BALKAN
REGIONAL PROFILE:
THE SECURITY
SITUATION AND THE REGION-BUILDING EVOLUTION OF SOUTH-EASTERN EUROPE
(A Background and February 2003 Issue in Brief)
Research
Study 46, 2002
Hard copy:
ISSN 1311 - 3240
AN I
S N-SPONSORED MONTHLY ELECTRONIC PERIODICAL
I.
INTRODUCTION
Developments
related to the crisis in Iraq had a dramatic effect on the Balkans during
February. A series of contradicting pressures and perceived responsibilities
shook not only the region’s stability, but also the fundamental orientation
of its states and their political activities, all of which are vital for
the secure future of Southeast Europe.
The first group of pressures has arisen as a result of the region’s efforts
to combat terrorism. Regional leaders are eager to deny Baghdad the ability
to transfer weapons of mass causalities (WMC) to terrorist organizations
but they are also keen to avoid a war in Iraq.
The problem of tackling both
terrorism and war has affected every Balkan state and has involved them
in the debate on both sides of the Atlantic and at the United Nations.
The majority of Balkan countries are NATO and EU candidates. They have,
for various reasons, shaped their threat perception of terrorism in line
with the US approach rather than that adopted by other European states
including the major EU powers. There are a number of reasons for this.
Balkan leaders are wary of the region turning into the “black hole” of
Europe. Terrorist activities from the past decade are still fresh in the
memory of the people. The Balkan countries’ experience of totalitarian
and authoritarian rule during the 20th century also explains their instinctive
resentment of dictators.
However, Balkan countries
are also under pressure to avoid war as the ultimate instrument of reaching
political goals. Following the upheaval of the 1990s, public opinion in
the region is weary of war and the further loss of human life.
NATO and EU candidates in
the Balkans are now faced with a number of hard decisions. These have
been driven by pressure from other governments as well as the responsibility
of preventing weapons of mass causalities and destruction from falling
into the hands of terrorist organizations. The decision to support military
action has a third imperative: the belief that containing the regime of
Saddam Hussein to preserve stability in the Middle East is not seen a
viable option. Iraq’s record of UN violations, coupled with the demagogy
and lies of its leaders, has left the UN looking weak and inefficient.
A second group of contradicting
pressures has arisen from the reaction of other countries towards the
Balkans’ handling of the crisis in Iraq and the persisting needs of the
region to preserve the benign engagement of all world powers in stabilization
efforts and regional development. As developments in February showed,
Kosovo, southern Serbia and the Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia
(FYROM) are in danger of descending into violence once again. Preventing
these dangers, completing the process of stabilization, and integrating
the region into the EU are essential to ensuring the security and progress
of Europe. The problems and prospects of the Balkan region must not be
forgotten or opportunistically manipulated because of the crisis in Iraq.
EU governments and NATO members are factoring their assessment of the
Balkans into their policies towards terrorism and Iraq.
A third group of contradicting
influences on the Balkan countries stems from the contending visions of
a world order that would, to varying degrees, predominantly serve the
interests of the legal nuclear powers and UN Security Council members.
A perfect opportunity has been missed to outline a progressive vision
of Europe that would attract the interests of the continent’s smaller
countries. France is particularly guilty of this. Jacques Chirac, France’s
president, has been seen to behave in a colonial rather a diplomatic manner
by undermining the dignity and interests of all EU and NATO candidate
countries from Southeast Europe. Paris clearly has a double standard on
the value of national sovereignty: while France has exercised its right
to criticize the foreign policies of other countries, it has sought to
deny this right to EU candidate countries.
Quick and substantive political
measures are now needed to repair relations between the Balkan region,
France and the EU in general. In light of the French president’s statements,
chiefly aimed at Romania and Bulgaria, the region is beginning to doubt
the EU’s claim that it is shaping itself as a global actor. By opportunistically
changing its role from a global actor to a regional one to tackle the
Iraq crisis, the Union is doomed to ineffectiveness as a single political
entity in the fields of international relations and security. Moreover,
it misleads candidate countries as to their own future role in the EU.
