ASEES 43nd Annual Convention

17th – 20st November, 2011
Washington, DC (USA)

Serbia, Its Neighbors, and Its Region: A Constructive Actor?

by Francine Friedman

On 19 November 2011, the Association for Slavic, East European, and Eurasian Studies (ASEEES) hosted a panel entitled "Serbia, Its Neighbors, and Its Region: A Constructive Actor?". The Chair of the panel was Francine Friedman, Professor of Political Science at Ball State University.

Stefano Bianchini, Professor of East European Politics and History at the University of Bologna, Forli Campus, focused on several questions: what is a constructive actor? What is the relative meaning of the terms? Who are Serbia's neighbors (i.e., which definition do we accept – European Union (EU) , other) ? In discussing the micro-region, we must also take into account the external players, such as the United States, European Union, Russia, and, to a certain extent, newer players like Turkey and China. This poses a very complicated picture regarding Serbia and its possible membership in the European Union, in particular. Some of the outstanding questions standing in Serbia's way have been answered: the major indicted Serbian war criminals are at The Hague Tribunal; democratic development is not contested now. The main problem now is neighborly relations:

• Serbia-Croatia: some dialogue has been established leading to a lessening of tensions;
• Serbia-Balkans: Serbia has promised to cooperate with other Balkan countries in the process of EU accession;
• Serbia-Kosovo/a: Germany, in particular, insists on a resolution of this problem.

However, another question presents itself: does Serbia have alternatives to entering the EU? Since 2005, EU conditionality has been fading, as it faces crises to the institution. The EU is declining and is having difficulty making decisions. EU members are divided about Serbian accession because of Kosovo/a. Therefore, Serbia's acceptance into the EU is not necessarily assured. Europe is weaker and conditionality has less influence on EU candidate or potential candidate countries, and other countries now have an impact. Russia, for example, is important because of its energy supplies and its support of Serbia over Kosovo/a. Turkey is systematically expanding into the Balkans. China is now in control of the Piraeus Harbor and Macedonian electric companies, is interested in the Port of Thessaloniki and is building infrastructure in the Republic Srpska.

Thus, is the EU aware of these external actors so that it can represent a viable alternative for Serbia anymore?

David Kanin, Adjunct Professor of European Studies at Johns Hopkins University, pointed out that the question of this panel would only be asked about Serbia, not other neighboring countries. Previously, the focus was on dysfunctional Bosnia. Now we look at Serbia alone. The question of Serbia's entering the EU hangs over everything, but the problem with this is that it absolves countries from having to work out their mutual problems; once in the EU, that organization is expected to handle those problems. This is unfortunate for all countries involved. Every time a new actor enters the scene (for example, the EU, China, Russia, etc.) , that actor and its exigencies become the lodestar, which means that parochial relations among the neighbors are simply set aside.

• Serbia-Bulgaria: the Macedonian question. Greece also now shares this problem, as well as financial concerns and identity questions.
• Serbia-Slovenia/Croatia: these relationships were mainly settled on the battlefield in the 1990s: Slovenia has left the Balkans; Croatia is very nationalistic. But the relations of these countries with Serbia remain decent unless or until Bosnia and Herzegovina falls apart.
• Serbia-Kosovo/a: the question of what Kosovo/a is to Serbia remains unsettled, so it is still a dangerous problem. There are a multiplicity of actors, each with a different response. Serbs in southern Kosovo/a are accommodating themselves to the situation, but the Serbs in northern Kosovo/a and Belgrade itself believe that they have lost control in Kosovo/a.
• Serbia-Bosnia: this is still a dangerous situation, although it is currently quiet. Serbia is currently not a player in Bosnia, but it is a neighbor, which means that it might potentially become involved there again. Bosniak civic identity has failed to take root, which leaves only ethnic identification there, which is spilling into the Sanjak region. This could become a significant problem for Serbia.

Obrad Kesic, Senior Partner of TSM Global Consultants, discussed what factors drive Serbian policy toward its neighbors. The situation is much improved over even two years ago, because there is now a mutually-enforced conditionality in the neighborhood (as witness the arrest of Ratko Mladic) . Internal politics are also open within the ruling coalition , between the rulers and the opponents, and within the government. Sometimes external factors are emphasized simply in order to serve as a distraction away from the real issues that the government does not want to discuss.

Neighborly relations are still fragile and lack depth. Little things sometimes throw relations off-kilter. There have lately been more economic contacts between neighbors, which is the best side of the relationship; however, even this side is not fully exploited to find mutually beneficial opportunities. Furthermore, in these relations, no one is given the benefit of the doubt – unless the European Union is involved. Serbian leaders have a low level of mutual respect, which makes it difficult to improve relations. No one in Europe, then, has confidence in the Serbian leadership, and Europeans are satisfied if Serbian leaders simply do the minimum of what they promised.

