aim/sko/trae/rm*** Benelux in the Balkans - Macedonia, Montenegro and Kosovo?
AIM Skopje, 6 July, 1999
Can two Balkan countries, Macedonia and Montenegro, and for the time being the province of Kosovo be the Benelux in the Balkans? This idea was presented at the latest seminar of Ros-Rot held in Ohrid by Ismet Ramadani, member of the opposition Party of Democratic Prosperity which belongs on ethnic Albanian political scene of Macedonia. Organizers of this prestigious seminar in which parliamentarians from more than 20 countries took part were the North-Atlantic Assembly and Macedonian parliament. It is interesting that this benign idea caused numerous discussions both at the sessions of the seminar and in the public of Macedonia. But such reactions perhaps should not surprise because the Balkans are passing through a very sensitive period when all these countries are deeply dug in their respective trenches fearing rightfully for their stability and their future. Especally when one knows that on the map of the Balkans borders are still drawn in dashed line, that the people still fear that someone might start re-drawing or scribbling on the maps all over again and that any joining of a group of countries, especially for Macedonia is equal to going back to the offset of Macedonian history which is full of divisions, changing boarders and conquerers.
Nevertheless, the question is why this idea, benign from the present angle, caused so much controversy? The answer to this question is simple. Even persistent search for data on Benelux leads to a single conclusion that it is a region which consists of Belgium, the Netherlands and Luxembourg. Although they have a joint name made up of the initial letters of their three names, these three countries have absolutely no special links in either political, ethnic or nationally-constructive sphere. On Internet or in analyses of experts on international relations it was impossible to establish that there have ever been negotiations among them about any kind of an alliance, a loose union or any connections on the political or the social level. In some leaflets about it it is stated that Benelux is exactly what it stands for - "the name of the region where Belgium, the Netherlands and Luxembourg are". This means - something like the Balkans.But this does not mean that these countries do not have special connections on the economic level, in presenting the region on the tourist market, in industrial or cultural cooperation. And this works. For Macedonian circumstances it is strange that two ministers of the Macedonian government who commented on this idea and who participated at the seminar reacted in an unexpected way - they did not reject the idea at the very start. On the contrary, their statements go along the line of the idea about "Benelux in the Balkans". Minister of trade, Nikola Gruevski declared that although he did not know exactly what was meant when this idea was mentioned, he nevertheless believed that it should be carefully elaborated and that economic experts should sit down and analyse what it leads to. Minister of finance Boris Stojmenov was even more tactful. He believes, as he said, "that every idea which leads to peace, stability and progress is good. We will treat this idea in this way and act accordingly if it will be well elaborated" said Stojmenov. "There are many ideas, but for the time being", he said, "I believe that the thesis on Benelux in the Balkans is more a wish than a real possibility. Contrary to these two, Nikola Kljusev, minister of defence of Macedonia, who is like Gruevski and Stojmenov, a member of VMRO-DPMNE, received the idea with hostility. He said that he could not understand how could anyone even think of anything like that, adding that this idea was dubious. Deputy chairman of Montenegrin parliament Predrag Popovic went along these lines and said that Montenegro was not interested in Benelux. "We are not interested in new ideas about formation of greater states such as the one that can be heard that all the Albanians wished to live in a single state. These ideas, however, cannot affect the Pact on Stability. We in fact do not agree with the idea of an independent state for Kosovo", said Popovic.
It seems that the proposer of the idea Ismet Ramadani tried to put an end to further debates just as participants of the seminar started buzzing about this topic in coffee-breaks of the seminar and just as the journalists concluded that the idea was one in the series of Albanian foul dealings. In his answer to Popovic Ramadani said his idea might be idealistic at this moment, but that it was a positive provocation and that due to the fact that Benelux exists, neither Belgium, nor the Netherlands, nor Luxembourg have lost any of their statehood or identity. In his further elaboration, Ramadani said that if there was any chance for new relations between Montenegro and Serbia (this means dissolution of FRY and the end of disintegration of former SFRY) the question that springs up is what should be done with Kosovo. In other words, Kosovo can be nothing else but an independent state, Ramadani believes.
