Turkish Version
Macedonia starts its long European journey with many disadvantages. The electoral, judicial and police systems require serious reforms. The growth rate is not promising, unemployment high, foreign investment low. The decentralisation process imposed after the six-month conflict in 2001 is not fully implemented. The problems with Greece would give a headache. Yet Macedonians have a great advantage: They are only 2 million people.
“A one-way ticket”
On the 17th of December 2005, the European Union granted Macedonia the candidate status. Thus the country became the second former Yugoslavian Republic, after Croatia, to get a green light to open negotiations with Brussels. Macedonia applied for the full membership on the 22nd of March, 2004. Macedonian Prime Minister Vlado Buckovski hailed the decision as a "one-way ticket" to the EU for his country and stated: "Macedonia finally leaves the Balkan road paved with cobblestones and joins a highway that leads to Europe”. To leave “the Balkan road paved with cobblestones”, though, Macedonia will have to wait for a while since no date has been set for the start of membership talks.
In fact, having granted Macedonia the candidate status, the EU kept up the appearances in last minute.
At the end of the Thessaloniki summit on the 20th of June 2003, the European Council reiterated its determination to fully and effectively support the European perspective of the Western Balkan countries. Those countries are Croatia, Bosnia-Herzegovina, Serbia-Montenegro, Albania and Macedonia. The Western Balkans is
| |
|
 |
|
| Macedonian Prime Minister Vlado Buckovski |
|
geopolitically and geo-economically a highly important region.
However after the rejection of the European Constitution in France and the Netherlands in June 2005, the EU started to question the enlargement. In fact that discussion was a flight from the real problems since few rejected the Constitution for fear of the disadvantages of further enlargement of the Union. However, the enlargement discussion fired with Turkey’s candidacy as scapegoat finally had a negative effect on some European countries. According to Eurobarometer’s research, the support for the membership of the Balkan States is no more than a slim 40 percent.
Thereafter the budget crisis broke out between the United Kingdom and France. The two-day summit in Brussels (15-17 December 2005) witnessed the clash of two proposals. France proposed a new debate as to whether there should be any further EU enlargement at all. As to the UK, it proposed a new budget, which would preclude any serious pre-accession assistance for the Western Balkans for the next 7-year budgetary period. On the 17th of December, though, the EU came to an agreement for the budget 2007-2013, which will not dismay candidates’ expectations.
For above mentioned reasons, one can argue that Europe showed that it did not forget its promises and commitments in last minute. Macedonia signed the Stabilisation and Association Agreement (SAA) in April 2001. The SAA is little more than a trade agreement. However it sent an important political signal as the first step on the road to the EU membership. Moreover, since the six-month civil war between the Macedonian forces and the Albanian rebels in 2001, Macedonia has been doing its best in order to implement the Ohrid Framework Agreement, which was in a way imposed by Europe in order to end the conflict. Under the Ohrid agreement, Albanian fighters laid down their arms in return for greater ethnic recognition within a decentralised State.
If the EU had not granted Macedonia the candidate status, that would have been a very contradictory and negative signal not only for good intentioned Macedonia but for all of the Balkans, which see in the EU their salvation. In this regard, how Prime Minister Buckovski announced the candidacy to his people is highly significant: “Now we know that we have friends in Europe”. A refusal would have been a serious blow for the credibility of the EU as well.
In January, Austrian Chancellor, Wolfgang Schüssel stated that the candidates have to be careful and “not to demand too much of Europe”. Macedonia’s GDP represents 0.04 percent of the EU's GDP. If Macedonia is offered the same level of support that was given to previous candidates, this would involve an increase in annual assistance from 45 million to 54 million Euros. This would change nothing in the EU standards.
Macedonia sets out for Europe. 2012 is seen as the earliest date for its full membership. However, the voyage will not be very easy both for Macedonia, which has to carry out many fundamental reforms and for the EU, which did not completely get rid of the “enlargement nightmare”.
Difficult, but not impossible
During the EU budget discussions, Macedonian social-democrat daily Utrinski Vesnik asked whether Macedonia became “the tiny pretext for the vast bargains in the EU”.
This is true. Macedonia has for sure a long way to go. However the road may not be very rough since the country seems very motivated in order to become a stable post-conflict democracy. But most of all, its population is only half of Ankara’s population, Turkey’s capital city: 2.045.262 (July 2005 est.). It would not much harm the “European stomach”, which complains from digestion problems so often nowadays.
Macedonia’s problems can be analysed in two parts: the internal and external problems.
Macedonia needs serious reforms in electoral, judicial and police systems. In its report on the 12th of January 2006, the International Crisis Group (ICG) pointed to judicial reform as an especially urgent need. The ICG qualified the Macedonian judicial system as “unreformed and dysfunctional”: “A country of two million citizens has a backlog of some 1.2 million cases. The crippled system, which is still subject to excessive executive branch influence and corruption, suits entrenched political interests”. Several constitutional amendments were drafted in order to improve judicial independence. Time is up for their effective implementation. As to the police reform, the ICG noted that “authorities have made notable progress in implementing changes outlined in the Ohrid Agreement”, such as the addition of ethnic Albanian officers and steps taken to enhance border security.