Other developments in the
region during February included the formal end of Yugoslavia and its replacement
with the Union of Serbia and Montenegro. The two countries will have the
freedom to separate legally into sovereign countries in three years time.
Additionally, February saw an increase of US and Russian activity in the
Balkans.
II.
SECURITY THREATS, CONFLICTS AND POST-CONFLICT DEVELOPMENTS IN THE BALKANS
1.
Security Threats: Terrorism and the Threat of Iraq's Possession of
Weapons of Mass Destruction and Casualties
a)
Turkey. The Turkish government's problems mounted during February
as it struggled to balance the pressures brought about by a possible war
in Iraq. US military pressure on Iraq has placed Ankara in a position
of confrontation with its most important strategic ally. The US, meanwhile,
continued its military build-up with a view to forcing the Iraqi regime
into disarming itself of weapons of mass destruction (WMD).
While negotiating its support
for a northern front against Baghdad, Ankara has also been preparing for
the harsh geopolitical, economic, and ethnic problems that may arise in
a post-Saddam world. The future of the Iraqi Kurds remains a major Turkish
preoccupation. Turkey's leading government institutions have been dragging
out discussions with the US in order to buy time to prepare for any post-war
problems and, of course, to win further concessions from the Bush administration,
including greater financial support.
Turkish leaders are wary of
the lack of agreement at the UN Security Council and of domestic public
opinion predominantly opposed to a war in Iraq. Ankara has also been alarmed
by the prolonged debate within NATO of providing military support to Turkey
in the event of war. France, Germany, and Belgium argued that a decision
by NATO to give military assistance to Turkey would signal that war had
already been decided upon by the alliance when, in fact, they still believed
that a diplomatic solution to the crisis could be found. Turkey, a loyal
member of the alliance, interpreted this as a violation of Alliance obligations.
On February 25, the Turkish
government presented a motion to the country's parliament to allow 62,000
US troops to be deployed on Turkish soil for a period of six months in
the event of a possible war in Iraq. The US will need ports and air bases
and the mandate will be renewable after the term expires. The US will
also be allowed to send a maximum of 255 warplanes and 65 helicopters
to Turkey. The deployment of these armed forces is seen as crucial for
a "northern front" against Iraq. The motion did not contain
details of the agreement between Washington and Ankara for economic aid.
b) NATO - Turkey. After
a marathon session in Brussels on February 16, NATO agreed to begin military
planning for the defense of Turkey in the event of a war in Iraq. Deadlock
on this issue lasted one month. The impasse was broken after the issue
was taken to the NATO Defense Planning Committee of which France is not
a member. The decision allows NATO to begin moving the alliance's AWACS
radar surveillance planes, Patriot missiles, and chemical and biological
defense units to Turkey. They will be used if Turkey is attacked by Iraq.
The NATO Defense Planning Committee said this decision "relates only
to the defense of Turkey and is without prejudice to any other military
operations by NATO, and later decisions by NATO or the UN Security Council."
Some NATO countries, such as the Netherlands, were already moving aid
to Turkey even before a NATO decision had been made. Four of the country's
Patriot anti-missile batteries, manned by approximately 400 Dutch soldiers,
had been shipped to Turkey on a bilateral basis and would be operational
by early March.
c) The Vilnius Group Countries'
Position. The Vilnius Group includes ten NATO candidate countries,
six of them from Southeast Europe: Albania, Bulgaria, Croatia, FYROM,
Romania and Slovenia. The group issued a statement in New York on February
5 in response to a presentation by the US Secretary of State to the UN
Security Council concerning Iraq's efforts to deceive weapons inspectors
and the country's links to terrorism. The statement said: "Our countries
understand the dangers posed by tyranny and the special responsibility
of democracies to defend our shared values. The transatlantic community,
of which we are a part, must stand together to face the threat posed by
the nexus of terrorism and dictators with weapons of mass destruction.
