serbia 14.12.06

Slovenia 30.03.94

Macedonia 15.11.95


Source and Owner/Caption: ….. (if applicable)

opment of this region.

The Partnership for Peace (PfP) is a programme of practi-

cal bilateral cooperation between individual Euro-Atlantic part-

ner countries and NATO. It allows partners to build up an indi-

vidual relationship with NATO, choosing their own priorities for

cooperation.

The essence of the PfP program is a partnership formed

individually between each Euro-Atlantic partner and NATO,

tailored to individual needs and jointly implemented at the level

and pace chosen by each participating government.

Every country agreed on the program individually and in

different time. This can be seen in figure 1:

Fully aware of the desire of the countries to completely

integrated we have to give notice to the stance of NATO to-

wards this question, and this is very clearly stated in the new

Strategic Concept5:

NATO’s enlargement has contributed substantially to the securi-

ty of Allies; the prospect of further enlargement and the spirit of

cooperative security have advanced stability in Europe more

broadly. Our goal of a Europe whole and free, and sharing

common values, would be best served by the eventual integration

of all European countries that so desire into Euro-Atlantic struc-

tures.

The door to NATO membership remains fully open to all Europe-

an democracies which share the values of our Alliance, which are

willing and able to assume the responsibilities and obligations of

membership, and whose inclusion can contribute to common

security and stability.

The Euro-Atlantic integration of the Western Balkans, with the

aim to ensure lasting peace and stability based on democratic

values, regional cooperation and good neighborly relations.

Looking how the countries respond it has to be pointed out

their active engagement to the NATO led operations. Specifical-

ly talking about the ISAF mission in Afghanistan we will present

some statistics for the active contribution in the past and in the

present:

After looking at these facts we must highlight that sending

troops from the Balkans and Europe itself shows that they play

vital role in Afghanistan. This fact is sometimes neglected from

the viewpoint of US stake-holders and the media who often

shape the perceptions of the broader public.

With the recent developments in the Arab world and the

new security challenges the integration of the Balkans has slowed

down. In context of this NATO has to show leadership and deny

the risk of local politicians taking advantage and abusing the pre-

sent situation, when they argue that the Alliance is the reason

why the countries are not integrated, in order to fulfill their own

ambitions. Integration into Euro-Atlantic organizations is crucial

for the stabilization and development of the region.

On one hand, EU and NATO have invested considerable

resources for various forms of support in the region and further

reaffirmed its commitment to expand. On the other hand, non-

integration involves significant negative political and economic

impact on affected countries and future negative impact on Euro-

Is this the image of NATO and the Balkans that the public still perceives?


Figure 2: NATO ISAF Contributions by Country

(Source: http://www.isaf.nato.int/troop-numbers-and-contributions/index.php)

ISO Code

COUNTRY Recog-nized as

TCN since

Current Troop

Contrib.

Presence in Afghanistan

OMLT contrib.

POMLT contrib.

PRT ANA Trust Fund

NATO Equip-ment Donation

Programme

POERF

AL Albania 24 July 2003 286

Regional Command Capital

Regional Command West

0 0 N/A 0 0 0

BA B&H 16 March 2009

55 Regional Command North

0 0 N/A 0 0 0

BG Bulgaria 24 July 2003 598 Regional Command Capital


4 0 N/A €160,000 50 mortars, ~21 million rounds of small arms am-munition, 500

binoculars

€170,000

HR Croatia 24 July 2003 312 Regional Command Capital

Regional Command North

3 2 N/A 0 0 0

GR Greece July 24 2003 154 Kabul International Airport (KAIA)

Compound

1 0 0

MK Macedonia 24 July 2003 163 Regional Com-mand Capital

0 0 N/A 0 0 0

ME Montenegro 24 February 2010

37 Regional Command North

0 0 N/A 0 0 0

RO Romania 24 July 2003 1876 Regional Command Capital

Regional Command South: Zabul

4 0 0 0 0

SI Slovenia 24 July 2003 79 Regional Command Capital


0 1 N/A €230,000

60 mortars, ~10,000 small arms, and ~2.2

million rounds of ammunition

0

TR Turkey 24 July 2003

1845 Regional Command Capital

5 1 Lead Wardak

Lead Jawzjan

€1,500,000 24 howitzers, ammunition,

clothing, equip-ment and acade-

my supplies

0


pean security.

Talking about the present situation and the heavy financial

crisis that remains, it has to be said that this issue has already

affected security budgets disproportionately. In NATO, the Eu-

ropean partners contribute 20% of the total NATO budget. In

1991 that participation was one third of the total budget; this

alone speaks for the dras-

tic changes.

The big cuts in the

military budgets and the

emergence of the Smart

Defence concept may yet

be the blessing in disguise that this region emphatically needed.

