UNIVERZA V LJUBLJANI FAKULTETA ZA DRUŽBENE VEDE
Julijana Cilakova
Evropska integracija Zahodnega Balkana in njene posledice European integration of Western Balkans and it's consequences
Magistrsko delo
Ljubljana, 2021
UNIVERZA V LJUBLJANI FAKULTETA ZA DRUŽBENE VEDE
Julijana Cilakova Mentor: doc. dr. Meta Novak
Evropska integracija Zahodnega Balkana in njene posledice European integration of Western Balkans and it's consequences
Magistrsko delo
Ljubljana, 2021
Evropska integracija Zahodnega Balkana in njene posledice
V magistrskem delu se bom posvetila tematiki vključevanja držav Zahodnega Balkana v Evropsko unijo in o posledicah oblikovanja nove Evropske unije. Glavno raziskovalnovprašanje, ki sem si ga postavila je naslednje: Kakšne posledice ima širitvena politika EU na države kandidatke Zahodnega Balkana? Če upoštevamo, da se v EU dogajajo notranje težave, lahko širitev prinese določena tveganja tudi za EU. Širitvena politika EU in njen namen "zapreti" vrata za prihodnjo širitev do leta 2025 ima kontroverzen pomen za vsako državo kandidatko posebej.
Kritiki izpostavljajo, da je tovrstna širitvena politika oslabila odločenost balkanskih držav, da nadaljujejo z zaostrenimi reformami, državljani pa izgubljajo potrpljenje in izražajo resne dvome glede vstopa svojih držav v EU ter resničnih koristih članstva. V nalogi bom tako preverila to tezo z analizo stališč prebivalcev Zahodnega Balkana do članstva v EU.
Ključne besede: EU, Zahodni Balkan, pridruževanje
European integration of Western Balkans and its consequences
In my master thesis, I will focus on the integration of the Western Balkans countries in the European Union and the consequences of the formation of a new European Union. The main research question in this thesis is: What kind of consequences do EU enlargement policies have towards Western Balkans on the candidate countries? The EU already has internal problems going on. The enlargement will only bring additional certain risks. The EU enlargement policies and their intention to “close’’ the doors for future enlargement until 2025 have controversial meaning for each candidate country individually. Critics say that these policies have weakened the Balkan countries' determination to continue with tough reforms and the citizens are losing patience and expressing serious doubts about their countries' entry into the EU and the real benefits or detriments of it. In my thesis, I will thus test this assumption by analyzing the public opinion of residents of Western Balkan towards EU membership.
Keywords: EU, Western Balkans, integration
Table of Contents
1. Introduction...6
1.1 Methods of research...7
1.2 Structure of the master thesis...8
2. Theoretical part...10
2.1 Historical overview of individual countries...10
2.1.1 North Macedonia...10
2.1.2 Serbia...12
2.1.3 Montenegro...13
2.1.4 Kosovo...13
2.1.5 Bosnia and Herzegovina...14
2.1.6 Albania...15
2.2 Interest of the Western Balkan countries to join EU...15
2.2.1 Obstacles...22
3. The EU approach to Western Balkans...25
3.1. Stabilization and Association Process and the Stabilisation and Association Agreement...26
3.2. EU-Western Balkans Summit- Thessaloniki...28
3.4 Is the current EU enlargement approach sufficient?...29
3.5 Limits of the EU approach to the Western Balkans...32
4. Empirical part...34
4.1 Positive and negative consequences for the citizens of Western Balkans countries, their behaviors and lifestyle in the period of EU accession...34
4.1.1 European integration, cultural change, and modernization of economies...37
4.2 Consequences that may appear if countries of WB remain in their current state of limbo...49
5. Analysis and recommendations...54
6. Conclusion...58
7. Slovenian abstract...60
8. References...61
Index of tables
Table no 2.1: Development of negotiations between the Western Balkans and the EU………18 Table no. 2.2: Obstacles Western Balkan face in process of European integration………24
Index of figures
Figure 4.1: EU investments in Western Balkan countries 2015-2019 (€m)………..36 Figure 4.2: Balkan Public Sentiment Index………...…39 Figure 4.3: Balkan Public Sentiment Index (2014 - 2019)………40 Figure 4.4: Do you believe that democracy is the best possible form of government for our country or not?...42 Figure 4.5: Do you think that EU membership would be a good thing, a bad thing, or neither good nor bad for your economy?...44 Figure 4.6: What would EU membership mean to you personally?...45 Figure: 4.7: "Do you agree that regional cooperation can contribute to the political, economic or security situation of your society?”………46 Figure 4.8: In general, when do you expect the accession of your economy to the EU to happen?...47 Figure 4.9: If a referendum was held today on our country joining the European Union, how would you vote?...49 Figure 4.10: Which of these countries do you consider to be the most important political partner or partners for our country?...52
List of used abbreviations
FRY Federal Republic of Yugoslavia
SFRY Socialist Federal republic of Yugoslavia
WB Western Balkan
NATO North Atlantic Treaty Organization
EU European Union
SUSM State Union of Serbia and Montenegro
SDUM (SDSM) Social Democratic Union of Macedonia
IMRO-DPMNU (VMRO-DPMNE) Internal Macedonian Revolutionary Organization – Democratic Party for Macedonian National Unity
BAH (BIH) Bosnia and Herzegovina
SAA Stabilization and Association Agreement
SAP Stabilization and Association Process
EC European Commission
IPA Instrument for Pre-Accession Assistance
1. Introduction
With the separation of the Socialist Federal Republic of Yugoslavia, six independent states were created: Serbia, Macedonia, Croatia, Slovenia, Bosnia, and Herzegovina, and Montenegro. The Majority of them belong to the Western Balkans region. The term Western Balkan is both geographic and political. It was initially employed by the United States of America (USA) and European policymakers to describe the part of the Balkan Peninsula that remained outside of both the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) and the European Union (EU) since the early 1990s. It included all seven states that were formed during the collapse of Yugoslavia (Bosnia-Herzegovina, Croatia, Kosovo, Macedonia, Montenegro, Serbia, and Slovenia) together with Albania, which was emerging from international isolation (Oxford Bibliographies, 2017).
After the expressed interest of these countries to join the European Union (EU), the EU decided to open the doors for this part of Europe in order to achieve better stability among the conflicted states and to normalize relations between them.
The analysis in this thesis is limited to ex-Yugoslavian countries that expressed interest in joining the EU, excluding Slovenia (which joined the EU in 2004) and Croatia (which joined the EU in 2013) that already successfully joined the EU. The analysis includes Albania which is also a-part of the political term of Western Balkans and Kosovo as a new state in the region.
