Edward Lucas talks about his new book (The new cold war - How the Kremlin Menaces Both Russia and the West) at Google HQ:

The “Kosmolinks” are finally back, and with the help of diigo I will try to make it a weekly feature! You can also watch and navigate through a slide show of all live pages of “Kosmolinks”: Just click here to start the “WebSlides”!

• Medvedev’s Russia

  A bunch of experts share their views about the new Russian president and topics ranging from Putin and developments in the Russian society and economy to the Caucasus and relations with Europe, Asia, USA … even a short paragraph on McCain and Obama.

• Mark Mardell - A presidential game of musical chairs

  The latest rumours about the new EU top jobs…Barroso, Ahern, Rasmussen, Blair, Juncker?…but it is also true that the front runners never win!

• The Borders of the European Union: Zagreb, 1. June 2011

  The Balkans in 2011? - A rather pessimistic (but realistic?) outlook on the future political developments on the Balkans…

• Belarus: RFE/RL Cites Online ‘Solidarity’ In Face Of Cyberattack

  Another cyberattack… exactly on the day of the 22nd ‘anniversary’ of the Chernobyl nuclear disaster. RFE planned live coverage of a protest rally in Minsk. Not that difficult to figure ot who was behind it…

• The Guest Blog : Le Monde goes Europe, the UK goes chicken

  Is the “Bureau of European Policy Advisers” (BEPA) of the European Commission (also known as the internal think tank) about to start blogging or is it only a guest post? Anyway, some good points on communicating and debating the EU and the usual problems and chances associated with it…

• Serbs to have easier travel in EU

  Another “carrot” for the undecided voters…

• ECFR: The new Russian presidency: Medvedev 1.0 or Putin 2.0?

  some “informed speculation” about the future of Putin and co.

• Time to think of a strategic bargain with Russia (pdf)
  

  Michael Emerson (CEPS) on the need of strategic relations between the West and Russia.

• Nicolas Sarkozy’s Foreign Policy: Gaullist by Any Other Name - Brookings Institution

  Is Sarkozy an Atlanicist, Gaullist or even a Sarkozyst?

It is 9 May, aka Europe Day, commemorating the Schuman declaration. Probably most people in Europe are not aware of it, regardless of the various events organised in each member state. However, if you work for one of the European Institutions, you actually get a day off (also some NGOs in Brussels have this tradition). I am wondering if it would make sense to have 9 May as a public holiday throughout Europe, in order to raise awareness and celebrate the European project? Of course it would be a purely symbolical decision (and EU symbolism is not very popular at the moment…) and another public holiday would have to be replaced (it seems impossible to introduce a “new” public holiday in light of current economic paradigms)

And herewith lies the problem: Nobody wants to get rid of “National days” in favour of a European one. Christian holidays are not public holidays in all European countries, and replacing one of them might not be particularly welcomed by many conservatives. Labour Day (+ May Day bank holiday in the UK) might be too historical and labour unions and many socialists would not support it (let alone any UK government). Some other related problems are: May 9 is traditionally known as “Victory day” in Russia, many countries celebrate the end of WWII on May 8, and the Council of Europe also has a Europe day on May 5…

So, what are your ideas on this? Do we need a public holiday on 9 May? Or would it actually be better not to change anything (and rather focus on “real” problems)?

Interesting TV documentary project about the Balkans. Unfortunately not online and only broadcasted by 3sat and ORF (both in German).

More details here and here:

This ten-part documentary series is one of the most ambitious TV projects on South Eastern Europe produced in recent years. It gives people who have contributed to the region’s progress since the mid-1990s the opportunity to comment on their present situation: artists, lawyers, journalists, activists, mayors and football players tell their version of the story. With powerful images, these ten 52-minute episodes provide a new perspective on the present and possible future of the region.

“Ministers, over lunch, will discuss the situation in the Western Balkans, notably in the run-up to the Serbian general elections on 11 May.” This is the seemingly unimportant announcement on the GAERC Council Agenda for the April 29th meeting in Luxembourg. But EU Foreign Ministers will have to decide on quite a difficult issue: Should the EU offer Serbia a Stabilisation and Association Agreement (SAA) before the Serbian elections? (which might even influence the election outcomes?)

The pessimistic perspective

The International Crisis Group thinks that the EU should not make a deal with Serbia before the upcoming elections. In a recently published research paper “Will the Real Serbia Please Stand Up?“, the think tank argues that the EU should not offer a SAA unless Serbia cooperates fully with the International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia (ICTY). The EU should also “stop intervening directly in support of one or another political force” in Serbia because it would backfire at the ballot box :

“At best, the EU and U.S. will have limited influence for many months, until a new government is formed, which may not be until September or later. Meanwhile, the public anger over Western support for Kosovo’s independence is such that any attempt to pressure or even induce Belgrade into more cooperation risks strengthening the nationalist vote.”

