The European Unions Involvement in Conflict in the Western Balkans

Egzon Gashi
The United States and international community has invested heavily in the Western Balkans over the past two decades. More recently, the European Union has taken the lead in attempting to stabilize and create a European future for the region. This paper will look specifically at the Republic of Kosovo and the progress that has been made in the newly independent country. The United States sees its progress as vi tal to stability in the Balkan. This paper will explore the recent agreements the European Union has facilitated in

University of Oxford Research Country: Kosovo September 2013

Kosovo and explore the prospects of future success.

IREX 1275 K STREET, NW, SUITE 600, WASHINGTON, DC 20005 T +1 202 628 8188 F +1 202 628 8189 WWW.IREX.ORG
This research brief was funded by a grant from the United States Department of State. The following opinions, findings, and conclusions stated herein are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views or policies of IREX or the U.S. Department of State.

Abstract (Arial 11, Italic, 1.5 space) 100 words

SCHOLAR RESEARCH BRIEF

RESEARCH IN CONTEXT Generally, the European Union has been considered weak in its foreign policy initiatives since its inception. The reasons for this are apparent in the fact that the international organization has 28 different independent states that all have their own agenda. Daniel Thomas notes that in 1995, European Commission President Jacques Santer observed that the European Union is simply not punching its weight on the international stage in the foreign and security policy areas. While the EU had substantive political and economic might at the time, its influence was not in accordance with this power. Since 1995, however, the European Union has increased its involvement in foreign issues and has become considerably more active both internationally and on its periphery. were undoubtedly involved in these conflicts, it was not under the leadership of the European Union. Beginning in the early part of the 21st century, the European Union changed and improved upon its foreign policy initiatives. Daniel Trenchov explains that cooperation represents the common future of the EU and the Balkans. This common future leads to the need to understand both the external (EU) and internal (domestic politics) aspects of the Union and Balkan region. As Balkan countries became more willing to cooperate with the EU, agreements as well as negotiations replaced war and strife. The European Union has been very active in the Balkans especially in Kosovo in an attempt to stabilize the region and eventually create a European future for the countries that were a result of the breakup of Yugoslavia. This paper explores that investment and attempts to determine whether or not it has been successful.

This research project attempts to explore the idea of the European Union becoming more successful in its foreign policy. In order to demonstrate this increase in effectiveness, the paper uses the Western Balkans as a primary example more specifically the Republic of Kosovo. Beginning in 1990, former Yugoslavia began to disintegrate and break up along ethnic lines. What was once one unified federal entity is now split into seven independent sovereign States. The fragmentation of Yugoslavia did not come without conflict; major conflicts in Croatia, Bosnia, and Kosovo represented a dark period for Europe. The Western Balkans was the setting of Europes worst conflict since World War II. As wars ravaged in Bosnia & Herzegovina and later in Kosovo, the European Union as a body had very minimal involvement. Instead, it was the United States and the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) that took the lead. While NATO includes many European Union member states, it is an entirely separate body from the European Union. Therefore, while Western European countries

RESEARCH PROCESS AND RESULTS The research relies both on primary and secondary sources to assess the role of the European Union in conflict resolution. The secondary sources include previous research that has already been undertaken. Previous research includes reports on EU conflict resolution and its effectiveness, progress reports published by EU institutions in the region as well as policy papers on EU involvement in the Balkans. Primary sources include interviews with civil society as well as government officials in the Republic of Kosovo. Civil society is especially important in Kosovo because it gives an internal perspective on Kosovar perceptions of the EU as well as their attitudes toward accession. Additionally, elite interviews at the EU level in Brussels are particularly effective in understanding the mindset of the European Union during times of intervention and conflict resolution. The mindset of the EU is important in understanding what the purpose of EU facilitation was and in understanding why the European Union wanted particular agreements. There are many benefits to elite interviewing in a qualitative analysis; for example one obvious benefit of elite interviewing is the ability to get into contact with people who know more about your subject or interest than you do. By contacting political and administrative elites, I am able to better understand the thought-process of all actors involved during the negotiating processes that took place in the Western Balkans. While the ideas and opinions of the European Union seemed most vital, it is also important to understand what mindset local leaders were in during said negotiations. The main purpose of the paper is to answer the question of why Kosovo was a special case of EU facilitation and success and why the EU was able to foster agreements in a region that was previously thought to be impenetrable by diplomacy. Interviews with elites will help further explore this question and give a clear understanding of why there has been diplomatic progress. As evidenced by the inefficiency of conflict resolution in the 1990s, the European Union needed, at the very least, a willingness to sit and talk on the side of the leaders in the Balkans. Interviewees were selected based on association with the European Union. For example, in Kosovo, the main interviewees consist of officials in EU

organizations present in the country such as the European Commission Liaison Office and EULEX (the EU rule of law mission present in the country). Additionally, interviews were conducted in the Ministry of European Integration as well as with different members of civil society who have written about Kosovo and the EU specifically. In Serbia, there are a multitude of organizations that work closely with EU integration. These are very useful in gaining a better understanding of the Serbian position. When conducting the interviews, a series of questions relevant to the research were posed. Below are the questions that were asked during most of the interviews: 1. Could Serbia and Kosovo have come to a sustainable agreement without the help of the international community?