The countries of the Western Balkans (WB) have been striving to join the EU for many years with expectations and hope for a better future. These so-called transition countries needed a long recovery period after the break-up of Yugoslavia and the ensuing wars. It is well known that the systems of these countries need reforms and changes in many segments of society. Thus, the long-term cooperation of these countries with the EU is based on achieving progress in solving problems and fulfilling reforms.
Furthermore, the interest for integration of the Western Balkans region in the EU has existed for a long time and the proof of that is the holding of the Thessaloniki summit in 2003. On the other hand, the interest for integration also exists from the WB countries, which see their prosperity, progress, and security as part of the European family. The integration process is complex and requires perseverance and consistency from both stakeholders. The EU stands for its interests in the WB region and insists on the implementation of reforms regarding democracy, institutions,
and the rule of law, but encounters obstacles to their realization and still puts the stability of the Union in the first place and prevents risk (Bonomi, 2018, p.3).
The integration process has consequences that affect the candidate countries as individuals, but also the entire WB region. On the one hand, the process contributes to positive consequences such as the development of countries in terms of the rule of democracy and the rule of law, tackling corruption and crime, economic growth, etc. However, the EU's reluctance and indecision regarding the conditions for integration and the long period of conducting membership negotiations contribute to the so-called fatigue of waiting, which negatively affects the overall process.
This thesis aims to analyze the candidate countries, their history, interest in the EU integration process, and the progress made in the reforms over the years on the one hand and the EU approach to the candidate countries and the commitment to their integration into the Union.
Furthermore, through that analysis, we will draw a conclusion about the factual consequences of the integration process itself.
1.1 Methods of research
To get an answer to the main research question of the thesis "What kind of consequences do EU enlargement policies towards Western Balkans have on the candidate countries?" two hypotheses were formulated:
Hypotheses 1: "The EU integration process is contributing to adopting reforms and to meet the standards of the EU membership, followed by positive consequences for Western Balkan countries and their citizens."
Hypotheses 2: "Long-term EU integration process is leading to dissatisfaction and doubts in Western Balkan countries."
In my master thesis, I intend to use the method of secondary analysis in order to analyze the EU integration process of selected candidate countries (North Macedonia, Serbia, Albania, and Montenegro) and potential candidate countries (Bosnia and Herzegovina and Kosovo).
Furthermore, this case study method will not only be used to describe each country's case but also to understand better their negotiations with the EU in the frame of their accession process.
1.2 Structure of the master thesis
The master thesis is composed of five chapters. The first part is an introduction where the ideas for this thesis are presented. Applied methodology and a small introduction of the countries of the Western Balkans are included as well and the EU as a subject of analysis is given.
In chapter two, I present the theoretical framework of my master thesis. In order to understand better the research problem and to be able to answer the research question, I briefly present the history of each Western Balkan country. To make the arguments clearer, the course of events is described chronologically. Each country has its own history and level of progress achieved on the road to EU membership. In order to look at each country individually, section 2.2 explains the interests of each of the Western Balkan countries individually, and also presents the problems faced by the countries striving to meet the reforms and conditionality criteria. At the end of the second chapter, I explain the obstacles that stand in the way to the EU for each country individually and recommendations for their solution.
The third chapter of the thesis refers to the approach of the EU towards the Western Balkans.
The chapter aims to analyze the contribution, steps, and efforts of the European Union over the years in order to integrate the Western Balkan countries into the EU. A significant part of this chapter focuses on the question “Is the current EU enlargement approach sufficient for the WB countries to enter the EU?''. To answer the question, that part analyses key moments from the summits held in recent years and the divided opinions of the EU leaders for the process itself.
Furthermore, part 3.5 explains the factual limits that are the reason for the slow development of the integration process in the Western Balkan region.
Chapter number 4 is the main chapter of the master thesis and is dedicated to answering the main research question. It also tests the two hypotheses. In the first part of this chapter, I analyze the influence of the EU on the Western Balkans in terms of investment and commitment to make progress in the integration of the candidate countries. Further, in the part 4.1.1 follows an
of respondents from the Western Balkans. The last part of this chapter covers the consequences that could occur if the Western Balkans remain in the so-called "state of limbo".
In chapter 5, I sum up the conclusions drawn from all the previous analyses. Furthermore, an answer to the main research question is given. I also form some recommendations for the Western Balkan countries in the EU integration process.
2. Theoretical part
2.1 Historical overview of individual countries
The Western Balkans is a region of countries that have turbulent backgrounds, times of war, international disagreements, and conflicting interests. The period following the breakup of the Socialist Federal Republic of Yugoslavia (SFRY) was difficult for most of these countries. The ensuing wars in this region that followed the break up of Yugoslavia caused international hatred and division of the nations that were once Yugoslavia. Two of these ex-Yugoslav states, Slovenia and Croatia, are already part of the European Union and an equal partner when it comes to shaping EU policies. It is important to highlight the history of other states of former Yugoslavia in the period following the breakup of Yugoslavia. Knowing their history, we can proceed to further analyze and research the situation in each candidate country of Western Balkan individually and their process of joining the European Union. In the following section, I present an overview of the history of each of the countries of Western Balkan that are not yet part of the European Union.
2.1.1 North Macedonia
North Macedonia and five other countries were part of a new after Second World War formatted federation, Socialist Federal Republic of Yugoslavia. After the separation of SFRY, Macedonia left the federation in September 1991 without any conflicts. The independence was confirmed with a referendum where Macedonian citizens voted for independence. Three-quarters of citizens who voted, wanted Macedonia to become a sovereign state. About 75 percent of the 1.3 million eligible voters did so (The New York Times, 1991, p. 1). As an independent country, North Macedonia was in a difficult economic and financial position because ''almost the entire Macedonian economic infrastructure was built around and made to function as a part of the Yugoslav economy'' (Marolov, 2013, p. 52). In January 2001, North Macedonia faced the conflict with ethnic Albanian insurgents. After negotiations between Macedonia and ethnic Albanians, the conflict ended with a peace agreement determining the future institutional arrangement of interethnic relations. (Stojkovski, 2010, p.87-88). Despite the hundreds of lives
spent (T. Nenovski, I. Smilkovski, 2012, p. 419). The years after, North Macedonia was in a tough transition period followed by economic crises, the first as a result of the military conflict in 2001, and the second recession as a result of the global financial crisis 2007-2008. As a small country in Yugoslavia, after the separation and the transition from the political system to parliamentary democracy, North Macedonia faced economic and political problems. The problems that existed in Yugoslavia after the separation expanded their scope, both internally and internationally (Ekonomija I biznis, 2020).
