A Useful Balkan Flip-Flop

By VITOMIR MILES RAGUZ

The best thing about policy is that it changes. Sometimes overnight. This is probably what the Croats are thinking these days, as they are about to receive EU candidate status at the European Council in June, following the adoption of a positive avis -- or readiness opinion -- by the European Commission on Tuesday.
Only 15 months ago, they were told loudly and clearly that candidate status would be premature. The EU and German ambassadors in Zagreb said that Croatia shouldn't submit a membership application at all. What has changed so quickly that Brussels is now about to open the door to its future 28th member?
Everyone's favorite democrats in the Balkans, Ivica Racan's Socialists, late last year lost power to Ivo Sanader's remnants of the much maligned HDZ party of former President Franjo Tudjman. So this can't be the reason. Perhaps it is the fact that eight Croats have meanwhile turned themselves in voluntarily to the Yugoslav war-crimes tribunal at The Hague. But the EU wouldn't make this important decision on one "soft" issue. Moreover, Zagreb hasn't convinced them that it has done everything to locate the fugitive general Ante Gotovina. It's also impossible to tell a real difference between the previous and present governments. On key questions of judicial reform and bloated government, both the Racan and Sanader governments are wanting.
No, the real change occurred in Brussels. And however fickle the EU might look, the new approach on Croatia benefits both Europe and the Balkans.
The EU realized that its options in the Balkans weren't good. Croatia's neighbors to the south have made precious little progress since the 1995 Dayton peace accord ended the Bosnian war. In fact, Serbia is again the biggest question mark in the region given the resurgence of its nationalist parties. Bosnia is in the hands of a large neo-colonial administration. Macedonia continues in limbo, following an air crash that took the life of its pro-Western president, Boris Trajkovski. Albania remains Europe's poorest country.
With so much uncertainty in the region, Croatia can be used as an example for its neighbors. By recognizing its political and economic stability, coupled with a willingness to meet international obligations, Brussels sends a message to the lagging bunch that progress and cooperation with the West pays off. Hence this week's decision effectively to carve Croatia away from the Balkans, as the EU did with Slovenia in the early 1990s.
But there is probably more design in the EU's move than meets the eye. Zagreb early last year took a calculated gamble by filing a membership application despite vocal opposition. Its foresight then became strengthened by the new thinking about the region, coming mostly from Berlin, and eagerly picked up by the conservative governments in Austria and Ireland, the Christian Democrats in the European Parliament, and the Holy See.
The then-Racan government played this EU card to reverse its slide in popularity, unsuccessfully in the end. But Zagreb also rightly concluded that its application could never be rejected, given the commitment in Brussels to a Europe that is "whole and free."
Indeed, imagine the message Brussels would send to the Balkans if it were to say no to a state that has a stronger economy than some of the newest 10 members. In the worst case scenario, Zagreb thought, Brussels would accept the application, and grant candidate status with conditions.
But the Sanader government would like to avoid conditions, and wants a firm start date for accession negotiations, with a view to join the Union alongside Romania and Bulgaria in 2007. However, conditional status is still most likely. Probably not in general terms like Turkey's, but more specific, possibly making the surrender of Gen. Gotovina an issue.
The precise conditions will depend on whether the EU's policy logic has truly shifted beyond the outdated regional approach once championed by Carl Bildt, the former Swedish prime minister and the first international viceroy in Bosnia. This approach held Croatia and Serbia back from the EU and NATO until Bosnia, theoretically entirely dependent on the good will of its bigger neighbors, recovers fully. It still has some supporters in Britain and Scandinavia.
But Berlin, aware of the meager results on the ground, has promoted a fresher approach, arguing that the future of Bosnia, and other fragile states in the Balkans, depends primarily on inter-ethnic relations in the countries themselves. Three years ago, German Foreign Minister Joschka Fischer called for a Helsinki-like dialogue among the groups in those countries to standardize their rights and obligations.
Whether the German model trumps the U.K.-Scandinavian approach in June isn't clear. The desire to send a strong message favors the Fischer model. But London still may hold out, not least since the EU takes over Bosnia peacekeeping from the U.S. and NATO in full at the end of the year, with U.K. leadership. London might view a strong Croatia as an obstacle, following the logic of Mr. Bildt that it might give Bosnian Croats an added reason to prefer the dominion of Zagreb over Sarajevo.
Few people in the Balkans think like the Foreign Office anymore, and would prefer to have the EU closer to its borders than anything else. They see Croatia as a deserving candidate, one that would cost Brussels little, and yet, give a powerful boost to the progressive forces in their own countries.
Incidentally, if it were to join in 2007, Croatia would contribute net €330 million to the EC budget, according to estimates made this year. This transfer would, of course, be offset by EU structural funds, but probably not by much. If one were to use Slovakia's first year financial net benefit as a proxy, Croatia would receive an overall net of €80 million. Peanuts, even for Zagreb.
As it turns out, the only beneficiary of keeping Croatia on the EU's sidelines may actually be Croatia. As candidate, it would enjoy the benefit of structural funds without obligations to pay into the EU budget, which it must as a member. The losers would be the EU and the Balkans.
Mr. Raguz, the ambassador of Bosnia-Herzegovina to the EU and NATO in 1998-2000, is now a banker in Vienna.
URL for this article:
http://online.wsj.com/article/0,,SB108258641764889839,00.html

Hyperlinks in this Article:
(1) http://online.wsj.com/article/0,,SB108197169437682732,00.html
(2) http://online.wsj.com/article/0,,SB108137348933477120,00.html
Copyright 2004 Dow Jones & Company, Inc. All Rights Reserved
 

Formatted for CROWN by Nenad Bach

Distributed by CroatianWorld.net. This message is intended for Croatian Associations/Institutions and their Friends in Croatia and in the World. The opinions/articles expressed on this list do not reflect personal opinions of the moderator. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient, please delete or destroy all copies of this communication and please, let us know!