CROATIA: EAST OR WEST?

by Brian Gallagher

Hrvatski Vjesnik (Australia) - 19 October 2001

 

Many believe that the imminent signing of the Stabilisation and Association Agreement (SAA) between Croatia and the European Union is the first step towards joining the EU. In reality, the terms of the SAA could mean a step away from the EU and into a regional federation; it may also mean Croatia being on the wrong side of a possible U.S. inspired 'buffer zone' between East and West.

There have been fears that the EU is interested in creating a regional federation in the region; a new Yugoslavia so to speak. Such fears are not without foundation. EU documents on its website freely describe EU thinking.

The EU strategy for the region, comprising the countries of the ex-Yugoslavia minus Slovenia plus Albania, is based upon the policies adopted for the ex-communist states on the one hand and the EU itself on the other – the EU being a 'valuable model' for the countries of South-eastern Europe. The EU has common laws, a parliament, commission, court, a single currency and central bank (bar the UK) and a proposed military role. If the EU is the model, then something not unlike the former Yugoslavia could well be in the offing.

The 'Zagreb Declaration' of 24 November 2000 gave more details. Paragraph 3 of the declaration clearly committed the five countries concerned to establish between themselves 'regional cooperation conventions' covering political dialogue, a free trade area and 'close cooperation' in the field of justice and home affairs. How ever you look at it, that describes some kind of federation; a 'soft' one, possibly, but a federation nevertheless. Such thinking does not apply to countries such as Bulgaria, Slovenia, Poland etc with whom the EU deals with on an individual, not regional, basis.

These are just words and intentions; it can be argued that they have no legal force. The SAA itself is another matter entirely. The SAA is the instrument of EU policy in the region; it only applies to the aforementioned ex-Yugoslav plus Albania minus Slovenia states. The proposed Croatian SAA has recently been made available on the EU website. Articles 11-14 – 'Regional Cooperation' are the vital parts of the SAA. It is in these articles that ideas of the Zagreb Declaration are given legal force.

The articles require Croatia to sign 'bilateral' agreements on 'regional conventions' with other states that are due to sign the SAA. These includes matters such as: political dialogue, a free trade area, mutual concessions concerning the movement of workers and capital as well as provisions on co-operation on matters not covered in the agreement, 'notably' the field of Justice and Home Affairs.

These agreements must be made within two years of each state having signed an SAA with the EU. This is a condition for further relations with the EU.

The end result of this is a set of inter-locking agreements which firmly bind Croatia with the other countries of the ex-Yugoslavia, with a coercive element involved. There is no guarantee in the SAA that if Croatia does all this that it will even join the EU. What is guaranteed is a future locked in with Yugoslavia, Albania, Macedonia and BiH.

Indeed, the SAA 'co-operation' provisions could well ensure that Croatia stays out of the EU altogether. The provision for movement of labour is surely a matter of concern. This will no doubt involve some loosening of work permit requirements. I do not envisage many Croats seeking a better future in Albania, Serbia and Macedonia. I do however see a great many Albanians, Serbs etc deciding to go to Croatia to look for work. What effect this will have should be considered. Furthermore, with more freedom of movement, a great many people from the other SAA states may use Croatia as a conduit point to illegally enter the EU. The SAA contains some provisions for Croatia to prevent this. But stemming the flow of illegal immigrants is notoriously difficult.

In the EU, particularly the UK, illegal immigration, or 'bogus asylum seekers' in the UK are a major political issue. British tabloids are full of sensationalist stories about such people, particularly those from Albania/Kosovo.

Indeed, one recent article linked asylum seekers to Osama bin Laden's organisation. If Croatia gets a reputation for being involved in the migrant trade then it can forget all about joining the EU; various reasons will be used to keep Croatia out, but out it will stay. Croatia may not then be part of the EU, but will be part of the SAA's inter-locked area. Serbia will dominate this arrangement, which is no doubt why people such as Zoran Djindjic, and former Yugoslav Prime Minister Milan Panic back regional economic ideas.

Furthermore, the loosening on cross-border activity such as movement of capital etc will enable criminals from other SAA states more opportunities via Croatia. We know organised crime is prevalent in places such as Albania and – as the Gavrilovic affairs shows – at the highest levels in Serbia. The idea of linking justice and home affairs between Croatia and these countries may simply mean corruption spreading to Croatia. Again, a reputation for criminality in the region with which Croatia is to be inter-locked could do Croatia enormous damage in its EU accession chances.

But there are even worse implications. The recent atrocities committed in New York demonstrate how terrorists operate on a worldwide basis, transferring funds and personnel easily. In recent days we have heard much of bin Laden -and others- links in BiH.

The SAA means that terrorists will be able to move more freely via Croatia. There is some talk of the Americans creating a 'buffer zone' in the region – effectively between East and West. If the SAA goes ahead Croatia is more likely to be on the 'wrong' side of that buffer zone. The US – and others – will take one look at Croatia's links with SAA countries believed to harbour terrorists and simply consider Croatia to be on the other side i.e. part of the East, not West. Many already think that. The SAA will do nothing to help Croatia to be on the Western side; especially as it may help terrorists to move personnel, money etc via Croatia.

Signing the SAA as it is could be a mistake of historic proportions. Croatia should insist upon renegotiating it. A case can be made to the EU that the SAA regional approach could be in its worst interests. Croatia must act immediately; time is not on her side.

The SAA can be seen at the EU website at:

http://europa.eu.int/comm/external_relations/see/croatia/com01_371en.pdf

Articles 11-14, "Regional cooperation" are on pages 18/19

 

© Brian Gallagher

 

A follow-up to this article can be found here