A public debate has been held on the 18th March 2008 beginning at 18:00 hours at the “Holiday Inn” hotel in Skopje named “The Western Balkans between conflict transformation and European integration”. The main panelist was the renowned analyst Mr. Predrag Jurekovic from the Institute for Peace Support and Conflict Management at the Austrian National Defense Academy. The panel­debate was held in cooperation between the “Institute for Democracy” – IDSCS and the office of the Friedrich Ebert foundation in Skopje.

Predrag Jurekovic was born in 1969 in Nova Gradiska (Croatia) and has studied political science and history at the University of Vienna. Since 1997 he is at different positions as a researcher and analyst at the Austrian Ministry of Defence. He was an advisor to the security political departments of the MoD regarding the Western Balkans. Since 1996 he is a permanent contributor to the Austrian military periodical “Osterreichische Militarische Zeitschrift” on developments in South East Europe. Mr. Jurekovic has participated in several research projects dealing with the peace processes in South East Europe (amongst others in a joint project with the German Nobel Prize winner for game theory Reinhard Selten on crisis management in Kosovo). He has issued numerous publications on the security and political developments in South East Europe. Since 2003 he is head of the department for conflict analysis in the Institute for Peace Support and Conflict Management at the Austrian National Defence Academy. Mr. Jurekovic is also Austrian co­chair of the Study Group “Regional Stability in South East Europe” in the scope of the PfP Consortium of Defence Academies and Security Studies Institutes.

At the beginning of his presentation Mr. Predrag Jurekovic expressed his gratitude to the “Friedrich Ebert Stiftung” for the invitation to participate in this public debate and expressed his pleasure regarding the work in the sphere of peaceful conflict resolution in the Republic of Macedonia. Mr. Jurekovic expressed his wish to address the audience in English although being a Croatian with a Serbian first name, noticing that nowadays it is unimaginable that one would not know the English language. For Mr. Jurekovic this is a very interesting lecture because being an analyst, raised in a western type society, and rooted in the Balkans, he very well understands the perception of the West regarding the Balkan countries and vice­versa, which he considers as his great advantage. Mr. Jurekovic clearly stated that he has come to the panel in the capacity of analyst, and not as a representative of his country and in his presentation he will not state the viewpoints of his country. He also underlined that in his presentation maybe certain painful statements shall be made in which certain social structures would recognize themselves, and that he will try to be honest regarding his points. The presentation will comprise of six parts regarding the transformation of the western Balkans from a conflict society into a society concerned with European integration.

The first topic regards the term “conflict transformation”. Mr. Jurekovic stated that he does not like at all the term “stability” because if one thinks critically a society could be stable in both in positive and in negative sense, which means that there is only transformation from negative to positive peace (cooperation). There are no quick solutions for the Balkans because we have a very serious present situation, and the West has faced a barrier in the process of peace­building. The West should give a chance to the countries in the region concerning the EU integration, because only within the EU the countries from the Western Balkans would have common interests and possibility for cooperation. The local actors should not remain in a passive situation; they should concentrate on the positive integration so the Balkans would not become a “black hole” in the region.

The second topic regards the manipulation with the ethnic differences. Mr. Jurekovic has pointed out the cases with the Yugoslav republics, the examples of 1990­1991 and the violent transformation of the conflicts in that period, the Tudjman example etc. The present situation in this society is a situation of negative peace without a military component but also without any cooperation. The national leaders in Bosnia and Herzegovina act as representatives of the three big religious groups and present a danger for the national identity because they fight for the ethnic identity. In Macedonia the majority and the minority differ in regards to the size of the groups and there is an active perception that one group endangers the existence of the other group. It is necessary to provide freedom of the cultural requirements apropos the freedom of the national identity, to increase the territorial identity and the political leaders should jointly start to build a citizen identity of all citizens on the specific territory. At this point Mr. Jurekovic once again stressed his own identity as an Austrian with a Balkan origin. In order to come over the security dilemma the representatives of the minorities should send a clear signal that their requirements are not a threat to the majority. Mr. Jurekovic pointed out the classical example of the Serbian­oriented parties in Montenegro that have no understanding for the new authorities. The majority has the obligation to implement the Ohrid Framework Agreement and the minority has the obligation to include itself in the political dialogue.

The third topic regards the lack of political leadership or having bad political leaders. This problem is connected to the problem of manipulation with the ethnic factor. If there are no leaders that will show that they are capable to implement the policies of the EU one does not have a serious situation. In Bosnia the Croats have strong leaders and the Serbs have powerful leaders, but they (both) do not utilize their power for political goals but for mischief in Bosnia and Herzegovina.

