Dear Sebastian,

Dear friends,

I am particularly happy to be here and I want to thank Sebastian and the European Fund for the Balkans for their invitation. You know Sebastian is probably one of my most consistent colleagues. And I want to thank him here for being so consistent in pushing for an innovative approach towards bilateral disputes settlement in the Western Balkans.

It is common knowledge that opens bilateral disputes have, at best, slowed down the accession process or, at worst, prevented it from going forward. It is precisely for this reason that last year in Vienna we agreed on a joint statement on the settlement of bilateral disputes as an instrument both to enhance regional cooperation and accelerate EU integration.

Ever since the countries of the Western Balkans embarked two years ago in the so-called “Berlin process”, many examples of regional normalisation, rapprochement or cooperation come to my mind:

• The normalisation of relations between Albania and Serbia over the past year and a half
• The signature of the border agreement between Bosnia and Herzegovina and Montenegro on one hand, on Montenegro and Kosovo the other hand in the margins of the Vienna Summit last year

All these are proof that the Berlin Process, meant as an accelerator of the EU integration process, has indeed produced practical and political effects of cooperation.  Most importantly, the region has shown that it can deliver on its promises.

The “Balkans in Europe Policy Advisory Group” has been very astute in describing these trends. Their paper on “COMPLETING THE BALKAN ENLARGEMENT” clearly outlines the risks ahead of us if the enlargement process does not go fast forward. And I am happy to see that this innovative thinking has now produced a toolbox that aims at creating a proper mechanism to address open disputes.

I agree with the principles outlined by the BiEPAG: bilateral solutions backed by strong EU engagement, tackle bilateral disputes before they turn into obstacles, creation by the EU of new mediation instruments, involve local populations & civil society.

Yet so far, the focus of the Balkans in Europe Policy Advisory Group has been on border disputes and minorities. I would add that the improvement of inter-ethnic relations is also a key.

Indeed, one of the reasons why bilateral disputes in our region seem so complex is precisely because quite often statehood disputes overlap with inter-ethnic conflicts.

A second reason why the web of bilateral disputes in the Western Balkans seems so entangled is that those disputes are extremely different both in nature and in terms of the countries they involve. Indeed it really makes a difference if the dispute involves an EU member-state or aspirant countries.

I will try to bring some clarity by dividing the current open bilateral disputes in the Western Balkans in three different boxes:

• In the first one are those bilateral disputes inherited from a distant past. In the case of Albania and Greece such disputes go back to the Second World War. It might come as a surprise to some here, but Albania and Greece, even if we seat together around the NATO table, are still under a state of war according to Greek law, and this has very practical implications for our citizens.
• In the second basket are the statehood issues that emerged after Yugoslavia’s break-up.
• In the third basket, are bilateral disputes that are of practical importance for the future but don’t necessarily produce  obstacles to EU enlargement.

It is precisely because of this complexity of nature and of actors that our work in resolving bilateral disputes is so difficult and sometimes looks very slow. As you can imagine, it is particularly difficult for one of the countries of the region to act as a mediator since every mediation initiative is thought to represent a hidden agenda. Also, what is there to be done when international arbitration is not an option?

I would also add that the ongoing dispute resolution mechanisms should integrate into their approach the economic development mechanisms – For example it is worth asking: what is the economic impact of the Kosovo-Serbia set of agreements?

Which takes us back to the importance of the Berlin Process? To be successful in overcoming disputes in the region we should focus on economic cooperation and development.

There is a need to further channel the EU assistance towards growth policies, connectivity and reduction of inequalities between WB countries and EU member states.

Furthermore, the EU should seek to encourage those cooperation trends that are likely to make regional success stories:

Examples are already existed: Countering Violent Extremism, collective response of Europe goal; and WB countries to the Migration wave etc.

The way regional the EU responds to regional cooperation trends remain indeed the only way to positively influence the resolution calendar of open bilateral disputes in our region.

 

Thank you !