WILL CROATIA JOIN A BALKAN NATO?
by Brian Gallagher
Hrvatski Vjesnik No.927 The New Generation English Supplement
26 July 2002
Croatia's relations with NATO have changed for the worse. Not only has it been made clear that Croatia will not join NATO in the near future, but Croatia is expected to "deepen and broaden co-operation " with its neighbours. The final intention appears to be some kind of regional security arrangement, involving "role specialisation" and having to "pool resources". Serbia is already involved in NATO policy-making on the issue. This appears to be geared to creating some form of mini-NATO for the region, effectively being the military side of the EU's West Balkans plan. The Serbs will naturally dominate, and Serb military units may return to Croatia.
On 24 June a conference entitled "Regional Stability and Co-operation: NATO, Croatia and South-East Europe" took place in Croatia. Lord Robertson, Secretary-General of NATO, gave a speech. This speech was clearly intended to signal NATO's policy for the region.
He covered problems in Kosovo, Serbia and Bosnia-Herzegovina as well as discussing Croatia. NATO clearly considers Croatia to be fully part of this troubled region, which cannot be good news for Croatia's image.
Robertson spelled out NATO's plans for the region's future:
"Regional cooperation can build greater confidence and mutual trust. And it can promote economies of scale, defence cooperation and role specialisation, encouraging like-minded countries to pool resources to enhance their own security more effectively"
Clearly, phrases such as "role specialisation" and "pool resources" means powerful inter-linking with other militaries of the region. Croatia could, for example "specialise" in the naval aspects of such arrangements whilst Serbia does so for land forces - perhaps even commanding Croatian troops. All this would involve joint exercises etc. In other words, Serbian infantry, tanks and artillery could end up exercising in Slavonia, no doubt including a number of troops whose last excursion in the area was to destroy Vukovar. Croatia and Serbia are not "like-minded" countries. Comparisons with the Baltics, which Robertson made, are thus completely inappropriate.
Robertson pointed out that the process of "co-operation" has already begun. In the recent civilian NATO exercise in Croatia "Taming the Dragon", representatives from BiH and Yugoslavia were present. A somewhat innocuous beginning, but no doubt over time, there will be more 'representatives' appearing at such exercises, culminating in joint military exercises.
Robertson commented on the two NATO projects that are driving this process: the South East Europe Security Steering Group (SEEGROUP) and the South East Europe Common Assessment Paper on Regional Security Challenges and Opportunities (SEECAP). A number of countries are involved in these initiatives. What is significant is that Serbia is a participant. Serbia is therefore helping to shape the new military policies for the region. This is not well known, because of Serbia's non-membership of Partnership for Peace programme.
It is staggering that the Serbian military, responsible for so much atrocity in places such as Vukovar, Dubrovnik etc is welcomed with open arms in NATO's policy making structure. All the more so, when one considers the fact that Serbia is harbouring indictees of the Hague war crimes tribunal.
Serbia's non-membership of Partnership for Peace is irrelevant. Serbia is already in NATO structures, and NATO policy is for "regional co-operation" rather than Serbia joining NATO.
Or indeed Croatia. Robertson also gave a quote to the press stating that Croatia has much to do to enter NATO because "With a politicised army, (Croatia) will never become a NATO member." Robertson effectively said that Croatia is not joining NATO anytime soon.
Many will no doubt wonder why all of a sudden Croatia has a "politicised army". Does the army have a high profile during elections, influencing the result? No. This is simply an excuse to keep Croatia out. Furthermore, does this standard apply to NATO members? Does it apply to Turkey, where the military have such a strong influence? Indeed, does it apply to the US military, who made their opposition to Clinton's policy over gays in the armed force very well known. No.
And why does this concern not prevent "regional co-operation"? After all, if the Croatian military is so "politicised" - presumably they mean 'extreme nationalist' - then one would have imagined that co-operation with Serbia, BiH etc would have been firmly off the cards. No, this simply an excuse to keep Croatia out of NATO and into some regional military structure; a West Balkan NATO.