This concept will be only positive for this region. Not only in the

perspective of efficient military spending, but this will bring to

light increased and emphasized cooperation that inevitably will

transform and will be passed on in lot of other sectors.

At this point we have to conclude that this region still faces

very big challenges. But these challenges are inevitable if the

region is to continue with the very healthy process of integra-

tion, cooperation and progress. As part of the Euro-Atlantic

Council of Macedonia it was always natural for us to work in

regional context and see things in broader spectrum and for us it

is crucial that our goals remain very clear, working towards Euro

-Atlantic integration. The feeling that this region remains dedi-

cated to integration is very strong, and it is recognized locally

that this is an ongoing process.

The only conclusion that can be drawn from this discussion

is that this region remains devoted to the Euro-Atlantic region,

where it naturally belongs.

As a recommendation for the further activities in working

towards integration the primary focus should be on the Smart

Defence concept. This concept is the perfect stepping stone for

the Balkans, it has to be put as a number one priority because it

will show that NATO with its own capacities is capable to make

reforms that are positive for every member and every partner

country, and is of benefit to the region. If properly applied and

implemented it will also significantly benefit the region long

after the current crisis is over and the integration process is com-

plete.

Notes

1 The Stability Pact for South Eastern Europe - EU's initiative adopted by more than 40 partner countries and organisations in Cologne on June 10th 1999. The Pact was reaffirmed at a summit meeting in Sarajevo on 30 July 1999.

2 Stabilization and Association Agreement constitute framework of relations between the European Union and the Western Balkan countries for implementa-tion of the stabilization and association process.

3 Foreign Policy. Relations with the Balkan Region / Republic of Turkey, Ministry of Foreign Affairs <http://www.mfa.gov.tr/relations-with-the-balkan-

region.en.mfa>.

4 The Partnership for Peace (PfP). NATO-led program, launched at the 1994 Brussels Summit, to improve security cooperation between NATO and Partner countries in Central and Eastern Europe. It focuses on building stronger political and military interactions, and increasing NATO interoperability. <http://www.nato.int/cps/en/natolive/topics_50349.htm>.

5 Strategic Concept for the Defense and Security, Adopted by Heads of State and Government at the NATO Summit in Lisbon, 19th – 20th November 2010.<http://www.nato.int/cps/en/natolive/

topics_82705.htm>.

The views expressed in this article are entirely those of the author. They

do not necessarily represent the views of the Atlantic Treaty Association,

it’s members, affiliates or staff.

[Smart Defence] If properly applied and implemented it will also signifi-

cantly benefit the region long after the current crisis is over ...

The Atlantic Treaty Association (ATA) is an international non-

governmental organization based in Brussels working to facilitate

global networks and the sharing of knowledge on transatlantic

cooperation and security. By convening political, diplomatic and

military leaders with academics, media representatives and young

professionals, the ATA promotes the values set forth in the North

Atlantic Treaty: Democracy, Freedom, Liberty, Peace, Security

and Rule of Law. The ATA membership extends to 39 countries

from North America to the Caucasus throughout Europe. In 1996

the Youth Atlantic Treaty Association was created to specifially

include to the successor generation in our work.

Since 1954, the ATA has advanced the public’s knowledge and

understanding of the importance of joint efforts to transatlantic

security, through its international programs, such as the Central

and South Eastern European Security Forum, the Ukraine Dialogue

and its Educational Platform.

In 2011 the ATA adopted a new set of strategic goals that

reflects the constantly evolving dynamics of international

cooperation. These goal include:

The establishment of new and competitive programs on

international security issues.

The development of research initiatives and security releted

events for its Members.

The expansion of ATA international network of experts to

countries in Northern Africa and Asia.

The ATA is realizing these goals through new programs, more

policy activism and greater emphasis on joint research initiatives.

These programs will also aid in the establishment of a network

of international policy experts and professionals engaged in a

dialogue with NATO.

Atlantic Voices is always seeking new material. If you are a

young researcher, subject expert or professional and feel you have

a valuable contribution to make to the debate, then please get in

touch.

We are looking for papers, essays, and book reviews on issues

of importance to the NATO Alliance.

For details of how to submit your work please see our website.

Further enquiries can also be directed to the ATA Secretariat at the

address listed below.

All Images published in this issue of Atlantic Voices are the property of NATO,

reproduced with NATO’s permission, unless otherwise stated. Images should not be

reproduced without permission from sources listed, and remain the sole property

of those sources.

Atlantic Voices - Vol. 2 no. 2

Documents

issue of atlantic voices

albania atlantic voices

balkans region

euroatlantic way branko

western balkans

future of euro

transatlantic community

balkan region