As far as decentralisation is concerned, the reason why the Ohrid Agreement could not be fully implemented is easy to see. French RFI Actualité asks with wit how to conduct a full decentralisation process in a country of 25.713 sq km with only 2 million people. Moreover the decentralisation issue is a delicate one in Macedonia. In November 2004, the opposition
| |
|
| |
 |
| |
European Commission President Romano Prodi (L) hands the EU questionnaire to former Macedonian PM Hari Kostov, 1 October 2004 |
forced a referendum to prevent the decentralisation of power to local authorities, many of them dominated by the Albanian minority. Only 26 percent voted in the referendum. The threshold needed for it to be binding was 50 percent. Yet the referendum, which was largely boycotted by government supporters, showed an overwhelming majority against decentralisation. Although the decentralisation process has being carried out, the brief emergence of a group of armed Albanians on Skopje’s outskirts at that time showed that Macedonia was still an immature and vulnerable democracy. Decentralisation worries not only the Macedonians, but also other minorities such as the Turks, who are anxious to lose the local power that they used to have in some municipalities.
The European Commission’s Ambassador to Macedonia, Ervan Fuere stated that obtaining a date for the EU membership talks depends on the conduct of this year’s elections. In March 2005, the country held local elections in order to prepare the way for the decentralisation of powers. The elections were peaceful although numerous irregularities attracted international criticism. The fairness of the parliamentary elections, which will be held in summer or autumn this year, will be then crucial for the future of Macedonia.
Macedonian economy too requires great reforms. The unemployment rate is as high as 38 percent (2005 est.), and the population below poverty line 30.2 percent (2003 est.). The real GDP estimated to have grown by just 0.5 percent in 2004. Macedonia has lagged in attracting foreign investment. The country has an extensive grey market. More than 20 percent of the GDP falls outside official statistics.
Macedonia is in a dangerous geography; all the more that one of its neighbours is unpredictable Kosovo. On the one hand, an independent Kosovo may provoke the Albania minority of Macedonia, which consists no less than 25.2 percent of the population, to turn to violence in order to obtain their independence and unify with Kosovo. On the other hand, if the independence of Kosovo is delayed or rejected, Macedonia’s Albanians may play the destabilisation card as they once did in 2001.
This was for internal problems. As to the external problem, it is the well-known dispute with Greece.
When Macedonia peacefully obtained its independence from former Yugoslavia in 1991, its recognition was delayed because of Greece, which refused to acknowledge the flag and the name of the new country.
The former flag of Macedonia depicts the Vergina Sun on a red background. However, the Greek government considered the Vergina Sun (the emblem of the dynasty of Philip II, father of Alexander the Great) to be a Greek symbol. The Macedonians claimed that there was no reliable verification on this subject. Yet, as far as national myths are concerned, one people do not believe the truth, but believes what it considers to be the truth. That is why we call them myths.
In August 1988, Greece renamed "Northern Greece" as "Macedonia". On the 27th of June 1992, Greece demanded Macedonia to change its constitutional name, which is Republic of Macedonia. On the 8th of April 1993, the UN admitted Macedonia under the provisional name "the Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia (FYROM)" as Greece demanded.
On 16th of February 1994, Greece imposed economic sanctions on Macedonia and demanded the change of its flag and its name. On 13th of September 1995, under the UN auspices,
| |
|
 |
|
| The former flag of Macedonia |
|
Macedonia changed its flag. The current flag represents a golden sun on a red surface. However the name issue is still unresolved. Since 195, the UN continues to act as mediator between Skopje and Athens.
Greek Prime Minister Kostas Karamanlis threatened in November 2005 that Greece would veto Macedonia's entry into the EU and the NATO if the two countries cannot come to an agreement in the name dispute. Meanwhile, though, Greece suffered a serious blow from the United States, which recognised the constitutional name of Macedonia, probably as a reward for the country, which backed the war in Iraq and also sent troops there.
It is not just a symbolic dispute. Macedonia blames Greece of ethnic cleansing of the Macedonians living on Greek soil during the Greek Civil War in 1946-1949. Thereafter Greece imposed ethnically discriminatory legislation to prevent the return of these exiles. Greece denies these claims for fear that these people request reparations and access to their lost property. It is known that Greece does not recognise the Macedonians living on Greek soil as minority, instead calls them “Greeks, who speak a Slavic language”.
It is noteworthy that for years the EU fails to connect the Macedonia name issue to Greece’s highly controversial minority policy. Despite the European Court of Human Rights’ decisions, Greece did not undertake any step in order to improve minority rights. The responsible must be the EU and its ambiguous definition of minority. The Maastricht Agreement urges the member States to “respect cultural diversities” on their soil. The meaning of “cultural diversities” is vague. The Copenhagen Agreement, however, stipulates the “respect of minority rights”. The main problem is the EU policy of “preferential avoidance” of member States regarding civil and human rights abuses. Thus the EU seems to apply the Maastricht Agreement for member States while it applies the Copenhagen Agreement for candidates. Otherwise it is hard to explain the tolerance of the EU towards Greece while it often pressures Turkey for minority rights.
The EU still uses the comprise name, FYROM. Macedonia and Greece have extensive trade and investment ties. Probably for these reasons Greece did not reject Macedonia’s candidacy for the EU. However at the time of full membership, Greece would not be that understanding. Neither would the EU. The EU overlooked Macedonia’s many shortcomings when it decided on candidate status, but it will not overlook them when deciding on the question of membership. However none of these above mentioned problems are impossible to resolve for Macedonia at least until 2014 when the EU wants to complete its enlargement into the Balkans at the latest.
EU Balkans policy:
Croatia and Serbia on Their Way to the EU, as Turkey Left Behind? (24.10.05)
Croatia Still Aspires to Join the EU (25.09.05)
Bulgaria: Secret Bargains to Overcome Government Crisis (11.08.05)
Why the EU Lets Rumania and Bulgaria In? (05.08.05)
Anti-Turkish “Croatia Front” Is Growing (19.07.05)
Hungary and Austria Urge: No Turkey in EU Without Croatia (13.07.05)
Macedonia:
Political Solution and Terrorism in Macedonia (11.10.05)
Main Page | News Page | 007 News | Print
|