The think tank sums it up with the statement “appeasement has already failed in the Balkans for over a decade and a half”. One should also not underestimate regional dynamics. In many Western Balkan countries, the EU is seen as having double standards and offering a deal to Serbia now would only support this kind of argumentation, especially because cooperation with the ICTY is a crucial point for the whole region. Ultimately, a SAA with a concession on ICTY cooperation would weaken the negotiation position of the EU in other SAA and accession negotiations in the region.

The optimistic perspective

As part of a “blog-round table” (more about that later!) I had the chance to talk to Milica Delevic, the Serbian Assistant Foreign Minister for European Integration. Obviously she would welcome an early offer from the EU and argues that “EU engagement is always better than isolation”. However, she also admitted that the Serbian government is a bit “schizophrenic” on the issue because the SAA is more and more linked to a recognition of Kosovo (Koštunica:”Signing SAA means signing away Kosovo“). But signing a SAA is not EU membership and it has nothing to do with Kosovo either, it would rather establish contractual relations as well as better trade relations with the EU, and it would give Serbia access to EU funding. (Delevic: “Russia has better contractual relations with the EU than Serbia!”).

The Serbian electorate is quite evenly split between “nationalists” and “moderates” which will make it probably difficult to form a new government after the elections. But a SAA could give the EU some leverage over the next government, be it moderate, nationalist or a coalition. At the same time, EU integration is supported by a comfortable 70% majority of the population, and a clear sign from the EU could motivate voters to vote for more moderate and pro-EU parties.

The EU is likely to find a compromise on the ICTY question (which is of particular interest of the Netherlands and Belgium) that would link parts of the implementation process of the SAA to the full ICTY cooperation and not the SAA offer. Deutsche Welle quotes Belgian Foreign Ministry spokesman Francois Delhaye on the position of Belgium and the Netherlands on the issue: “The two countries would agree to a proposed Stabilization and Association Agreement (SAA), but Serbia should not benefit from the advantages of this accord without full cooperation with the International War Crimes Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia (ICTY).”

What future for Serbia?

So what should the EU do? - Here are the official Kosmopolit recommendations:

It is necessary to overcome the pure political argumentation here and to highlight the important process of reforming the country. Symbols still prevail in the Balkans. It is time for focusing on economic and social issues in order to overcome the power of symbolism, which has been present in Balkan politics for too long. By offering a SAA now, the EU can show that it has not given up on Serbia, which can be perceived as quite a powerful statement in Belgrade! Signing the SAA can bring a different perspective and a new hope, especially for the young generation/voters. The agreement would at least restart the pro-European debate and possibly turn the attention away from Kosovo. Although the SAA offer might not directly influence the election outcome, it will certainly increase the pressure on politicians to get serious about reforming the country. The persistence and attraction of radical and nationalistic ideologies can be traced back to the lack of economic and social reforms that are long overdue. The proposed SAA would not directly introduce reforms, it may nevertheless open the door for the long awaited process.

Written by: Tanchi & Kosmo

Update 29/04/08: The EU decided to sign a SAA with Serbia. However, the implementation and the ratification of the agreement will depend on Serbia’s full cooperation with the ICTY:

• Financial Times: EU to sign deal on on ties with Serbia
• EUObserver: EU to sign pre-accession deal with Serbia
• International Herald Tribune: EU nations agree to sign pre-membership pact with Serbia, not implement it
• Official statement by Boris Tadić, President of Serbia

The Economist has quite a good commentary about EU enlargement and the limited influence of the EU once a country has joined the club:

A common feature in all these tales is the limited leverage of Brussels. It is often said that the EU’s enlargement policy has been the most potent tool yet devised to entice its neighbours along the road to free-market democracy—far more effective than anything the United States has found to wield over its southern neighbours. But the corollary is a loss of influence after a country actually joins. The pattern of intensive reform to qualify, followed by a let-up in the process once membership is achieved, is too common to be mere happenstance.

(…)

There is another big problem with this game: the behaviour of old EU members. Mr Rehn notes that, if one took the worst features of every old EU country, one could easily come up with an amalgam that would barely meet any of the criteria for EU membership. To take just one example often cited by new members, Italy can hardly claim to be free of organised crime.

Click here to read the whole article!

While reading the article I remembered a very good comment made by Osman Topcagic, the Director of the Directorate for European Integration for Bosnia and Herzegovina whom I met a few weeks ago. He was fully aware of the above mentioned problem and instead emphasized the importance of the enlargement process in itself. Basically he said something along these lines (unfortunately I did not write down the exact words of the statement): It is not important when Bosnia joins the EU, it is important that we reform our country which is the most challenging task ahead of us. The EU helps facilitating this process and therefore we should enjoy the process because this is the time of improvements. And ultimately everyone would like to see improvements.

So, I guess the times are changing. The EU has learned from its mistakes and introduced stricter benchmarks, that can trigger restrictions also after EU accession. At the same time, politicians, especially in the Balkans (Turkey is indeed a different case), see EU accession as a chance to reform the respective countries.

Now only the old EU member states should start thinking about the issue…