2. Do you feel that, specifically, European Union intervention was necessary in the Republic of Kosovo?

3. How would you compare the recent agreement in Kosovo to the Ohrid Agreement in Macedonia and the split of Serbia and Montenegro?

4. Do you feel that the EU-brokered agreements in all three countries have helped prove that the European Union can externally contribute to conflict resolution? 5. Do you think that the agreement in Kosovo disproportionately favors either party? 6. How would you assess the likelihood of implementation in Kosovo, especially considering the fact that Serbians in the North are not in favor of this agreement? 7. How important was the incentive of EU accession in getting the two sides to agree? 8. If implemented, do you believe that the agreement concerning the North of Kosovo is sustainable? In addition to elite interviewing, process tracing was used in this research in order to grasp the methods and causal mechanisms used by the EU to gain some type of consensus between disagreeing parties. In essence, this process tracing was used in order to link causal mechanisms with outcomes produced. By using process tracing, I was able to dissect the mechanisms that the European Union used to resolve conflict and compare them to the outcome of agreements that were passed or negotiations that took place. I was then able to compare what mechanisms produced positive outcomes and determine which mechanisms were not effective. Lastly, publications from major think tanks, newspapers as well as online sources were used in order to assess the past 20 years of intervention. The policy relevant findings of the research seem to point to the fact that the European Union is in fact successful as a facilitator when it incentivizes cooperation. In the case of the Western Balkans, the countries are willing to cooperate with the EU because they have aspirations to join the supranational organization. The paper used three important examples of EU intervention in order to assess the progress in the 21st century. The first case that was looked at was the Ohrid agreement in Macedonia signed by the minority Albanian community and the majority Macedonian community. In the early part of the 21st century there was a fear that Macedonia would be another

country in the Western Balkans that would endure war and conflict. In this case, however, diplomacy proved successful and the Ohrid agreement skirted conflict and avoided war. In 2006, the European Union led and made the rules for the referendum that separated Montenegro from Serbia. Serbia and Montenegro represented the last of the Yugoslav federation, but this EU-facilitated referendum resulted in independence for Montenegro. The population narrowly voted for independence and this was agreed to by Serbia as evidenced by its recognition of an independent Montenegrin State. Kosovo, the focus of this paper, represents the most complicated issue in the Western Balkans. The paper dissected the EU-facilitated dialogue that brought Kosovar and Serbian leadership to Brussels in order to normalize relations and solve pertinent issues which inhibited both countries from progress and put a dark cloud over regional stability. The agreement reached in 2013 represented a very positive step forward for Kosovo internally and Serbia externally in its relations with the European Union. Today, as the agreement is being implemented, the influence of the European Union and its success as an external actor is being tested.

Brave leadership is vital if lasting change is to be achieved. The normal condition of politics is to exploit dividing lines and incite differences. The demand of peacemaking is to seek common ground and design a shared future. Over the past six months I have seen men from both Belgrade and Pristina evolve from politicians into peacemakers.
Catherine Ashton, Balkan Insight, April, 25 2013

CONTINUING RESEARCH European Union conflict resolution is still in its developmental stage. While the Western Balkans represents progress, only two former-Yugoslav countries are currently in the Union: Slovenia and Croatia. If the rest of the region eventually enters the EU, it will show that the organization has been successful in its attempt to Europeanize the periphery. Before the region is to join the European Union, however, it is important that the agreements and negotiations facilitated by the European Union are actually implemented and adhered to. In Macedonia, the Ohrid agreement has stabilized the country, but the stability may be temporary. Tensions between Albanians and Macedonians persist despite the fact that war was avoided. Similarly, the split of Serbia and Montenegro was viewed by some to be just another example of ethnic division in the Western Balkans. Instead of the two countries working to keep unity and peace, division was preferred and supported. Therefore, while the European Union has been able to successfully avoid war in the Balkans in the 21st century, problems persist. Further research would be vital in order to determine what the ultimate effect of these agreements is and to determine whether or not the methods of intervention by the European Union were successful in the long term. In Kosovo specifically, the agreement that was signed in April of 2013 is yet to be implemented. EU-facilitated dialogue brought the two parties to the negotiating table which was a huge step in the right direction but the actual implementation of the agreement will truly determine whether or not the EU is successful in normalizing relations. Furthermore, both Kosovo and Serbia are moving toward EU candidacy and eventual membership. Ultimately, as previous mentioned, the success of the EU will be determined by the stability of the region as well as its ability to create new member states of the supranational organization.