We have actively supported
international efforts to achieve a peaceful disarmament of Iraq. However,
it has now become clear that Iraq is in material breach of UN Security
Council Resolutions, including UN Resolution 1441, passed unanimously
on November 8, 2002. As our governments said on the occasion of the NATO
Summit in Prague: 'We support the goal of the international community
for full disarmament of Iraq as stipulated in the UN Security Council
Resolution 1441. In the event of non-compliance with the terms of this
resolution, we are prepared to contribute to an international coalition
to enforce its provisions and the disarmament of Iraq.' The clear and
present danger posed by Saddam Hussein's regime requires a united response
from the community of democracies. We call upon the UN Security Council
to take the necessary and appropriate action in response to Iraq's continuing
threat to international peace and security".
On 11 February US Senators
John McCain (R), Joe Lieberman (D), Lindsey Graham (R) and Evan Bayh (D)
introduced a "Sense of the Congress" resolution praising 18
European allies, including the Vilnius Group countries for their support
to enforce UN Security Council Resolution 1441. "France and Germany
do not speak for Europe," said the resolution, which also added that
most European governments understand that if the Security Council fails
to enforce the demands made on Iraq, the Council risks impotence and irrelevance.
"In short," the resolution read, "most European governments
behave like allies that are willing to meet their responsibilities to
uphold international peace and security in defense of our common values.
We thank this European majority for standing with us."
d) EU and EU Candidate States.
Thirteen candidate countries agreed on February 18 to the common EU position
adopted on Iraq during the emergency summit of February 17 in Brussels.
The candidate countries were not allowed to join the summit after France,
Germany and Belgium refused to agree to the Greek presidency's invitation.
However, they were briefed after its completion. Most candidate countries
stated that reaching an agreement was a good sign of the political unity
of Europe. "The input of the 13 has been, and will be, an invaluable
contribution to our common will to resolve the Iraqi crisis," read
the common EU declaration on the meeting. It added that the common EU
position on Iraq remained "full and effective disarmament" and
that "force should only be used as a last resort… We want to achieve
this peacefully." As a member of the UN Security Council, Bulgaria
added that Resolution 1441 must be respected and a consensus found. Although
Bulgaria favors a peaceful solution to the Iraq crisis, Prime Minister
Simeon Saxkoburggotsky said he would not exclude any options.
The gathering of candidate
countries in Brussels followed the tensions created by French President
Jacques Chirac's criticism of the pro-American Vilnius Ten letter, signed
largely by EU candidate countries. Romania issued one of the strongest
responses to the French president's criticisms. Romanian Prime Minister
Adrian Nastase regretted that candidate countries had not been more involved
in European security and defense debates as a means of avoiding such tensions.
In his statement of February 17, President Chirac singled out Romania
and Bulgaria for criticism, arguing that their signing of the Vilnius
Ten letter jeopardized their chances of joining the EU. The Bulgarian
Prime Minister refused to comment on the issue, saying only that his country's
relations with France and Germany have been excellent for many years.
Other candidate countries, including Slovenia, said they regretted President
Chirac's comments.
e) Bulgaria. The Bulgarian
Foreign Ministry announced on February 3 that the country's policy towards
Iraq was closer to that of the US and Great Britain rather than that of
France and Germany. Bulgaria was chosen as a non-permanent member of the
UN Security Council on January 1, 2002 and will hold its seat until December
31, 2003. Bulgarian diplomats and foreign affairs experts have argued
that the over-precautions, conditional stance taken by a large number
of countries did not improve the chances of finding a peaceful solution
to the Iraq crisis.
During preliminary talks with
representatives of the Bush administration over support for a possible
war in Iraq, Bulgaria was assured that it would be allowed to participate
in the process of post-war reconstruction and would be repaid the money
owed to it by Iraq. Baghdad owes Bulgaria some US$1.7 billion ( 1.58
billion) in debts dating back to the Communist era when Bulgaria actively
participated in large infrastructure projects and delivered arms to Iraq.