During Prime Minister Nikola Gruevski and Internal Macedonian Revolutionary Organization- Democratic Party for Macedonian National Unity (VMRO-DPMNE) governing from 2006 to 2017, Macedonia seemed to be moving in the right direction, promising a better future for citizens through numerous campaigns. However, excessive government spending and numerous administrative employments have led the country to insolvency and the need for additional loans (Ordanoski, 2011, p.95-97). The government was changed in 2017 and the new current Prime Minister is Zoran Zaev from the party Social Democratic Union of Macedonia (SDUM). Zaev and his party strive for membership in NATO and the EU. The whole process of joining EU and NATO was at first blocked by neighboring Greece over the name dispute (DW, 2017). An important change of Zaev’s government was the changing of the name of the country in 2018, which has been a significant long-standing problem between Macedonia and Greece, as well as a problem for Macedonia's EU accession.
Greece's dispute with North Macedonia has a historic origin and is connected with identity problems. This problem was based on the identification of a part of the Greek people as ethnic Macedonians who are not related to the Macedonians from the country North Macedonia. North Macedonia even adopted two amendments to its Constitution affirming that it ‘has no territorial claims against any neighboring states’ and ‘shall not interfere in the sovereign rights of other States and their internal affairs.’ However, that was not enough and Greece blocked the entrance of North Macedonia in NATO and the EU (Daskalovski, 2017, p.328). After the long negotiations and meetings, the Prespa Agreement between Greece and North Macedonia was signed in June 2018. On 11January 2019 the constitutional amendments with the required two- thirds majority were adopted by the Parliament of the Republic of Macedonia (EWB, 2019)
changing the official name of the country from the Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia to North Macedonia.
2.1.2 Serbia
Serbia was the biggest country in SFRY and, like the other countries in the region had a tough history after the collapse of SFRY. In April 1992 a constitution for the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia (FRY), between Serbia and Montenegro was adopted. Serbia was for several years dominated by the politics of Slobodan Milošević. From 1989 to 1992 he was the President of Serbia in SFRY, from 1992 to 1997 the President of Serbia in a frame of FRY, and from 1997 to 2000 he was the president of FRY. Riots broke out between Serbia and the then Serbian province of Kosovo, which escalated in 1998 and sparked military clashes between the Kosovo Liberation Army and Serbian police. NATO airstrikes began in March 1999, displacing hundreds of thousands of civilians from the province and seeking refuge from the war. The governance of Slobodan Milosevic was followed by a lot of disagreements and mass protests all across Serbia, which contributed to concede defeat in October 2000 (DW, 2013). In February 2003, the federation was reconstituted in The State Union of Serbia and Montenegro. The situation after elections did not meet the expectations of citizens, reform initiatives were halted which contributed to disappointment by the Serbian population. In March 2003 Serbia once again faced the crisis after Prime Minister Zoran Đinđić was assassinated. Zoran Đinđić expressed clear support for the integration of Serbia into the European Union. Under his government, Serbia and Montenegro became members of the Council of Europe. In 2004, Boris Tadić won the Presidential elections and Vojislav Koštunica became the Prime Minister (UCA, 2020). That contributed to sealing the integration path of Serbia to the EU and supporting the idea that joining the EU is a priority for Serbia. The State Union of the Republics of Serbia and Montenegro was dissolved in June 2006. In 2006, Serbia with the declaration of independence finally became an independent country. When the political situation in Serbia seemed to be going in the right direction with great optimism, the problem with Kosovo's independence showed up.
Kosovo was an autonomous province of Serbia until 2008 when it declared independence. Serbia and Kosovo still have conflicts about Kosovo’s recognition. Serbia continues to claim that
Kosovo is a Serbian province. Resolving that problem is one of the conditions for Serbia's successful EU accession.
2.1.3 Montenegro
Montenegro was the smallest country with the lowest population in SFRY. The period after the SFRY separation was difficult for Montenegro. The country decided to stay in Yugoslavia with Serbia and adopted the constitution of the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia (FRY). The federation was later reconstituted into Тhe State Union of Serbia and Montenegro. On the referendum held in 2006, where Montenegro voted to leave the federation with Serbia and proclaimed its independence (Ralchev, 2010, p. 100). The success of the referendum was confirmed with 55.4%
of the people voted for independence, which fulfills the set threshold of 55% (DW, 2006). EU institutions were involved and helped in the referendum process as an external influence. The cooperation between Montenegro and EU institutions later helped in the integration process and made integration the most important aim for the country. Following the referendum on the independence of the Republic of Montenegro, the parliament and the government declared the importance of the European processes and designated them as a priority. Diplomatic relations between the EU, its member states, and Montenegro began on 12 June 2006 (Radulovic, 2011, p.79-80).
2.1.4 Kosovo
According to some authors, the case of Kosovo1 is one of the reasons for the breakup of the Yugoslavian federation. In the period since the breakup of the federation, to date, Kosovo has been a problem for Serbia (Stojkovski, 2010, p.71). Kosovo separated from Serbia in the spring of 1999 after the intervention of the NATO alliance and bombing operation when it became a protectorate of the United Nations and the NATO Alliance (Stojkovski, 2010, p.71). Kosovo is populated mostly with Albanian people, who wanted the status of a federal republic already within SFRY. In 2008 Kosovo declared independence. Today, its independence is recognized by
1This designation is without prejudice to positions on status, and is in line with UNSCR 1244/1999 and the ICJ Opinion on the Kosovo declaration of independence (European Commission, 2019).
22 out of 27 EU member states. There are still disputes between Serbia and Kosovo and Kosovo is not recognized by Serbia (Morsut & Irerra, 2018, p.164).
As part of the Western Balkans region, Kosovo has a clear European perspective and is a potential EU candidate country. EU is promoting and proposing reforms in Kosovo that would lead the country closer to the EU, which would ensure peace and stability in the region. Thus, the European Union Rule of Law Mission in Kosovo and the full EULEX civilian mission aim to assist the Kosovo authorities in the establishment of sustainable and independent institutions of the rule of law (European Commission, 2016).
2.1.5 Bosnia and Herzegovina
Bosnia and Herzegovina (BIH) was part of SFRY and definitely was the most affected by the breakup from SFRY. After Croatia, Slovenia and Macedonia began to strive for independence, the BIH government elite started to discuss whether to stay in the Yugoslav federation or leave.
As an outcome, they decided for independence to protect their country. The referendum for independence held in March 1992 was boycotted by the great majority of Bosnian Serbs. On 1 March 1992, BIH declared independence and soon faced a civil war between three major ethnic communities (Serbs, Croats, and Bosnian Muslims). The war ended after 43 months in 1995. The war in BIH ended with signing the Dayton Peace Agreement that established a complex administrative structure of the new country (Ralchev, 2010, p. 42-43).