RELEVANCE TO POLICY COMMUNITY Since 1990, the United States has been very involved in the Balkan region. The most significant investment came in the Republic of Kosovo. In 1999, the United States took the lead in air strikes on Kosovo and Serbia that sought to end the conflict between the two countries. Since 1999, the United States has been involved in the region via Camp Bondsteel (the largest military base in the Balkans) as well as a Kosovo Force (KFOR). For this reason, a stable and European Kosovo would be very beneficial to the United States. It would eliminate the continued need for a U.S. presence in the region and help realize the goal of a stable Balkans. While the United States has significant interests in keeping Camp Bondsteel in the region, the KFOR troops that are in the North of the country could give up their duties to local police and thereby eliminating the need for a U.S. military presence outside of the base. Another important aspect of U.S. policy that is very relevant to Kosovo is the idea of peace-building. By incentivizing European Union membership, the EU is able to make peace and cooperation an attractive option for Balkan countries. Therefore, the incentives that the EU creates are not possible for the United States to make. For this reason, it would be in the best interest of the U.S. collaborate with the European Union in an attempt to stabilize the region. Essentially, the U.S. has a vested interest in supporting and advocating for the initiatives of the EU in this regard. Lastly, the United States has taken a pledge to support and advocate budding democracies across the world Kosovo and the rest of the Balkans are moving toward this reality. The European Union also requires its member states to be democratic. Ultimately, by supporting the European Union, the United States is able to realize its goals for the Western Balkans while acting as a support mechanism rather than taking the lead.

REFERENCES

Peabody, R L et al (1990) Interviewing Political Elites PS: Political Science and Politics, 23 (3) September 1990: 451-455 "Serbias Platform Will Have No Impact in the Dialogue." Independent News Agency. Web. 10 May 2013.

homas Thomas, Daniel. "Still Punching below Its Weight? Coherence and Effectiveness in European Union Foreign Policy." Journal of Common Market Studies 50.3 (2012): 457-74. Print. Tocci, Nathalie. The EU and Conflict Resolution: Promoting Peace in the Backyard. New York: Routledge, 2007. Print. Trenchov, Daniel. "The Future of the Western Balkans Integration within the EU."Analytical 08 (2012): 4556.

oc

ENDNOTES

Picture 1: The first picture shows a map of the current Western Balkans. The map shows the seven independent states that have resulted from the fragmentation of former Yugoslavia. It also lists the major battles that have occurred in the region over the last two decades. Picture 2: The second picture shows the European Union High Representative Catherine Ashton at a conference between the European Union and Western Balkans countries that took place in Bosnia and Herzegovina.

This Scholar Research Brief was developed as part of the Individual Advanced Research Opportunities (IARO) Program, an IREX program funded by the U.S. Department of State. IARO supports indepth field research by U.S. students, scholars and experts in policyrelevant subject areas related to Eastern Europe and Eurasia, as well as disseminates knowledge about these regions to a wide network of constituents in the United States and abroad. The IARO Program plays a vital role in supporting the emergence of a dedicated and knowledgeable cadre of U.S. scholars and experts who can enrich the US understanding of developments in Eastern Europe and Eurasia.

ABOUT TITLE VIII

The Title VIII Program, administered by the Bureau of Intelligence and Research, U.S. Department of State, provides funding for research and language training to American scholars and students for the study of Eastern Europe and Eurasia (Independent States of the Former Soviet Union). Title VIII maintains U.S. expertise in the regions and brings open source, policy-relevant research to the service of the U.S. Government. Grants under this program are awarded through an open, national competition among applicant organizations. Authority for this Program for Research and Training on Eastern Europe and Eurasia (Independent States of the Former Soviet Union) is contained in the Soviet-Eastern European Research and Training Act of 1983 (22 U.S.C. 4501-4508, as amended).

IREX is an international nonprofit organization providing thought leadership and innovative programs to promote positive lasting change globally. We enable local individuals and institutions to build key elements of a vibrant society: quality education, independent media, and strong communities. To strengthen these sectors, our program activities also include conflict resolution, technology for development, gender, and youth. Founded in 1968, IREX has an annual portfolio of over $70 million and a staff of over 400 professionals worldwide. IREX employs field-tested methods and innovative uses of technologies to develop practical and locally-driven solutions with our partners in more than 100 countries.