The fourth topic regards Kosovo and its influence on other interethnic relations. This is a very important topic for Macedonia as well. Although most of the EU countries have recognized Kosovo or have the intention to do so, there is a bit of fear among them that there might be negative effects on other neighboring countries i.e. a new wave of destabilizing perceptions. Mr. Jurekovic was not very skeptical regarding the question but he nevertheless stated that there is a certain risk that Kosovo on a short or medium term will be turned into a “Cypriot model” of political arrangement which will harden the situation of UNMIK. In the enclaves of south Kosovo, the EU and the Kosovo government should influence to create positive living environment for the Serbs. Wherever there is Albanian majority problems might occur. There is also a problem in Macedonia but the government of Macedonia, after announcing the acceptance of Ahtisari’s plan, will probably recognize Kosovo’s independence. In Presevo the Albanian politicians accept territorial integration of the Presevo area as long as Serbia has the territorial integrity of Kosovo in mind. North Kosovo is still not under EU control and this could have a negative impact if nationalist parties take over power. The recognition of Kosovo by the USA and some EU­countries should not in any case be a precedent for partition of Republika Srpska from B&H, and one should not at all support Serbian nationalism in this regard. The reason is that Republika Srpska did not exist in Yugoslavia as Kosovo did, and there was ethnic cleansing in order to reach the present situation.

The fifth topic regards the necessity for cooperation in field of co­operative security of the region. At the moment there is negative peace, but it is still possible to evolve from violence­protecting measures to security policy of the national governments. NATO is that very chance for the Balkans. It is not unusual for an Austrian to say that Austria is neutral. The Summit of NATO in Bucharest is an opportunity for giving an invitation to Albania, Croatia and Macedonia for NATO membership, and yet there is the risk of veto by Greece for Macedonia. The invitation would have positive consequences for Greece as well, because stability in the region is at stake. We know the Albanian perception of the USA and the NATO thus the entrance into NATO is positive both for the Albanians and the Macedonians. There is a consensus in B&H that the country should become a member of NATO. Serbia is divided in regard to the issue, where almost 50% of the population does not support the accession into NATO, so Serbia might become an exception which is not good for international cooperation. A western framework is needed that would be equal for all states not differing regarding the accession criteria for NATO.

The sixth and last topic regards the maintaining of the credibility. Europeanization of the region is much needed as well as a consensus of the region apropos this process. The EU has a goal to integrate the Western Balkans, but the approach in the last few years is very technical, and the process of socialization for peace weakens. The example of the political sacrifices of Bulgaria and Romania has been pointed out at this moment, as well as the fear that the same situation might occur in the case of Croatia in the process of accession into the EU. The standpoint of Mr. Jurekovic is that all countries should get the candidate status under the same conditions and start the negotiations which are not a risk for the EU. However, the principle that every state is a separate case should be maintained and no state should block the entrance of another state. The EU should seriously consider the partnership with the Western Balkan countries because of the economic progress and the political stability in order to avoid the division within the Western Balkans societies.

In the Q&A section Mr. Jurekovic mentioned that the political rhetoric has a very special place regarding the improvement of the interethnic relations pointing to the example of Tudjman in Croatia where ethnicities have never been mentioned amongst Croatian citizens, again stating that positive rhetoric might change the psychology of perception of certain phenomena. The panelist pointed out Macedonia as an example where both situations are present – manipulation with ethnicity and bad leaders that state the readiness to implement the Ohrid Framework Agreement, and yet they give ambitious statements regarding ethnic separation. The Council for Regional Cooperation has been mentioned at this point, being a body that supports regional cooperation and that has ethnic integration as its biggest challenge. The need for responsible persons willing to better the situation and not work for improving their own financial situation and power has been mentioned as well.

The standpoint of Mr. Jurekovic is that Macedonia should be invited to NATO because if it is left out that would mean a bad signal for the region and would create chaos, in the same time worsening the internal situation in the country. The timeframe for accession apropos the eventual miss on inviting Macedonia would prolong and the situation in the region would deteriorate. What is positive is the fact that all states included in the Partnership for Peace, independently of bilateral military agreements between them, have bilateral agreements with western countries. The only critical spot is Serbia because there is no real possibility for political consensus regarding NATO and in the last months many Serbian colleagues (of Mr. Jurekovic) have been interested in neutrality looking for advice from Mr. Jurekovic as a citizen of a neutral state. At this point Mr. Jurekovic expressed his hope that the liberal forces would win and that a possibility for NATO accession would appear. Montenegro has very small armed forces and a consensus for NATO accession, with a small exception of the separatist Serbian groups that are not loyal to the authorities in Montenegro. However Montenegro should not have a problem accessing NATO. Once again, Mr. Jurekovic underlined the timeframe of 15 years within which it will become clear which countries shall enter NATO and EU and which will not.

In regards to the Serbian question the political manipulation of Mr. Tadic has been pointed out i.e. utilizing Serbian patriotism to win the elections, striving in the same time towards EU and NATO, and using this rhetoric even after the elections. Mr. Jurekovic also pointed out that the USA are being more pragmatic in this integrative processes than the EU, because of the fact that EU integration has been downsized to technical implementation, and the real problems that might lead to conflict have often been a matter concerning which Mr. Jurekovic had to often remind EU officials. In regards to the endangerment of the Macedonian integrity by the neighboring states Mr. Jurekovic pointed out that the endangerment will not exist if the citizens themselves decide to stay in Macedonia and to work on improving of the society in every field. In this case nobody would endanger the Macedonian identity. Because what matters is the citizenship, not ethnicity.