Today, BIH is one country with two federal entities Federal Bosnia and Herzegovina with a predominantly Bosnian-Croats population, and the Republic of Serbia with a predominantly Serbian population. The conflict has left a big mark on the country's further development.
Currently, BIH is a potential candidate country for EU accession. BIH is working on an implementation of legal, administrative, institutional, and economic reforms proposed by the EU to gain EU candidate status (DEUBH, 2019).
2.1.6 Albania
As a non-ex-Yu country, Albania was not directly affected by the crises following the breakup of SFRY. Nevertheless, Albania has also been through a difficult transition period from socialism to the new political system.Due to the long duration of the communist regime in Albania, it was one of the most underdeveloped countries in the region, economically and socially. However, the bigger problem for the state was the political regime as a whole, which resulted in disagreement between the major political parties (Stojkovski, 2010 p. 30). The lack of a good plan and the poor readiness of governments at that time to cope with the situation harmed the development of the country. The disintegration of the old regime took a long time, unlike in the rest of the countries of Central and Eastern Europe. The result was chaotic and brought political disagreements that led to the inability to form effective policies (Hashi and Xhillari, 1997, p.2). An important part of the Albanian transition period is the ''pyramid scheme phenomenon''2 which left a significant mark on the development of the state during this period. The crisis that struck from 1996-1997 contributed to the creation of significant financial costs for the Albanian state. Political instability at the time and the collapse of the state overshadowed the results achieved in the five- year transition period (Muco, 1997, p.70). Today, Albania is making changes and reforms to become an EU member state.
2.2 Interest of the Western Balkan countries to join EU
The main aim of Western Balkan countries to join the European Union is to achieve stability. As is well known, the WB region is one of the most unstable and controversial in Europe. In these areas live multiethnic communities that were united in SFRY. The wars, that took place in these areas after the breakup of the SFRY, caused insecurity and hatred among the people. Nationalism still prevails in some countries as a consequence of the past. The quality of democratization is not at the desired level. The countries from the Western Balkan region see a solution in becoming EU member states. Since the negotiations with the EU began these countries have
2 ‘’In a typical pyramid scheme, a fund or company attracts investors by offering them very high returns; these returns are paid to the first investors out of the funds received from those who invest later. The scheme is insolvent—liabilities exceed assets—from the day it opens for business.’’(Jeffries, 2002, p.78).
been trying to follow the recommendations made by the EU, accept the conditions, and solve bilateral disputes to be able to become EU members.
As defined in the Treaty on European Union any country from Europe can apply for EU member states as long as it respects and promotes EU democratic values (European Commission, 2016).
EU accession to the Western Balkans is regulated by the Stabilization and Association Process, which will be discussed further. The process began in 1999, in which the countries of the Western Balkans were given the opportunity to join the EU. Later, at the Thessaloniki Summit in 2003, it was determined that all countries in the region can become potential candidates for EU membership. When a country fulfills the reforms given by the EU, it becomes an official candidate country for membership. This is not an opening of a formal negotiation process (European Commission, 2019). After obtaining the EU candidate status, the country goes through certain stages that are part of the integration process. The speed of meeting and the set conditions for membership depend on the merits of the state and its progress. The progress of the country and the fulfillment of the reforms are observed by the European Commission that prepares reports on the progress of each country individually. Each country that has the status of a candidate country for membership or a potential country candidate receives EU assistance to implement the indicated reforms. Since 2007, countries have received this assistance through a unified instrument called the Instrument for Pre-Accession Assistance (IPA). IPA differentiate between potential EU candidate countries and EU candidate countries taking into account the political situation and seeking to facilitate the transition from potential candidate countries to candidate countries, as well as to resolve differences between them in terms of their administrative, programming, and management capacity. In terms of country support, IPA seeks to align national legislation with EU legislation, implement the Copenhagen criteria and strengthen national institutions (European Parliament, 2019). The assistance that countries receive from the EU in order to implement reforms is another reason for the interest and motivation to fulfill the reforms and become EU member states.
In the table below we can see the dates, events, and negotiations for each country of WB.
Table no 2.1: Development of negotiations between the Western Balkans and the EU
Source: European Council, Council of the EU 3
As we can see in Table 1, North Macedonia has started with EU Association Agreement negotiations on 5th April 2000 and the Membership application was submitted in May 2004, 15 years after the Council set the start date of negotiations. We can see that the process is going very slow. The reason for this could be EU rigid conditions that need to be fulfilled, in obstacles that the state must overcome and in connection with a well-known name dispute with Greece which is explained more in the historical part on North Macedonia. The recognition to North Macedonia on changing the name to solve the dispute with Greece in 2019 was expressed also by the President of the European Commission at that time, Jean-Claude Juncker. “I said clearly back
3 Accessed at: https://www.consilium.europa.eu/en/
in 2018 that no country will join the European Union unless it has solved all its bilateral disputes.
North Macedonia has heeded the call,” Juncker told reporters in Brussels (EU reporter, 2019).
Following the change of the official name the President of the Commission also recognized the development in the accession process of North Macedonia. “In our view, based on objective assessment of the facts, the Republic of North Macedonia is ready for the next step. I will do everything possible in order to convict them to follow this historical movement, and I will defend North Macedonia whenever it is needed.” (Juncker in EU Reporter, 2019). Looking at Juncker's statement, North Macedonia has done its part however it has not yet started negotiations with the EU.
Besides name dispute, North Macedonia has concerns connected to rule of law, independent media, and civil society. In recent years, Macedonia has been striving to improve the technical issues that are also important for EU accession. The country's interest in joining the EU was demonstrated in a referendum held on 30 September 2018 (Sobranie, 2018), supported by the ruling Social Democratic Union of Macedonia (SDUM) party, The referendum was organized to vote for a name change that would solve the long-standing problem with the southern neighbor Greece. However, participation in the name change referendum was far from the expected turnout. Оver a third of Macedonians voted in the referendum, with 50% needed for the referendum to be declared successful (BBC, 2018). There was a need for changes in the constitution to avoid further elections. The issue of the referendum was transferred to the assembly and the MPs with a 2/3 majority for constitutional changes voted the referendum successful (DW, 2018). In the period after, the name change has taken place, and now the official name of Macedonia is North Macedonia.
Macedonia has faced another obstacle on its path to the EU in 2020. The negotiating framework for Macedonia and Albania proposed in June 2020, was expected to be adopted by the EU in December 2020. It ran into problems (Telma, 2020). Bulgaria blocked the adoption of the negotiating framework by not recognizing the Macedonian language as Macedonian. Despite negotiations between the two countries and the EU's efforts to resolve the issue and build good neighborly relations, Bulgaria has not yet changed its position (DW, 2020). This problem further complicates the process and exacerbates the political crisis that already exists in this country.