According to Foreign Minister
Solomon Passy, Bulgaria has endorsed a peaceful solution to the crisis
in the Gulf region. But he added that if diplomatic efforts failed to
persuade Baghdad to disarm, military pressure should be exerted on Saddam
Hussein.
On February 4, the US Government requested over-flight rights from the
Bulgarian government as well as transit and temporary stay rights for
US and other coalition air force units on Bulgarian soil. The US government
also asked for a Bulgarian contingent to be stationed outside of Iraq
in the event of war. On February 6 and 7 respectively, the Bulgarian government
and parliament agreed to open the country's airspace to coalition air
forces for a period of six months and to offer land and logistical support
for transiting US and other coalition forces. Bulgaria will also send
two companies trained in nuclear, chemical and biological defense to Turkey's
border with Iraq. Up to 18 US planes will be based at the Sarafovo airbase
near the Black Sea city of Burgas. The first US planes and troops arrived
in Sarafovo on February 24 to prepare for expected air-to-air refueling
missions.
f) Romania. According
to Rompress sources, a team of 14 Romanian specialists in nuclear, biological,
and chemical (NBC) decontamination will be sent to Iraq to conduct investigation
and decontamination missions. Colonel Nicolae Popescu, commander of the
Application School for Nuclear, Biological and Chemical Defense based
at Campulung Muscel, said the 14 officers are highly trained and will
be equipped with four armored personnel carriers for investigation missions.
The Romanian unit's tasks will include the investigation of sites that
pose contamination risks and marking contamination areas.
g) Albania. FYROM.
Albania and FYROM, together with Latvia and Uzbekistan, urged the UN Security
Council on February 19 to consider stronger measures to ensure Iraqi compliance
with its disarmament obligations. Their intervention supported the US
position that Iraq must now face serious consequences for defying the
UN Security Council. The statement came just days after French President
Jacques Chirac warned Central and Eastern European states that their support
of US policy on Iraq could be detrimental to their hopes of joining the
EU and NATO. Albania's ambassador to the UN, Agim Nesho, urged the international
community to be bolder, arguing that greater resolve in the 1990s could
have avoided bloodshed in Bosnia and Kosovo. Another Vilnius Ten member,
FYROM, also urged tougher action from the Security Council.
h) Croatia. Croatia
agreed on February 26 to open its airspace and airports in the event of
US military action in Iraq, but only to civilian transport aircraft. The
government's decision does not require parliamentary approval. If war
breaks out, the Croatian government expects to receive new demands from
the US.
2.
ThePost-Conflict Issues in FYROM, Southern Serbia, Kosovo, and Bosnia-Herzegovina
a)
FYROM. (1) A powerful explosion destroyed part of the local courthouse
in the town of Struga on February 14. The illegal Albanian National Liberation
Army (NLA) threatens to launch a spring offensive in an effort to move
forward the "solution of the Albanian national question". CIA
assessments warn of a worsening of the situation in the Balkans, mainly
in Macedonia, southern Serbia and Kosovo. NATO sources, however, have
denied that the NLA is preparing for a spring offensive.
The Albanian Prime Minister
Fatos Nano met with Albanian political leaders from Macedonia, Ali Ahmeti
and Arben Xhaferi in the southern Albanian town of Pogradets on February
9. The three men agreed that stability in the broader region was in the
interest of all countries. (2) While visiting Skopje at the end of January,
the UN Secretary General's special envoy for human rights, Hina Jilani,
warned of serious violations of human rights by the Albanian police as
well as efforts to stifle the free media. (3) Carla Del Ponte, chief prosecutor
for The Hague-based international war crimes tribunal, met with Prosecutor-General
Aleksandar Prcevski and government members in Skopje on 19 February. Del
Ponte demanded that the government adopt a law on cooperation with the
tribunal. Prcevski agreed that such a law would help the national judiciary
act without encountering problems with the tribunal, as has hitherto been
the case. (4) The EU is on course to launch its first military operation
on March 15 by taking over NATO's slimmed-down peacekeeping mission in
FYROM. The operation, which includes the deployment of 350 personnel,
is seen by EU officials as a milestone in developing the European Security
and Defense Policy at a time of deep divisions over Iraq.
b) Southern Serbia.
