Border disputes still simmer in parts of Europe

Deutsche Welle, 11 June 2011  

Yugoslavia was shattered by the
conflicts of the 1990s

The break up of Yugoslavia and the collapse of the Soviet Union led to the creation of many new countries. However the redrawing of Europe's map that occured following those events may not yet be complete.

Balkanization is a term that has come to symbolize the break up of large states into numerous smaller national states, which often regard each other as enemies.

This happened a number of times over the past couple of centuries, but for several decades following World War II, there were no major border disputes.

It wasn't until the breakup of the former Yugoslavia in the conflicts of 1991-95 that its republics became new states, with new borders. This was caused by two contradictory principles of international law, according to Solveig Richter of the Berlin-based German Institute for International and Security Affairs.

"On the one hand there is territorial integrity, on the other, the right of a people to self-determination," Richter said. "In Southeast Europe in particular there are a great number of nations or ethnic groups in close proximity, each of which claims the right to their own state."

The former Serbian province of Kosovo declared independence just three years ago. There is still a separatist movement among the large ethnic Albanian minority in Macedonia. In Bosnia, border issues are still hotly debated. 

In February, Kosovans celebrated
three years of independence

But this phenomenon is not unique to Southeast Europe - in the regions that belonged to the former Soviet Union there are also movements aimed at creating ethnically homogenous states. In the Caucasus this has repeatedly led to conflict. Nagorno-Karabakh, Abkhazia and South Ossetia are but a few examples.

The Kosovo factor

However, according to Richter, fears expressed by opponents of Kosovo's independence - that this would set a dangerous precedent for other states - have turned out to be unfounded.

"Local developments and other geopolitical and strategic considerations play a much bigger role than Kosovo in the South Caucasus region," he said.

At the same time, Richter fears this could change if Kosovo itself is split up.

"This could set off very strong ethno-nationalist dynamics, which could spark local conflicts that lead to violence. It could set off a wave of violence that may be impossible to calculate or assess," Richter said.

The idea of splitting up Kosovo seems to be on the mind of Serbian President Boris Tadic. Serbia has not recognized the Kosovo's unilateral declaration of independence. About 90 percent of its inhabitants are Albanians, but the biggest minority are Serbs in the north of the country, close to the border with Serbia. 

Tadic and his government have not
recognized Kosovo's independence

Belgrade is not alone in its stance. Russia and China - both veto-wielding members of the UN Security Council - as well as EU member states refuse to recognize Kosovo's independence.

In a recent interview with the Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung newspaper, Tadic expressed the idea of "an agreement in which all sides would get something, creating a sustainable solution, as well as peace and stability."

This, he said, would be "extremely helpful to all sides." In this connection, he also spoke of a Greater Albania and a Greater Serbia. Serbian diplomatic sources said that behind the scenes there has been talk for some time of splitting up Kosovo, with the northern portion joining Serbia and the rest going to Albania.

But Albanian Foreign Minister Edmond Haxhinasto has rejected the idea out of hand.

"Nobody, no country, no state, including the newly independent state of Kosovo should be treated as a prize that can be divided up to satisfy the wishes of whomever," Haxhinasto said.

"Kosovo is not a territory. Kosovo is a society and this society must be respected and its citizens must be respected," he added.

"A society must not be treated in terms of an obsession with territory. This is completely wrong, completely anti-European, and it's contrary to the future of the countries of the region."

Lack of clarity from Europe

European policy on this issue isn't clear. There is deep disagreement about Kosovo - five of the EU's 27 states haven't recognized it as an independent state. This has negative consequences for all involved as well as other countries in the region.

"This means that EU members aren't agreed on whether they should offer the states of the western Balkans prospect of joining the bloc in the near future. The EU is currently undermining and eroding its very strong pacifying role," Richter said.

According to Franz-Lothar Altman of the Munich-based Southeast Europe Association, this comes at a time when a clear and united EU policy could play a crucial role in pointing the way to a future without wars or ethnic conflicts for both the Caucasus and Southeast Europe.

"When you see the way the European Union has developed, the way the borders have lost their meaning in daily life, that should lead one to say: 'let's see the opportunity we have before us,'" he said. "If we only tone down this disastrous nationalist way of thinking."

Author: Zoran Arbutina / pfd

Editor: Kyle James