The second country in the table above is Albania which has almost the same history as North Macedonia on the path to join the EU. These two countries belong to the same category of candidate countries for EU accession. EU Association Agreement negotiations have started in January 2003, three years later the Stabilisation and association agreement (SAA) was signed and in April 2009, the SAA officially entered into force. In June 2018 the Council issued conclusions on the country's progress and agreed to start negotiations with the country. In recent years, Albania, as well as other members of the Western Balkans, has sought to meet the EU's recommendations and criteria.
The question arises as to the actual reliability of the criteria given by the EU and whether they are set and changed in relation to the geostrategic policy led by key EU member states. The event that is related to this issue is Europe's failure to agree on EU accession talks with Albania and North Macedonia at the EU summit in October 2019. At this event, French President Emmanuel Macron and few other countries blocked North Macedonia and Albania on the road to membership negotiations. Macron considers it very important that all EU member states agree on the decision for these countries to make progress in accessing the EU and he also emphasized that these countries made substantial progress but still need to make reforms in many areas (BBC, 2019). This topic will be discussed in detail in the section below.
The position of the European Commission on the other hand differentiated from the main EU member states. “I am very disappointed with the result of our debate on enlargement,” Juncker told reporters at the end of a two-day European Council summit. He said the majority of members of the Council were in favor of opening talks with both countries but "a certain number of member states were not ready." (Politico, 2019).
After the October summit, the leaders of Albania and North Macedonia expressed dissatisfaction and disappointment, but still believed in resolving the problems and obtaining soon a negotiation date.
The third country on the table 1 is Montenegro. This country started with EU Association Agreement negotiations in October 2005 and two years later the SAA was signed. On 19 December 2009, Montenegrin citizens got permission (Visa liberalization) to travel to the Schengen area (European Commission, 2009). In May 2010 officially the SAA entered into
force. Montenegro applied for EU membership in December 2008. After two years of meetings and negotiations, the country officially got the status of a candidate country on 17 December 2010.
In the years that followed, Montenegro continued to pursue reforms designated by the European Commission with a special focus on the fight against corruption, organized crime, the rule of law, and media freedom. Based on prepared reports and positive conclusions given by the European Commission, the European Council adopted the decision on 26 June 2012, and finally, the membership negotiations have started on 29 June 2012 (Djurovic, 2016, p. 82-86).
Since 2012, Montenegro has been in the process of accession negotiations, receiving EU reports, each year on the country's progress and reforms. Progress reports have been confirmed by the European Commission as positive, but despite the positive ones, the European Commission has also noted shortcomings. Some critics say that Montenegro has not moved from that place since 2014 and that Montenegro still has inner problems for which the EU has no patience for (European Western Balkans, 2019). However, Montenegro is clearly oriented towards the EU and remains pro-European.
Serbia is in the same group as Montenegro on the path to the EU. As we can see in the table, Serbia started with EU Association Agreement negotiations on 10 October 2005 and the Membership application has been submitted in April 2008. In December 2009 Serbia formally applied and three years after in March 2012 was granted EU candidate status for membership.
The visa agreement entered into force in December 2009 which opened the doors to the Schengen area for Serbian citizens (European Commission, 2009). Furthermore, in December 2013 the Council adopted a negotiating framework. According to some analysts, the negotiations are going slow, especially because of the dispute that Serbia has with Kosovo. The problem between Belgrade and Pristina has become a major obstacle since Kosovo's independence in 2008. As is well known all disputes between countries of the region have to be resolved before entering the EU.
The first negotiation chapters were opened in December 2014. One chapter is about normalizing relations with Kosovo. This chapter is of great importance for Serbia on the road to the EU and cannot be closed until Kosovo's dispute is resolved. (Euractiv, 2015) In recent years, Serbia has
been working to solve problems and meet technical criteria. However, EU Enlargement Commissioner Johannes Hahn noted that Serbia needs to meet also other criteria besides solving a dispute with Kosovo if it wants to join the EU:
“For Serbia, this means that it is necessary to conclude and permanently implement a legally binding agreement with Pristina. However, it seems that many people, including politicians, are under the impression that the solution regarding Kosovo is the only prerequisite for Serbia joining the EU. This is not the case. The implementation of reforms in the rule of law, fundamental human rights, and good governance remains at the core of the enlargement process,” (Serbia Monitor 2018).
According to the latest report, Serbia is making progress in the judiciary, but further fundamental reforms are needed in the economy, the public sector, and in the fight against corruption (European Commission, 2019). However, it should be noted that there has been an increase in impatience between Serbia and the EU in recent years.
Bosnia and Herzegovina, similar to other WB countries got the status of a potential candidate for the EU at the European Council summit in June 2003. Bosnia and Herzegovina started with Association Agreement negotiations in November 2005, three years later the SAA was signed and on 1st June 2015 officially entered into force. Furthermore, the Membership application has been submitted in February 2016.
The difference between Bosnia and Herzegovina and other WB countries is that there are bi- partisan legislation and a three-member presidency in BiH, which in some way make the state less functional in terms of meeting reforms and agreeing between them (European Western Balkans, 2018). That is one more reason why the country's progress on the road to the EU is going slower compared to other countries from WB. “It is crucial that all governments are formed at all levels in Bosnia and Herzegovina. We cannot suggest a continuation of negotiations to member countries if we have nobody to talk to on the other side,” said EU Enlargement Commissioner Johannes Hahn (N1, 2019).
Of great importance for BIH association to the EU is the encouraging attitude of the three members of the Presidency of Bosnia and Herzegovina that they are resolute in continuing negotiations and speeding up the process. Reports from the EU say that Bosnia and Herzegovina
should continue to work hard on reforms in order to move closer to European integration (European Commission, 2019).
Kosovo as a newly formed country has shown its interest in joining the EU immediately after its independence in 2008. In October 2013 Kosovo started with EU Association Agreement negotiations, after two years the SAA was signed and in April 2016 the SAA officially entered into force. Kosovo has EU support through the EULEX rule of law mission in Kosovo (European Commission, 2019). It is still far from getting a negotiation start date. Kosovo, as well as Bosnia and Herzegovina, lag behind other Western Balkan countries in terms of EU integration. It is well known that Kosovo's path to the EU is hampered by the dispute Kosovo has with Serbia.
European officials encourage Kosovo and Serbia to follow the example of North Macedonia in resolving the longstanding name issue.