Serbian security forces arrested 12 Albanians in the villages of Veliki
Trnovac, Konchul and Lucane in southern Serbia on February 8, including
the former leader of the disbanded Army for the Liberation of Presevo,
Buianovac and Medvedza, Ionuz Musliu. The arrests were made after several
incidents in the region, including the killing of a security serviceman,
Selver Fazliu, a few days earlier.
c) Kosovo. (1) President
George Bush informed Congressional leaders in Washington on January 31
that US military personnel serving as a contribution to the NATO-led KFOR
operation in Kosovo will be gradually reduced in size as public security
conditions improve and Kosovars assume increasing responsibility for their
own self-government. (2) Kosovo's first war crimes trial against four
former ethnic-Albanian guerrillas began under heavy security on February
17. It is one of the most sensitive court cases to be heard in the UN-governed
province. An international prosecutor has charged the well-known ex-commander
Rustem "Remi" Mustafa and others with torturing fellow ethnic
Albanians suspected of collaborating with Serb officials in the 1998-99
conflict. Three men are also accused of murdering civilians. (3) On February
17 KFOR apprehended Haradin Bala, Isak Musliu and Agim Murtezi, indicted
on January 27 by the International Criminal Tribunal for Former Yugoslavia
(ICTY) in The Hague. They were transferred to ICTY custody on February
18. A fourth indictee, Fatmir Limaj, was taken into custody on February
18 by authorities in Slovenia. All four indictees were members of the
Kosovo Liberation Army and are charged with crimes against humanity and
violations of the laws or customs of war for allegedly imprisoning, torturing
and murdering civilians in a prison camp in Kosovo in 1998.
d) Bosnia and Herzegovina.
On February 5 the Overseas Private Investment Corporation announced it
is providing a US$2.5 million loan to a Bosnian-based corporation owned
by a US citizen to build between 700 and 800 apartments in Mostar. Sixty
per cent of the city's housing stock was damaged or destroyed during the
civil war of the 1990s.
III.
THE NATIONAL PERSPECTIVES OF THE BALKAN COUNTRIES: SPECIFIC ISSUES
1.
Serbia and Montenegro
(1) The state of Yugoslavia formally ceased to exist on February 4.
It was replaced with the Union of Serbia and Montenegro. To achieve this
end, the Yugoslav parliament adopted a Constitutional Charter and an Implementation
Law. The new 126-seat joint legislature of Serbia and Montenegro is expected
to begin its work by early March. (2) The Balkan republic of Montenegro
has again failed to elect a president in elections held on February 9.
Less than the required 50 per cent of voters turned up to cast their ballot.
As in the previous election, former Prime Minister Filip Vujanovic won
the majority of votes. (3) Serbian ultra-nationalist Vojislav Seselj was
indicted by the ICTY at The Hague on February 14. Seselj, the leader of
the Radical Party and a former presidential contender, was a persistent
ideologue of the policy of ethnic cleansing practiced by Serbia. He surrendered
to the Tribunal on February 24. He is expected to face eight charges of
crimes against humanity and six charges for violations of the laws or
customs of war.
2.
Bulgaria
The Director of the National Intelligence Service (NIS), Dimo Gyaurov,
has been dismissed from his office by the government and president. Colonel
Kircho Kirov was appointed as interim Director of the NIS. His appointment
came after consultation with Bulgaria's partners to make sure his appointment
would be welcomed by allied intelligence services.
IV.
BILATERAL AND MULTILATERAL RELATIONS IN THE BALKANS. THE STATE OF THE
REGIONAL INITIATIVES
1.
