![]()
Introduction
This chapter introduces the reader to the book’s overall theme and the different concepts and definitions used. To set the scene, the first part offers a brief summary of the involvement of the European Union (EU) and other international actors in the Western Balkans. The second part offers a short discussion on the context of international state-building and the case of Kosovo and the justification for the approach taken in the book. The last part provides the structure of the book through a brief overview of individual chapters.
Setting the scene: the EU and other international actors in the Western Balkans
The map of Europe has changed significantly over the past few decades (Wydra, 2020, 315). The fall of the Soviet Union (SU) and the breakup of the Socialist Federal Republic of Yugoslavia (SFRY) established new borders in Europe (ibid). As a result of the collapse of SFRY, part of those newly established borders in the 1990s and early 2000s, six new countries emerged (i.e., Slovenia, Croatia, North Macedonia, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Montenegro, and Serbia). The last country which emerged from the breakup of Yugoslavia was Kosovo in 2008. Perhaps, there is some truth in the claim: “THE YUGOSLAV CRISIS began in Kosovo, and it will end in Kosovo” (Malcolm, 2002, xliii). In the meantime, Slovenia in 2004 and Croatia in 2013 joined the EU, whereas the rest of the five countries that emerged from the SFRY, plus Albania, constitute what is nowadays dubbed as ‘Western Balkans’.
Hence, the Western Balkans is only partly incorporated into Western security and economic institutions 20 years after the wars in the former Yugoslavia (Larsen, 2020, 1). Today, the region is an arena for dominance involving NATO and the EU on the one side and Russia and China on the other side (ibid). The EU has remained involved in the region directly and extensively in the past 20 years. However, none of the six Western Balkans countries have been able to join the EU yet. To all of them, the EU has promised a European perspective since 2003 at the EU–Western Balkans Thessaloniki Summit.
Nonetheless, no tangible progress has been achieved until now related to the final goal (EU’s accession), and the midterm future is not that optimistic in this sense. Among the six Western Balkans countries on their relations with the EU, Montenegro in 2012 and Serbia in 2014 have opened their accession negotiations, and Albania and North Macedonia are expected to open accession negotiations soon, if Bulgaria will drop its veto on North Macedonia. At the same time, Bosnia and Herzegovina and Kosovo are considered only as potential candidates. Nevertheless, the EU has not been able to replicate its Central and Eastern European (CEE) enlargement success story in the Western Balkans (Richter and Wunsch, 2020, 42). In essence, internal enlargement resistance in the 2020s is the product of multiple fragmentation and disintegration processes that vary significantly from the enlargement fatigue debates that followed the accession of the CEE countries nearly two decades ago (Economides, 2020, 6). In concrete terms, these processes result from a questioning of the future of integration as a whole, not just of administrative and decision-making processes (ibid). Brexit adds more to the puzzle.
In contrast to the EU, under the US leadership, Albania in 2009, Montenegro in 2017, and North Macedonia in 2020 joined NATO. Serbia is unwilling to move; in Bosnia, this process is obstructed by Republika Srpska. Kosovo is willing to join, but due to the non-recognition by four NATO member-states, it struggles to initiate this process. A myriad of the other external actors involved (e.g., China and Russia, Turkey, without undermining the other international actors) complicates the mosaic in the Western Balkans. For instance, there has undoubtedly been an increase in Russian meddling in the Western Balkans, sometimes at the demand of governments (Serbia, Republika Srpska), and sometimes allegedly directed against governments (Montenegro) (Balkans in Europe Policy Advisory Group – BiEPAG, 2017, 7). Russia, among others, is using its support for Serbia in the Kosovo issue, which it has provided to Serbia as a permanent member of the United Nations Security Council.
On the other hand, over the past ten years, Russia has established a strong relationship with Republika Srpska and its president Milorad Dodik, who is trying to foster an ethnic identity in opposition to Bosnia and Herzegovina’s NATO membership bid (Larsen, 2020, 3). Such a Russian policy is not exceptional only in the Western Balkans – the EU encounters challenges to its activities and policies by Russia also in the South Caucasus (Noutcheva, 2018, 467). Besides, China is involved in the region via its economic power and various projects – China’s 16+1 initiative, as part of the ‘Belt and Road’ project and also promises on new infrastructure and unique project investments, as well as job growth, with no political conditions attached (Economides, 2020, 7–8). This is the present situation in the Western Balkans, which is not an easy one, and as can be seen, the case study of this book is also part of this landscape, and perhaps its nexus.
International state-building and the case of Kosovo
International state-building, as opposed to indigenous state-building, occurred around the turn of the 20th century. In essence, this process was first initiated with the missions of the League of Nations, dubbed the ‘mandate system’. The rationale behind these missions was the re-distribution of the colonial possessions of defeated powers. This practice was carried on until the Second World War. In the aftermath of the Second World War, this mode of state-building was continued by UN trusteeship missions. A similar practice was carried out after the Second World War in the reconstruction of Germany and Japan by the United States and its allies. Currently, this practice is primarily carried out by the UN, or in the past 20 years from the United States and its allies (as, e.g., Afghanistan, Iraq).
Nevertheless, in the past 25 years (notably since the establishment of the Common Foreign and Security Policy (CFSP) under the Maastricht Treaty in 1992/93), the EU has increasingly become involved in international state-building operations. One of the crucial parts of the world where the EU has played this role and still does is in the Western Balkans (e.g., Kosovo, Bosnia and Herzegovina, North Macedonia) and elsewhere in the world (e.g., Congo, Chad, Afghanistan, etc.). In these various missions in international state-building, the EU either played the role of key or assistant actor in the process of (re)building a state. This book intends to address the EU’s role in international state-building in a systematic and in-depth analysis in Kosovo’s case compared to other international actors involved in this process. The first chapters of the book will look at the EU’s role in the birth of a state (i.e., Kosovo’s statehood) compared to other international actors (1999–2008). In contrast, the last chapter will analyse the EU’s role in norm diffusion in the post-independence period (2008–2020). Throughout this book (where feasible), we will try to draw a parallel analysis with broader debates and scholarly literature regarding the EU’s role as a state-builder or norm-diffuser.