Besides the problem with Serbia, European officials point to problems with corruption and the rule of law. Kosovo has not yet been recognized as an independent state by five EU member states (Greece, Romania, Cyprus, Slovakia, and Spain) and is the only WB country that does not enjoy visa liberalization (Kmezic, 2015, p.8) However, resolving the dispute with Serbia and finding a compromise between the two countries is crucial to speeding up the integration process.
2.2.1 Obstacles
Every country that wants to join the EU needs to adopt EU legislation, legal acts, and court decisions. The process of adopting EU acquis consists of more than 30 policy chapters that each country needs to negotiate with the EU and close down before it becomes an EU member state (European Parliament, 2019). The European Commission delivers reports on the status of each chapter before the start of negotiations with that state. Furthermore, the Commission makes recommendations, and Council votes to open or not further chapters. If progress is made, the Commission may recommend a ‘provisionally closing’ of this chapter. The Western Balkan countries follow the recommendations made by the European Commission in the form of
"progress reports" for each country in order to continue with progress in fulfilling the reforms.
policy. The European Commission submits this "expansion package" every year and considers the situation in each country that is a candidate country or potential candidate. The "package" is of great importance to the candidate countries, it is communication and in some way, it shows progress to becoming an EU member state (European Commission, 2020).
In table 2 below, we can see what is the main obstacle for each country. They need to resolve it if they want to become an EU member.
Table no. 2.2: Obstacles Western Balkan face in process of European integration
Countries Status Obstacles
North Macedonia Candidate Corruption and organized crime
Politicized judiciary
Low freedom of expression
Serbia Candidate in
negotiations
Kosovo dispute
Corruption and organized crime
Limited progress in the judiciary and fundamental rights
Montenegro Candidate in
negotiations
Corruption and organized crime
No progress on freedom of expression
Politicized institutions
Albania Candidate Corruption and organized
crime
Limited progress on freedom of expression
Little progress in
democratization and the rule of law
Kosovo Potential candidate Serbia dispute
As a potential candidate, there is a lot to work on every sphere
Bosnia and Herzegovina Potential candidate Does not yet sufficiently fulfill the criteria of
democracy and the rule of law
Politicized judiciary
Corruption and organized crime
Source: European Council, Council of the EU
The data in table 2 is obtained by the reports prepared by the European Commission on the progress of each country of Western Balkan. It can be seen that corruption and organized crime are the main obstacles for the Western Balkan countries to join the EU. Some of them are making progress in tackling this problem, but further reforms are needed in this area.
If we compare the obstacles between the countries, we can see that, unlike other countries, Kosovo and Serbia are dealing with the dispute that exists between these two countries. In Bosnia and Herzegovina, unlike in other countries, it has been stated that it does not meet the criteria for democracy and the rule of law. On the other hand, Kosovo as a country that is a potential candidate has numerous obstacles and changes are needed in every area. For Northern Macedonia, the problem with low free expression stands out. However, EU recommendations point to further tackling of these problems as well as finding solutions.
Furthermore, for the Western Balkan countries, one of the biggest barriers to joining the EU is that their market economies are not ready for the challenges that exist in the EU's internal market. Despite the achievement, the presence of crime in all countries of the region significantly slows down the improvement of other segments such as transparency, the rule of law, feelings of impunity, inequality, and mistrust throughout society. Another barrier is the existence of the so- called "brain drain"4 phenomenon, which further contributes to the reduction and lack of competitive businesses, innovation, and jobs (EPSC, 2019, p. 4-5).
4 “Brain drain” is the situation in which large numbers of educated and very skilled people leave their own country
3. The EU approach to Western Balkans
The next chapter will focus on the EU's approach to the Western Balkan states, their position, status of EU negotiations through the years, and the limits of the current approach of the accession.
EU as an international organization aims to promote peace, stability, and partnership between the member states, but it is also open to accepting new countries in its composition. The security of the Western Balkans is important for both, the region and the entire EU as a regional force for peace and stability.
Former president of European Commission Jean- Claude Juncker (2014-2019) once said: “It is the most basic and universal of rights of European citizens to feel safe and secure in their homes”
(EPSC, 2018, p.1). The right to security applies to EU members but also to those who are on their way to becoming part of the EU. Also, progress on security issues in the Western Balkans essentially means progress in the EU as a whole. The security of the citizens of these countries is of great importance, especially since they went through conflicts and war in recent history.
Former Commission President Romano Prodi (1999-2004) emphasized that "the process of European unification will not be complete until the Balkans join the EU"(ibid, p.2) Furthermore, Chris Patten (then EU Commissioner for External Affairs) described the Western Balkans as -
"one of the missing pieces in our puzzle Europe "(ibid). Another important factor in the EU's approach and activities in the Balkan region is the fact that the EU is the largest investor and trading partner in the Western Balkans (ibid).
The EU has shown interest in the WB a long time ago, by holding the Thessaloniki summit 2003, by creating instruments such as the Stabilization and Association Agreement and the Stabilisation and Association Process, and by insisting on meeting the Copenhagen criteria by Western Balkan countries, all of these will be discussed individually below.
3.1. Stabilization and Association Process and the Stabilisation and Association Agreement
The Stabilization and Association Agreement (SAA) was created by the EU in order to establish a closer relationship with the WB countries. The SAA is part of the Stabilisation and Association Process (SAP) which is an instrument created by the EU in order to maintain stability and security in the Balkan region (Tota, 2019, p.56).
According to the analysis of Kmezic (Kmezic, 2015, p.13), the EU-WB strategy is based on a regional approach conceived in the Stabilization and Association Process (SAP). SAP is structured with a bilateral dimension and a regional dimension.
On one hand, the bilateral component includes issues related to financial assistance, improving trade liberalization between countries, cooperation between states regarding the rule of law, and SAA. In addition to linking the EU and the Western Balkans, and improving prospects for the region's EU membership, the SAA also provides a contractual framework that outlines more precisely the conditions for Western Balkan countries. On the other hand, the regional component includes cooperation between the regions as well as good neighborly relations (ibid).
In order to clarify these instruments the European Commission (European Commission, 2016) has published the following:
The SAP was established as an instrument in June 1999 and was later strengthened at the June 2003 – Thessaloniki Summit. SAP as an instrument is guided and relies on contractual relations based on bilateral agreements on stabilization and association, trade relations between countries, financial assistance through the Instrument for Pre-Accession Assistance - IPA as well as regional cooperation and good neighborly relations.
The EU's initiative in 1999 with the inauguration of the SAP shows the EU's interest in the region as well as its commitment to linking the EU to the WB through trade and financial assistance.
In addition, as mentioned above, the SAA is a kind of framework for relations between the EU and the Western Balkans, but also a way to implement the SAP. Agreements between the two sides have been adjusted to the specific country under consideration. In addition to establishing a free trade zone with the EU, they also seek to build common political and economic goals as well
as regional co-operation. At the same time, the agreement serves as a support for the implementation of the accession process (European Commission, 2016).