Bilateral Relations
a)
Romania - Albania. At a meeting in Bucharest on January 29, the head
of the Romanian air force, Constantine Georghe, met with Albanian Defense
Minister Pandeli Majko. The two agreed that Romanian experts would support
the modernization of the Albanian air force, including Albania's Russian-made
MIG aircraft and its air defense systems. Romanian experts will visit
Albania to assess the modernization process in the near future. Majko
also met with Romanian President Ion Iliescu to discuss possibilities
for further bilateral cooperation. Romania has agreed to back Albania's
plans to join NATO.
b) Greece -Turkey.
Greece invited Turkey for talks on the issue of Cyprus on February12.
The election of Tassos Papadopoulos as president of Cyprus on February
16 is seen as a protest vote against the peace plan proposed by the UN.
Papadopoulos, leader of the conservative DIKO party, won 51.3 per cent
of the vote. The biggest problem facing the reunification of the island,
in light of its integration into the EU, stems largely from the current
focus on Iraq and European and Euro-Atlantic disunity on this issue.
c) FYROM - Serbia and Montenegro.
The Foreign Minister of the Union of Serbia and Montenegro, Goran Svilanovic,
visited Skopje on February 27 and met with Macedonian leaders. They discussed
the security situation in the region and bilateral ties.
2. Stability
Pact
(1) On February 17 the President of the European Commission, Romano
Prodi, called for more flexible rules governing the Stability Pact amid
warnings that a war in Iraq could throw the region's economy further off
course. (2) On February 24 the Vice-President of the Bundesbank, Jurgen
Stark, criticized the German, French, Italian, and British positions on
the Stability Pact following their failure to consolidate their part of
the Pact's budget.
V.
THE ECONOMIC SITUATION OF THE BALKAN COUNTRIES AND THE REGION
IMF
- Croatia. The IMF approved Croatia's request for a US$146 million
precautionary credit on February 3. The credit is intended to support
the country's economic and financial development program and will remain
in place until April 2004. According to the IMF, there are no immediate
plans to draw on the funds.
VI.
THE PROCESS OF DIFFERENTIATED INTEGRATION OF SOUTHEASTERN EUROPE IN EU
AND IN NATO
1.
EU Summit on Iraq - EU Candidate Countries
The EU debriefed
candidate countries following its Iraq summit on February 18. The candidate
countries were not invited to the deliberations for fear that they may
voice views contrary to those held by other EU states. Despite French
President Jacques Chirac's earlier comments, it is impossible to argue
that candidate countries violated the EU's common strategy towards Iraq
as such a strategy does not exist. Public sentiment in the candidate countries
has cast Chirac in the role of a bully, criticizing East Europeans for
having a sovereign opinion of their own and allying with the US. He warned
countries such as Bulgaria and Romania that their efforts to join the
EU had been jeopardized by their "pro-American" behavior. The
candidate countries have responded to these warnings by arguing that France's
double standard on national sovereignty was unacceptable. Bucharest and
Sofia do not need to be reminded by President Chirac that they are far
short of fulfilling the EU's membership criteria but should instead be
applauded for their efforts to date. Candidate countries have also argued
that they are just as informed about events in Iraq as other, more powerful
European countries and assessed these events in light of their own security
interests. Moreover, the drafting of a common EU foreign and security
policy had been greatly undermined by France's attitude.
2.
EU - Croatia
Croatia officially presented its candidature to join the EU on February
24. The Croatian government's target date of 2007 is shared by Bulgaria
and Romania.
3. EU
- FYROM
The Foreign Minister of FYROM, Ilinka Mitreva, said in Brussels that her
country would shortly present its candidature for EU membership. Skopje
is faced with the major problem of restoring stability and freeing itself
from all sources of outside dependency before beginning the EU's accession
process.
4. NATO
- Bulgaria
(1) A Bulgarian delegation visited NATO's headquarters in Brussels on
February 10 for the second round of accession negotiations. The country's
budget and its judicial and security systems were all discussed. (2) NATO's
Secretary General, Lord George Robertson, visited Sofia on February 17
and delivered a speech to the Bulgarian parliament. He met with the country's
president, the prime minister and foreign minister and encouraged its
efforts to prepare for full NATO membership.