The question on future status of Kosovo ranked second according to the number of discussions and interest it caused apart from the topic of the seminar - Regional Security of South-Eastern Europe. USA ambassador in Macedonia and direct participant in resolution of the crisis in Kosovo, mediator in Rambouillet, Christopher Hill, said that he was discouraged by the fact that the seminar had begun with debates about the future status of Kosovo. "What is needed the most now is establishment of democratic institutions. I do not say reconstruction because there have been no democratic institutions in FRY so far, but I say development from scratch. Nostalgy for 1974 constitution pursuant which the Albanians had many more rights is unnecessary. I believe that the norms of human rights of that constitution have been exceeded by the very fact that the Declaration from Helsinki was adopted in 1975", said Hill. Although he underlined that he did not wish to discuss the future status of Kosovo, he said that the international community has not changed its stand about where Kosovo belongs. Nevertheless, Hill said that the status of Kosovo depends on whether democracy will first enter Kosovo or Serbia.
To the question of NATO parliamentarians, Albanian minister of defence Ilir Boska, said on this topic that the Albanian government respects democratic rules and the will of the people. "In this case we support the citizens of Kosovo in resolving their problems. We will consent to their choice. The same goes for Montenegro", said Boska. He also gave an answer to the question about the influence of the Albanian government on the Kosovo Liberation Army (UCK). "Our influence on Kosovo is a reality, but it is limited and it is not big", he said.
Deputy chairman of the parliament of Montenegro Popovic expressed a negative attitude to the independence of Kosovo. He said that not a single "greater" state idea should survive in the Balkans, and while speaking of the future of Montenegro he explained that there were only two directions - either a loose federation with democratic Serbia without Milosevic or - secession of this state. Macedonian defence minister Nikola Kljusev declared himself against independence of Kosovo because, as he said, this province belonged to the legal system of FRY. Afrim Etemi, representative of Kosovo as he was announced by the organizer, who is actually from the Centre for Reconstruction of Kosovo, said as he had been expected to that he saw Kosovo as a developed democratic and independent country.
At this seminar, not only politicians from the region but also foreign connoisseurs of the circumstances also stated opinions about the future status of Kosovo. Noel Malcolm, professor of history at Cambridge, political commentator of the Daily Telegraph and the author of the book titled "Kosovo - A Short History" advocated independence of this Yugoslav province. He said that the idea on division of Kosovo between Serbia and the Kosovars was a dangerous thesis and that dissolution of Yugoslavia was not secessionism but dismemberment into components. "It is necessary to go back and redefine the conclusions of Badinter's commission by conclusing that Yugoslavia has fallen apart into eight, not six units. It is difficult to imagine", Malcolm believes, "that the Kosovars will wish to stay in the country which killed and persecuted them. According to the way things are developing, in the forthcoming period the Kosovars will be treated as citizens of Yugoslavia. It is difficult to view how Kosovo will be integrated into FRY. Although it did not have the status of a republic, Kosovo had its own government, parliament, etc.", Malcolm said. To the remarks that this would be a precedent in changing the state borders if Kosovo became an independent state, Malcolm replied that a precedent has already been made when borders of SFRY were changed.
About the question opened by representatives of Macedonia of making a precedent and introducing a practice in this way, which could lead to changing borders of Macedonia, ambassador Christopher Hill said that the possibility of federalization of Macedonia must be prevented and that possible independence of Kosovo did not mean that this might become a recipe for resolving problems in the Balkans. He added that the intention of the international community was to make borders invisible and that the remedy of the problem was democratization, economic prosperity and making countries of the Balkans join the European Union. The pact of stability was a good step and move of the European Union, Hill assessed.
AIM Skopje
#VALENTIN NESOVSKI
senden