Furthermore, the treaties in the form of the SAA are based on common democratic principles, human rights, and the rule of law. The work of the Stabilization and Association Council is to oversee the implementation and enforcement of this agreement and it meets annually at the ministerial level. With the signing of this agreement by Kosovo in April 2016, the SAA was signed and entered into force in all Western Balkan countries. Each of the agreements is adapted to the country for which it is intended, also common political and economic goals are taken into account in order to encourage regional cooperation. These agreements enter into force shortly after signing and serve as a basis for implementing the EU accession process (European Parliament, 2019).
The EU attaches great importance to regional co-operation, with one of the SAP's main goals being to promote co-operation between countries in several areas, including prosecuting war crimes, fighting organized crime, and border issues. South-East European Cooperation Process (SEECP) is based in Sarajevo (Bosnia and Herzegovina) and is called the Regional Cooperation Council (RCC). RCC aims to support countries that are not part of the European family and to develop cooperation between them in several areas such as economic and social development, energy and infrastructure, security cooperation, and so on (ibid.).
3.2. EU-Western Balkans Summit- Thessaloniki
The EU-Western Balkans Summit was held in Thessaloniki on June 21, 2003. It marks an important step by the EU in terms of showing greater interest in the WB countries. Also, it is an important moment in the history of the relations between the EU and the WB countries.
Tota has emphasized the importance of the summit for the accession of Western Balkans to the EU. At first, reiterates the perspective of the European perspective of the WB by declaring that their future is within the European Union, secondly, it emphasizes and gives further support to the SAP as that program remains the main EU approach or framework to the WB countries for their future accession (Tota, 2019, p.57). Since the Western Balkans Summit, the EU has been
pushing for reforms, resolving disputes between countries aimed at joining the Western Balkans within the EU, but not at all costs.
The creation of the EU is based on a peace project. Furthermore, the EU's goal concerning the WB is to stabilize relations between countries as well as to build democracy and implement reforms for better societies. The interest of the WB countries in joining the EU unites and realizes the opportunity for cooperation and reconciliation between them. At the 2003 Summit in Thessaloniki, a decision was made on possible membership, which is important for all candidate and potential candidate countries (Politico, 2019).
3.3. Copenhagen criteria
Going through the years of negotiations and meetings, WB countries, or any other candidate country that wants to join the European Union are encouraged by the EU to meet the so-called Copenhagen criteria.
These criteria (known as the Copenhagen criteria) were established by the European Council in 1993 in Copenhagen and were strengthened by the European Council in 1995 in Madrid. They include the following:
stability of institutions guaranteeing democracy, the rule of law, human rights, and respect for and protection of minorities;
a functioning market economy and the ability to cope with competitive pressure and market forces within the EU;
ability to take on the obligations of membership, including the capacity to effectively implement the rules, standards, and policies that make up the body of EU law (the 'acquis'), and adherence to the aims of the political, economic, and monetary union (EUR-Lex, n.d)
Meeting these criteria, as well as the perspective to be part of the European Union, has motivated Western Balkan countries to work hard in the fight against corruption, to advocate for the rule of law, make economic reforms, aim to achieve political stability, and resolve the disputes to maintain good neighborly relations.
Furthermore, candidate countries face additional conditions called “Copenhagen Plus”. These conditions include the following: “requirement of full cooperation with the International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia (ICTY), refugee return, regional cooperation and reconciliation, and the resolution of bilateral disputes or statehood dilemmas.” (Kmezic, 2015, p.
13). Furthermore, they include respect for political and peace agreements that have been concluded and are a consequence of the armed conflicts of the 1990s in the area of Western Balkans (ibid).
3.4 Is the current EU enlargement approach sufficient?
In order to improve the WB integration process, the EU organizes summits to discuss the achievements and problems associated with this issue. Holding these summits is of great importance for achieving continuity in relations, as well as motivating the leaders of these countries. But it is not uncommon for leaders to have different opinions about the success of the summit and whether it speeds up or slows down the process. The summits held in 2019 and 2020 by the EU with the WB will be discussed in the following paragraphs.
The Summit in Berlin in April 2019 was organized on the initiative of French President Emmanuel Macron and German Chancellor Angela Merkel. At this Summit French President Emmanuel Macron stated that ‘WB remains EU priority’ but also that ‘no final solutions should be expected’. The main focus of the summit was on the Serbia-Kosovo problem and encouraging dialogue to resolve it. (EWB, 2019) Furthermore, аt this summit North Macedonia received positive comments and praise from Merkel and Macron for resolving the name dispute and among other things, Macron said: "When decision-makers decide to engage, and for that, we should thank Borisov, Tsipras, and Zaev, then a concrete solution can be found." (DW, 2019), emphasizing the success of the leaders in resolving the dispute. The summit does not appear to be important in terms of progress. Macron and Merkel are trying to keep the leaders' attention and keep the process going without making significant decisions about what to do next.
The next Summit was held in Poznan in July 2019, on the initiative of several EU Member States. At this summit, the EU reaffirmed its will to contribute and maintain continuity in
cooperation with the WB with a focus on five areas: transport and energy, digital, economy, security, and good neighborly relations. At the summit, former Vice President of the European Commission and Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy, Federica Mogherini (2014-2019) stated: "Our engagement with the Western Balkans is a priority. Today, all six partners in the Western Balkans are closer to the European Union compared to the beginning of our mandate almost 5 years ago. The European perspective remains the driver for change in the region. Regional cooperation, good neighborly relations, and reconciliation are key and support the EU integration of the Western Balkans.” (European Commission, 2019). Similar was expressed by Commissioner for European Neighbourhood Policy and Enlargement Negotiations- Johannes Hahn “We are stepping up our work to modernized infrastructures, support digitalization, invest in green growth and circular economy. The EU programs will bring tangible benefits to the people in the Western Balkans and are another milestone in our even closer ties with the region.” (ibid)
Several member states, led by France did not agree to start membership talks with North Macedonia and Albania. President Macron at the news conference said that the accession process needed to be reformed, he also stated: "The enlargement rules need reform. We must not open accession talks with North Macedonia before Albania - there must be a majority for talks with both, together. We should do more to help those countries develop, not just make pledges."
(BBC, 2019). Some European leaders reacted to the statement. Jean-Claude Juncker, the then head of the Commission, said it was a "major historical mistake" and hoped it would be only temporary. Then former European Council President Donald Tusk (2014-2019) also said: "It's not a failure, it's a mistake. I feel really ashamed." Former EU Enlargement Commissioner Johannes Hahn (2014-2019), stated: “To refuse acknowledgment of proven progress will have negative consequences, including the risk of destabilization of the Western Balkans, with the full impact on the EU.” However, not all EU member states agreed with the position of France.
