Overcoming bilateral disputes as part of the EU accession process
DOI :
https://doi.org/10.60054/PEU.2019.6.228-239Ключови думи :
EU, North Macedonia, accession, bilateral, disputesАбстракт
Bilateral disputes have presented a significant obstacle for EU enlargement, especially in the region of South-Eastern Europe. The disputes between Slovenia and Croatia, Macedonia and Greece, Turkey and Greece/Cyprus demonstrated the need for a more cohesive approach in order to avoid situations where bilateral issues could pose a threat to the enlargement policy. Moreover, future enlargement rounds may be endangered by additional disputes – Croatia and Serbia, Serbia and Kosovo, Albania and Serbia, etc. Historical, cultural and political issues often favour national interests, while the common European interest remains neglected. The idea for a “Europe whole, free and at peace” can be realized only with the necessary political will and courage, strong determination for completion of the European project, and continuous commitment to the process that has brought benefits to millions of European – the enlargement. Instead of maintaining the fear of “importing conflicts”, the EU is the most appropriate actor that can contribute to solve them, using all the tools available in the accession process. Lessons learned, existing challenges, as well as potential outcomes are analyzed in this paper.
Литература (библиография)
Albioni, R., & Greco, R. (1996). Foreign Policy Re-nationalization and Internationalism in the Italian Debate. International Affairs, 72(1).
Bartovic, V., et al. (2011). The EU Enlargement to the Western Balkans: Time to Put Conditionality First Again. In Contribution of 16 European Think Tanks to the Polish, Danish and Cypriot Trio Presidency of the European Union. Notre Europe – Jacques Delors Institute.
Bassuener, K. (2010). EU Enlargement on its own is not a Credible Policy. Europe's World, (19).
Baun, M. J. (2000). A Wider Europe: The Process and Politics of European Union Enlargement. Rowman & Littlefield.
Booker, C., & North, R. (2003). The Great Deception: A Secret History of the European Union. Continuum.
Carmin, J., & VanDeveer, S. D. (2005). EU Enlargement and the Environment – Institutional Change and Environmental Policy in Central and Eastern Europe. Routledge.
Favretto, I. (2004). Italy, EU Enlargement and the 'Reinvention' of Europe between Historical Memories and Present Representations. Journal of Southern Europe and the Balkans, 6(2).
Grabbe, H. (2001). Profiting from EU Enlargement. Centre for European Reform.
Halverson, T. (1993). Ticking Time Bombs: East Bloc Reactors. The Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists, 49(6).
Hilion, C. (2010). The Creeping Nationalisation of the EU Enlargement Policy (Report No. 6). Swedish Institute for European Policy Studies.
Janev, I. (1999). Legal Aspects of the Use of a Provisional Name for Macedonia in the United Nations System. The American Journal of International Law, 93(1).
Klemenčič, M., & Zupančič, J. (2004). The Effects of the Dissolution of Yugoslavia on the Minority Rights of Hungarian and Italian Minorities in the Post-Yugoslav States. Nationalities Papers, 32(4).
Kramer, J. M. (2004). EU Enlargement and the Environment: Six Challenges. Environmental Politics, 13(1).
Kubosova, L. (2005). Slovakia: Barking after Lost Bone. Transitions Online.
Linden, R. H. (2002). Norms and Nannies: The Impact of International Organizations on the Central and East European States. Rowman&Littlefield.
Önis, Z. (2001). Greek – Turkish Relations and the European Union: A Critical Perspective. Mediterranean Politics, 6(3).
Paul, A. (2011). The Turkey- EU Deadlock. European Policy Center.
Pavlinek, P., & Pickles, J. (2004). Environmental Pasts / Environmental Futures in Post-Socialist Europe. Environmental Politics, 13(1).
Ramming, S. (2008). Cyprus' Accession Negotiations to the European Union: Conditional Carrots, Good Faith and Miscalculations. International Negotiation, 13(3).
Rehn, O. (2006). Europe's Next Frontiers. Nomos.
Roter, P., & Bojinovic, A. (2005). Croatia and the European Union: A Troubled Relationship. Mediterranean Politics, 10(3).
Rudolf, D., & Kardum, I. (2010). Sporazum o Arbitraži između Hrvatske i Slovenije (Arbitration Agreement between Croatia and Slovenia – in Croatian). PPP, 49(164).
Slapin, J. (2009). Exit, Voice and Cooperation: Bargaining Power in International Organizations and Federal Systems. Journal of Theoretical Politics, 21(2).
Teasdale, A. L. (1993). The Life and Death of the Luxembourg Compromise. Journal of Common Market Studies, 31(4).
Tocci, N. (2002). Cyprus and the European Union Accession Process: Inspiration for Peace or Incentive for Crisis? Turkish Studies, 3(2).
Tocci, N. (2010). Unblocking Turkey’s EU Accession. Insight Turkey, 12(3).
Torreblanca, J. I. (2006). The European Union’s Financial Perspective for 2007-13: A Good Agreement for Spain. Elcano Royal Institute.
Tsebelis, G., & Yataganas, X. (2002). Veto Players and Decision-making in the EU After Nice: Policy Stability and Bureaucratic/Judicial Discretion. Journal of Common Market Studies, 40(2).
Turkalj, K., & Ibler, V. (2001). Piranski Zaljev: Razgraničenje Teritorijalnog Mora između Hrvatske i Slovenije. Organizator.
Verney, S. (2006). EU Enlargement as a Moral Mission: Debating Cyprus' Accession in the European Union [Paper prepared for presentation at the 3rd Paneuropean Conference of the ECPR Standing Group on European Union Politics].
Wesolowsky, T. (1998). Sparring over Mochovce. The Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists, 54(6).
