EPI’s commentary on the conclusions of the Council of EU on Macedonia and Albania
Reaching the conclusions regarding the countries in the enlargement process was not an easy task for the Bulgarian presidency, especially taking into account that no conclusions for enlargement were adopted by the Council from the end of 2015. The key discussion revolved around the Republic of Macedonia, the Republic of Albania and their status. The outcome, as it usually is the case with the Council of the EU decisions, is a result of ‘bargaining’ between the EU member states, with a clear bloc of supporters, among which was Germany on one side and skeptics on the other, such as France and the Netherlands. The expectations by the candidate countries are often higher than what the Council of the EU can determine as a mutual position, but this time around it was especially clear due to the insisting done by France that a part of these significant questions cannot be a subject of decision before the European Parliament elections in 2019.
The conclusion leaves the EU door open and gives opportunity for the start of negotiations in the second half of the next year regarding Macedonia and Albania, conditioned by the implementation of reforms, which in the case of Albania are more difficult. The conditions contained in the conclusions are not new, neither surprising and they refer to the areas in which all of the stakeholders in the country need to work on, starting with the Government. Improvement in judiciary, security services and public administration reform needs to be shown until the middle of next year, the main areas in which the Government has already started the reforms, as a part of the Plan 3-6-9.
Nonetheless, if we look from a 2009 perspective, these are the first conclusions in which the start of negotiations in June 2019 is being reviewed with an indicative date and intergovernmental conference at the end of 2019, which was not the case up until now. However, there is no dilemma surrounding the concern that this conclusion does not validate enough the step forward done in the agreement on the name dispute, something that was undoubtedly recognized by the European Commission and a part of the member states, as Macedonia’s upper hand. Along the difficult name compromise and a fully renewed approach towards the neighboring countries, the Republic of Macedonia, for the first time ever, turned an “enemy” into an ally towards the European Union.
The attention that our, along with the European public, turned to the meeting of the Council was exceptional. From the enlargement aspect, the European Commission confirmed the role of the main advocate of enlargement, however the gap between the Commission and a part of the member states was also noted, regarding the evaluation of the candidate readiness and their lack of readiness for enlargement, due to the assessment that the Union primarily needs to deal with internal issues.
Several lessons could be drawn from this experience. Firstly, of course, is the need to work in continuation with all of the member states of the EU in this process, with the aim to help not only the Commission, but ourselves as well. We need to continue working with the neighbors – member states of the EU –regarding the mutual relationship and lobbying in the EU – as we would need them as allies in the long run.
The following 12 months should be used to make up for the lost time, with which we would have an advantage after the start of negotiations. The report from April 2019 will be the last from this composition of the Commission and will present a basis for the decision of the Council in June 2019. In it, we have a chance to show evidence of improvementwithin the given areas and provide argumentation for the start of the negotiations. The mobilization of the administration for this kind of a step would be challenging, but we expect an incentive from the European Commission, which announced preparatory activities in the direction of the start of the negotiations. We should use the negotiation experiences of Serbia and Montenegro, which today are quite different. Moreover, this experience could serve as a warning that we should realistically evaluate the conditions within the EU – at this moment and in the future. This is just an announcement for the start of a long path, which with great measure we should create ourselves. It is undeniable that the Macedonian Government has shown leadership and courageousness, but what is necessary is persistence, vision and capacity building for the process which will follow.