5. NATO
- Croatia
A NATO team visited Zagreb on February 4 for talks on the Annual Program
for Partnership for Peace activities in 2003.
VII.
THE INFLUENCE OF OTHER EXTERNAL FACTORS ON THE REGION: NATIONAL GREAT
POWERS AND INTERNATIONAL INSTITUTIONS
1.
US
a)
US - Albania. US President George Bush sent
a letter to the Albanian Prime Minister Fatos Nano on February 14 thanking
him for Tirana's support for US policy against Iraq.
b) US - Bulgaria. US
President George Bush met with Bulgaria's Prime Minister Simeon Saxkoburggotsky
at the White House on February 25. They discussed global issues including
the crisis in Iraq. A few days earlier, Bulgaria's Foreign Minister Solomon
Passy met with Secretary of State Colin Powell. US Trade Secretary Don
Evans will arrive in Sofia at the beginning of March to discuss bilateral
economic ties. Bulgaria asked for and received US support in four key
areas: financial compensation for Bulgaria's participation in a coalition
against Saddam Hussein; priority payment of the US$1.7 billion owed to
Bulgaria by Iraq after a possible war; additional guarantees for Bulgaria's
national security; and US political support for Bulgaria.
2.
Russia
a)
Russia - Bulgaria. (1) Russia and Bulgaria will adopt a joint declaration
providing for the conclusion of a new bilateral treaty during Vladimir
Putin's visit to Bulgaria on March 1-3. The existing treaty will expire
in 2007. The Presidents of the two countries will also declare their cooperation
in fighting terrorism, transnational crime, and the illegal trafficking
of arms, drugs, and people. Russia has recognized Bulgaria's legitimate
right to join the EU and NATO. The two countries have also agreed to improve
their cooperation in the UN and the Organization for Security and Cooperation
in Europe. They have already agreed to cooperate in trans-European gas
and oil transportation projects as well as to increase bilateral trade
exchange. Alexey Miller, the president of the giant Russian gas company
Gasprom, visited Sofia on February 5-6 and met with Bulgaria's president,
prime minister and energy minister. Following Putin's March visit to Bulgaria,
Gasprom will begin preparations for extending the bilateral treaty with
its Bulgarian partner, Bulgargas, beyond 2010. (2) Speaking in Ekaterinburg
at the beginning of February, Russian Defence Minister Sergey Ivanov announced
the imminent withdrawal of the Russian contingent in the Balkans. It is
time, said Ivanov, for the region's police forces to work independently.
The Russian contingent has been in the Balkans for four years. There are
no military duties to perform in the region and it is no longer financially
sustainable.
VIII.
CONCLUSIONS
Preparations for a possible war in Iraq have shaped this month's security
relations in the Balkans. The global coalition against Iraq is now seen
as having its stronghold in Southeast Europe. These developments have
had a profound impact on the region's relations with the continent's two
most powerful institutions - the EU and NATO. The crisis in Iraq has offered
a unique opportunity to address the fundamental problems of European integration
and the drafting of a common foreign and security policy. Tensions in
the Middle East are no reason to neglect the Balkans, one of Europe's
most important and immediate security concerns. A great many issues are
still at stake in Southeast Europe. The region's leaders are eager for
EU and NATO solidarity. However, the candidate countries' EU membership
prospects should not be threatened or manipulated to suit the interests
of other EU powers. Any derailing of the membership process will be at
the expense of Europe's long-term security interests.
EDITORIAL STAFF:
|
CONTACT AND REFERENCE
|
Dr. Plamen Pantev, Editor–in–Chief
|
ISSN 1311 – 3240
|
Dr. Tatiana Houbenova-Delissivkova
|
Address: ISIS, 1618
Sofia,
|
Mr. Valeri Rachev, M.
A.
|
P. O. Box 231, Bulgaria
|
Mr. Ivan Tsvetkov, M.
A.
|
Phone/Fax: ++(359 -
2-) 551 828
|
Dr. Todor Tagarev
|
E-Mail Address:
isis@cserv.mgu.bg
|
|