Chancellor Angela Merkel marked that decision as ''disappointment'' (ibid).
The statement about blocking the start of membership talks with North Macedonia and Albania, despite meeting the criteria set by the candidates, is causing distrust and disappointment among the leaders of these countries, as well as among the citizens. This also indicates that EU member
states do not share a common view on the issue and points to the existence of unresolved disputes within the Union.
Nikola Dimitrov, Macedonia's minister for foreign affairs, called on the EU to be honest on the issue of starting negotiations. Among other things, he said: "The least the European Union owes to the region is to be direct with us." and "If there is no more consensus on the European future of the Western Balkans, citizens deserve to know." (ibid)
Furthermore, four months later in February 2020, President Emmanuel Macron on annual security conference in Munich stated that they are waiting for the results of the progress made by the candidate countries of North Macedonia and Albania and that if they were positive, negotiations could begin (Euro News, 2020). In March 2020, the European Commission presented the results achieved by the candidate countries and stated: "The Commission stands firmly on its recommendations to open accession negotiations with Albania and North Macedonia and I hope that the Member States will make a positive decision in the coming weeks" (European Commission, 2020). Despite the positive news from the French president and positive comments from European Commission, there are still doubts about the start of membership talks with the two countries, given the EU's internal indecision on the issue.
The countries of the Western Balkans have gone through a difficult process of transformation in recent years, as a result of the numerous conflicts that took place in this area in the 1990s. The paradox of the current approach is that those same countries are expected to go through more obstacles as candidate countries than the countries of the previous wave of EU enlargement.
(Kmezic, 2015, p.14).
However, EU candidate countries are still ahead of the EU threshold, 21 years after the start of the accession process (1999 SAP). The consequence of the events of the past period is the distrust of the candidates, who in some way pay the price for the irresponsibility of the EU. The progress made by the states, especially the case of the referendum and the change of the state name of North Macedonia is of great effort and sacrifice. All this is making questionable the sincerity of the EU and the question of whether the current EU approach is sufficient for Western Balkan countries to enter the EU.
3.5 Limits of the EU approach to the Western Balkans
Over the years, each country individually has sought to implement reforms, but there are still obstacles that are slowing countries on their path to the EU. The long period of negotiations has caused impatience between political leaders and political parties in most of these countries. The impatience that exists is due to the long years filled with promises, events, and statements from European officials that call into question the whole process and the sincerity of the EU in all this.
On the other hand, the EU is facing internal problems that put the enlargement process in the background.
According to European observers, several problems explain the existence of obstacles in the current EU approach to the WB. One of the problems is the so-called “enlargement fatigue” and concerns about whether the EU can attract new members. The second problem is the so-called
“institutional fatigue” experienced by citizens in terms of basic EU political stability, after the French and Dutch rejection of the European Constitution in 2005. The third problem is the so- called “financial fatigue” of some member states' failed economies (e.g. Greece's bankruptcy).
An additional problem is a problem with the migrant crisis and the lack of an appropriate solution by the EU for it (Fraenkel, 2016). Problems of this kind affect countries as well as EU citizens who show disagreement with future EU enlargement.
According to the ECFR survey (ECFR, 2019) most of the European citizens stated that they are against the future enlargement of the EU. Surprisingly, Germans and Austrians, who as countries are in fact big supporters of the process, have been skeptical about this question.
However, the reasons for such results have another background. The countries that last joined the EU (Romania, Bulgaria, Hungary, the Czech Republic, and Croatia) still face obstacles after entry. The difficult transformation of Bulgaria and Romania as member states and deficits in the rule of law in Poland and Hungary (ibid) have further contributed to disagreement for further expansion and acceptance of underdeveloped WB countries in the EU.
The integration process depends on both sides, the EU on one side and the candidate and
negotiations influences the policies pursued in the WB countries which leads to changes in the societies, economy, and culture in those countries. The next chapter will cover the changes that are taking place in societies and how those changes are affecting the population.
4. Empirical part
The following section will be dedicated to the main issue in this thesis, i.e. analysis of the consequences of the integration of the Western Balkan countries into the EU and consequences for the citizens of WB in the period of accession. For that purpose, I will use the method of secondary analysis and I will analyze the results obtained from the European Commission for Investment Projects selected for EU funding for 2019 (European Commission, 2019) and a survey analytical report prepared by the Balkan Barometer 2020 (RCC, 2020). Additionally, I will also analyze the data gathered in the frame of the research conducted on behalf of the International Republican Institute’s (IRI) Center for Insights in Survey Research by Ipsos Bosnia and Herzegovina in 2020 (Center for Insights in Survey Research, 2020).
4.1 Positive and negative consequences for the citizens of Western Balkans countries, their behaviors and lifestyle in the period of EU accession
EU integration is leading to a change in many segments of the societies and states concerned.
Fulfillment of the conditions provided by the EU contributes to changes in policy, the functioning of institutions, the functioning of the economy, the modernization of society, and culture change. Countries that have a status of candidate countries for EU membership tend to improve and modernize in order to be closer to the European model of countries that provide security and good functioning.
The fact is that the EU is the largest investor in the Western Balkan countries. From the beginning, in the 1990s the EU has been involved in modernizing transport and energy infrastructure in the Western Balkan region. This has been noticeable through grants from the European Commission and loans from the European Investment Bank in a period from the 1990s to 2018. A total of 22 billion euros have been invested in the Western Balkans (European Commission, 2019, p. 5-11).
Furthermore, from 2015 to 2019, 1 billion euros were allocated for transport and energy projects that will be delivered in the period from 2015 to 2020. The European Commission's goal is to
increase funding to connect the Balkan region with investments in transport and energy trans- European networks. The investment will generate 4 billion euros in investment and 45,000 jobs (ibid).
Figure 1 shows the amount of EU investment distributed among WB countries. BiH is a country with the most investments planned in the period 2015-2019, ie 1,094.70 million euros. Second, in terms of investment is Serbia with 627.4 million euros. Investments of 399.2 million euros are planned in Montenegro, and 329.9 million in Kosovo. Macedonia and Albania are countries with the least investments, ie 272.7 million for Macedonia and 214 million for Albania (ibid.)
Figure 4.1: EU investments in Western Balkan countries 2015-2019 (€m)
Source: European Commission, 2020
EU investments in WB countries are of great importance to both, the Western Balkan countries and the EU, especially due to the location of these countries that connect Western European countries with EU member states in Southeast Europe. The modernization of transport infrastructure leads to better connectivity between countries as well as within countries. Good