Robertson signalled that NATO's own priorities for the region will be dealing with criminals, terrorists and illegal movement of people and arms. Croatia is considered part of this problem region, which NATO appears to want quarantined.
What is incredible, is that the Stabilisation and Association Agreement (SAA) that Croatia has signed with the EU, ensures - within articles 11-14 - that Croatia must make the transfer of people, services etc simpler with countries such as Serbia, BiH and Albania. This will make life easier for terrorists and criminals, who will start to move more and more via Croatia. Croatia is already loosening visa restrictions with Serbia.
Why is Croatia anchoring itself to these problem countries? Is Zagreb unaware of the appalling image these countries have in the EU? The British media - often hysterically - is continually running stories about Albanian criminals gangs in the UK. General Sylvester, Head of NATO in Bosnia-Herzegovina, in relation to dealing with terrorism described the BiH border as "porous" in TIME magazine.
Such an image means that Croatia will never join NATO and the EU on an individual basis. But it will certainly end up in some "West Balkan" structure. The EU makes things clear on their website. They wish to "encourage the countries of the region to behave towards each other and work with each other in a manner comparable to the relationships that now exist between EU Member States." A West Balkan EU in other words. Significantly, Lord Robertson ended his above-mentioned speech by claiming that NATO itself was an example to follow of "regional co-operation". Not a structure to join; but an example to follow. NATO and the EU are clearly thinking on the same lines.
Croatia will be economically impoverished by 'West Balkans' association. Many investors will take their money to 'safer' countries, not linked to basket case economies such as Serbia. And if there are any conflicts in Serbia or elsewhere, tourism may suffer. Croatia needs to get away from the West Balkan image, not plunge straight into it.
West Balkan integration is a gradual process that will creep on Croatia. If the international community were to declare that Croatia was to become part of some West Balkans state, there would be mass protest. Hence the softly, softly approach. The idea here is to enmesh Croatia firmly in to the "West Balkans" over time, promising the Croatian public that it will join the EU, NATO if it participates in "regional co-operation". At the same time, the international community denies any regional federation plans. The clever part of all this, is that the West Balkans structure that will emerge may not even have an official name; it lets people claim that no regional structure is planned.
The truth is that there is no real appetite for the 'West Balkans' to join the EU and NATO. It is much easier to establish the West Balkans structure thus quarantining these 'problem' countries. Some associate membership for the '"West Balkans", dominated of course by Serbia, will probably be offered, in lieu of real membership of NATO and the EU. Given the second class EU status being offered to countries far ahead of Croatia in joining the EU accession process such as Poland and the Czech Republic, it is somewhat naive to think Croatia will not be offered third or fourth class membership.
Ironically, the only person associated with the ruling actors in the region to have pointed out the EU West Balkan plan was not any Croat, but one of President Kostunica's foreign advisers, Pedrag Simic. He stated that the EU had consigned Serbia to a long-term second class status, as part of a 'Euroslavia' consisting of former Yugoslavia plus Albania, minus Slovenia. Other Serbian politicians, such as Prime Minister Djindic, a regional co-operation enthusiastic, will no doubt grasp the opportunity for Serbian hegemony within such a structure, second class or not.
Last year I wrote that Croatia may end up on the wrong side of a 'buffer zone' facing East. That is clearly coming to pass. Could it have been different? Can it be different in the future? Yes. The Slovenes provide the example. By simply saying "no", Slovenia has avoided all regional nonsense and has escaped the Balkan image. It is on a fast track to NATO and the EU. More importantly, it also has a choice. Many in Slovenia are wary of joining NATO; it may not happen. The Slovenes have the luxury of choosing whether to join NATO or not. Croatia, on the other hand, has no such choices. Even if the Croatian people in the future decide against joining the EU or NATO, it will be stuck in a 'West Balkans' political and military structure, harmful to its economy - and dominated by Serbia.
My advice? Adopt Slovene policy.
Lord Robertson's speech can be found at: http://www.nato.int/docu/speech/2002/s020624a.htm
Current EU policy can be found at: http://europa.eu.int/comm/external_relations/see/actions/sap.htm
© Brian Gallagher