Theoretically, this book combines the general framework of the liberal peace approach with the normative power Europe (NPE) approach. The rationale behind this perspective is based on the links that exist between the components of the liberal peace approach (institution-building, a free-market economy, and ethnic accommodation) and the ‘core’ norms of normative power Europe (sustainable peace, freedom, democracy, human rights, and the rule of law).
Similarly, some additional co-relations exist between the tools used for the diffusion of the tangible1 and normative2 impacts through the liberal peace approach and the tools used for the overt and transference diffusion of normative power Europe. This coherence and the links that exist in practice between the attributes of liberal peace approach and normative power Europe made feasible the application of this theoretical framework in this book.
In empirical terms, this book will analyse if the EU and other international actors were successful or failed to diffuse tangible and normative impacts in state-building in Kosovo (1999–2008), plus the EU’s diffusion of normative impact from 2008 to 2020. Moreover, it will scrutinise the role of the EU and other international actors’ roles in the processes of state-building through transference tools (funding) and overt tools (political role). Therefore, through these and other related findings, the current book aims to determine the EU’s role in state-building (particularly in Kosovo) by applying the liberal peace approach and its links with normative power Europe.
The eventual innovative dimension of this book may be drawn based on the below facts:
First, this book may engender a new perspective for studying the processes of international state-building through the combination/application of liberal peace approach and normative power Europe.
Second, few studies assess the results of state-building missions under the liberal peace approach as successful,3 and these studies chiefly look at the tangible impact of these missions. Additionally, more studies critically assess the results of state-building missions under the liberal peace approach and mainly scrutinise these missions’ intangible (normative) impact. On the contrary, this book intends to both combine the tangible and normative impacts and draw results based on this perspective. Such a perspective may also be an additional innovative dimension of this book.
Nevertheless, why Kosovo’s case, one might raise the question?
In fact, many scholars and researchers emphasised the importance of Kosovo’s intervention as a crucial or turning point in international affairs and state-building missions. In this context, a new model of international relations started a blueprint for new world order, in international response to the Kosovo crisis, in either a positive or a negative context (Weller, 2009, 259). Similarly, Kosovo is a critical test case for the EU, not only because of its pressing political/geopolitical significance but also because it represents the political geographies of EU power in its ‘neighbourhood’ (Bialasiewicz, 2009, 80). At the same time, some scholars emphasise the normative dimension of Kosovo’s state-building/peace-building process.
Few post-conflict places have undergone extensive and thorough reconstruction as Kosovo did following NATO’s intervention in 1999 (Björkdahl and Gusic, 2015, 266). As a result, Kosovo, with its unrivalled external presence, serves as a model for studying norm diffusion in post-conflict contexts (ibid). Likewise, Kosovo is a par excellence example representing the normative aspect of peace-building efforts (Groß, 2015, 313). These are relevant reasons and arguments (beyond other factual) that contributed to triggering further the author to test EU’s role as a state-builder in Kosovo’s case.
Structure of the book
In Chapter 2, the first part will briefly discuss the different categories under which the processes of international state-building are currently studied. Besides, the current debates and perspectives within the liberal peace approach (including the supportive and critical studies and applying this perspective in international state-building) will be discussed in this chapter. Because this book primarily intends to research the EU’s role in the process of international state-building in Kosovo, the third part of this chapter will review the scholarly literature on the EU’s international role. In this respect, normative power Europe links and coherence with a liberal peace approach are outlined.
Chapter 3 will discuss and analyse in more detail the involvement of all the EU agencies and other international actors in Kosovo concerning the three issues which will be discussed in subsequent chapters: (1) immediate economic reconstruction and free-market economy; (2) institution-building; and (3) ethnic accommodation (principle of multi-ethnicity). In essence, the chief objective of this chapter is merely descriptive (i.e., to offer a sort of chronological narrative and lay the ground for analysis and interpretation in the subsequent chapters). In order to reach this goal, the chapter will first address the NATO airstrikes against former Yugoslavia. Thereafter, it will analyse the UNMIK’s background, mandate, and structure, together with its four pillars. The second part of the chapter will then analyse and discuss the remaining fabric of the EU presence in Kosovo, which did not form part of UNMIK. In addition, this part will cover other international actors involved in the issues mentioned above in two different periods 1999–2008 and 2008–2020.
Chapter 4 will begin with an analysis and interpretation of the results regarding the immediate economic reconstruction and establishing a free-market economy. A simple reason for this is related to the timing factor that this process in post-conflict situations begins immediately after the conflict has ceased. Consequently, it is more logical to begin the discussion with this process. This chapter will analyse the diffusion of the tangible and normative impacts by the EU and other international actors through overt and transference tools concerning the immediate economic reconstruction and a free-market economy. The results of this endeavour will be generated and critically analysed. Also, it will be found out which of the involved international actors (e.g., EU, UN, the United States, OSCE) had the crucial role through overt and transference tools in diffusing the tangible and normative impacts regarding immediate economic reconstruction and free-market economy in Kosovo (1999–2008). It will also attempt to relate the chapter findings with broader debates in the relevant scholarly literature.
Of the three issues addressed in this book, Chapter 5 will address the key issue institution-building. Hence, this chapter analyses the diffusion of tangible and normative impacts of the EU and other international actors on institution-building in the process of state-building in Kosovo (1999–2008). Furthermore, it explores what international actors had key and as...