There is a problem of communication in the region (parallel communication) . Different spokes-people say different things about/for Serbia, which makes it difficult to figure out the true Serbian position on some issues. The Serbian public and private messages are different (see, for example, Wikileaks) , but, generally, neighbors will respond first and think later, which causes major problems.

Other problems in the area:

• the influence of the domestic public vs. the neighbors (outsiders) makes for a schizophrenic foreign policy;
• Serbia's policy is personality-driven, which means that cooperation depends on who likes whom;
• the lack of leadership in Serbia, which means form is greater than substance; that is reflected in Serbian policy;
• a general lack of consensus even within the ruling elites means that there is no consensus on goals to achieve; now, everyone simply wants to survive in office, not truly govern;
• parallel foreign policy from different ministries and offices, which undermines Serbian foreign policy.

Julie Mostov, Professor of Political Science and Vice Provost for Global Initiatives, Drexel University focused on the lack of depth in Serbia's external relations. Serbia could be a constructive actor by strengthening its contributions in scientific research and innovation, sustainability issues, building regional energy capabilities and river systems, etc. Serbia could also become a regional leader in economics and business matters, as there is a natural regional connection. There may even be EU money available for these initiatives in order to create levels of collaborative partnerships. This would enable construction of more of the density, trust, and confidence that are currently missing in regional relations without necessarily touching on the hot political issues. Such a focus would create less dependencies and allow Serbia to become stronger in those areas.

However, there is a Serbian resistance to sit at the table with Kosovo/a, for example. This simply must be overcome. Sitting at a table with a representative does not imply recognition. Symbolic issues like sovereignty must not prevent Serbia from moving forward in its own interests.

Serbia is comfortable with ambiguity, but the country should use this characteristic to forward its own interests, as well as the interests of the region. Serbia is seen as a potential leader in certain aspects of the region, so it needs to develop its strengths and not allow symbolic and legalistic arguments to get in the way of long-term gains and the public good. Serbia could play (and has played) a constructive role in such important fields as civil society, cultural activity, and, especially, gender, in which women's organizations have engaged in constructive cross-border collaboration.

Stanislav Tkachenko, Professor of Economics and History, St. Petersburg State University discussed the relationship between Russia and Serbia. In effect, Russia told Slobodan Milošević that it would not fight for Serbia in regard to Kosovo/a. On the other hand, Russia has viewed the issue of Kosovo/a as a litmus test for other countries both symbolically and with regard to the geopolitical situation. Some members of Russia's leadership view Serbia as geo-politically important, although others believe that Serbia is simply an asset in Russo-European relations.

During the Question and Answer period, the panelists were able to expand on their remarks.

Stefano Bianchini: Russia has penetrated into the Balkans via the Kosovo/a issue, and Belgrade has lost control in Kosovo/a, to the extent that some Kosovar Serbs have even requested Russian citizenship. This provides a possibility for increased Russian involvement, but the question remains whether this involvement will be constructive for the region or just for Russia. EU conditionality is weakening, which allows for the potential of alternative politics for Serbia than the EU.

David Kanin: Russia's involvement has more economic significance than previous forays into the region, and the South Stream pipeline project could move that relationship forward, although it has not as yet. Like pre-World War II Germany with regard to the Balkans, Russia is creating a material relationship with Southeastern Europe, but a lot of the money is going to private hands, as corruption is significant in the area.

Now Turkey matters more in the Middle East and the Balkans than ever before. Turkey's Erdogan is playing a skillful game to increase Turkey's scope.

The EU crisis is an identity crisis, not a financial crisis. None of the EU countries have enforced the four criteria necessary to belong to the euro zone; if the euro should collapse, the anthropological problem of where to go next becomes difficult but also highlights European incompetence.

Obrad Kesic: Russian energy influence is not anymore of a threat than European banking influence. Furthermore, the Balkans are often held to higher standards than other European countries, particularly in regard to the question of nationalism. For example, Serbia should be able to pursue its own national interests just like any other country and not be held to a double standard.

Julie Mostov: Civil society is more than simply non-governmental organizations; it also includes such popular institutions as sports, education, etc. These institutions will not bind a society together alone, but they will provide more of the depth necessary for a successful society.

This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it *
Ball State University

* Francine Friedman is Professor of Political Science and has been at Ball State University since 1990. She received her Ph.D. from Claremont Graduate School. Professor Friedman teaches international relations, Russian and East European politics. Her primary research interests focus on the former Yugoslavia. Dr Friedman teaches courses in International Relations, Russian Politics, Ethnic Conflict, and Terrorism. Dr. Friedman is also the Director for the Jewish Studies program.