Main topic

ARICLES AND STUDIES

GEOPOLITICAL ASPECT OF REDEFINED STATE POWER ON THE EXAMPLES OF THE EU AND THE BALKANS

Abstract

Globalization did not make states unnecessary. On the contrary, in order for people to successfully take advantage of the opportunities offered by international integration, they need a state at both ends of their transactions. Weak, disordered and corrupt states are being avoided as black holes in the global economic system. The modern understanding of power (strength) of the state implies six basic factors on which its strength and authority in the international community are based. Those are: population, territory, economy, armed forces, foreign policy (political adaptability) and national culture. In this paper, modern international relations, the power and influence of each state are defined through elaborated factors which create the pyramid of power of today. The position of small and medium-sized countries is analysed on the example of the EU countries. These countries are trying to have a more significant influence on decision-making process through connection within various subregional groups, such as the Visegrád Group, the Benelux countries, the Baltic states and the like. This, especially on the example of the first group, will prove to be an issue in achieving full compliance of the EU countries, especially regarding the sensitive issues such as a mass migration to Europe. Recently, we have witnessed numerous attempts by the EU members to automatically declare narrow national interests as “European”, i.e. to try to “nationalize” the EU foreign policy. This trend has produced various tensions within the EU, both between member states and within the relation of member states with the European Commission, which is the official representative of the common interests of the EU countries. Dissonant characteristics that are present at the EU level, such as economic imbalance, “centre-periphery” issues, and crises of political systems, have negative affect on political systems and economic dynamics of the Western Balkan countries, with a notable increase in Euroscepticism. The unfavourable climate towards the EU enlargement from the EU itself is being transferred to the local levels which have always been a paradigm of intersection of the interests of both state and non-state global actors. During the 1990s, Turkey strongly implemented its presence and influence. Then, 2000s brought the consolidation of Russian influence through economic and investment presence, while the ending decade is marked by China which significantly increased its influence and presence in the region. Almost three decades after the break-up of Yugoslavia, the rest of Europe has been warned that there is a political and economic vacuum in the Balkans’ societies, which could soon turn into a security and political issue. If soon as possible there is no more certain prospect of the EU membership for those countries that are “stuck on the European path”, other players could enter the game more significantly, primarily China, Russia, Turkey and some Arab countries. Concerns that China could use the situation with the current COVID-19 pandemics and expand its political influence in Serbia and the region, are increasingly expressed in the European political circles. The concern is not without reason. The European response has been waited for too long.

keywords :

References

    • Anastasijević, Dejan. 2018. „Zapadni Balkan: Sve dalje od EU”. BBC News na srpskom, 18. april, 2018.
    • Арон, Рејмон. 2001. Мир и рат међу нацијама. Сремски Карловци: Издавачка књижарница Зорана Стојановића.
    • Bayart, Jean-Franois and Brown, Andrew. 2007. Global Subjects: a Political Critique of Globalization. Cambridge: Cambridge by Polity Press.
    • BBC News.  2020.„Nuklearno naoružanje: Koje države ga imaju i u kojim količinama“. BBC News na srpskom, https://www.bbc.com/serbian/lat/svet-51109505, 19/05/2020.
    • Vulf, Martin. 2003. „Da li će nacionalne države preživeti globalizaciju”. U: Globalizacija – mit ili stvarnost (prir. Vladimir Vuletić). Beograd: Zavod za udžbenike i nastavna sredstva.
    • Гајић, Александар Саша. 2018. „Геополитичка позиција Србије: између атлантизма, евроазијства и кинеског утицаја“. Политика националне безбедности, бр. 2, стр. 13-29.
    • Garčević, Vesko. 2020. „Zapadni Balkan između EU, Rusije i Kine: ko ima kontrolu?”. Remarker, 17. avgust 2010.
    • Гаћиновић, Радослав. 2007. „Примена силе у међународним односима“. Српска политичка мисао, 3-4, стр. 9-22.
    • Деспотовић, Љубиша. 2016. „Антиномије националне (не)моћи: Глобализацијски и геополитички контекст националне безбедности Србије“. Политика националне безбедности бр. 2, стр. 27-45.
    • Entina, Ekaterina and Pivovarenko, Alexander. 2019. „Russia in the Balkans – The Balkans at the Epicentre of International Developments”. RIAC report, January 13, 2019, Russian International Affairs Council.
    • Zacher, Mark. 2001. „The Territorial Integrity Norm: International Boundaries and the Use of Force”. International Organization, vol. 55, issue 2, pp. 215-250.
    • Zorić, Ognjen. 2020. „Kina i Srbija: Čelično prijateljstvo u doba korone“. Radio Slobodna Evropa, 18. 3. 2020.
    • Igrutinović, Milan, Janjić, Miloš i Subotić, Strahinja. 2019. Kineski uticaj na Zapadni Balkan, Beograd: Centar za evropske politike.
    • Jović, Dejan. 2019. „Na Balkanu sve manje ‘vernika’, u EU sve više ravnodušnih”. Tanjug 13, decembar 2019.
    • King, Charles. 2010. Extreme Politics: Nationalism, Violence, and the End of Eastern Europe. New York: Oxford University Press.
    • Lopandić, Duško. 2010. „Male i srednje zemlje u međunarodnim odnosima i Evropskoj uniji“. Međunarodni problemi, br 1, str. 79-112.
    • Lopandić, Duško. 2017. „Kako članstvo u EU jača položaj zemalja male i srednje veličine“. European Fund for the Balkans, 26. jun 2017.
    • Maciois, John and Marie Gerber, Linda. 2011. Sociology. Toronto: Pearson Prentice Hall.
    • Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the Russian Federation. 2016. „The Foreign Policy Concept of the Russian Federation”, Approved by President of the Russian Federation Vladimir Putin, on November 30, 2016.
    • Novaković, Igor. 2011. „Koncept neutralne države”. Međunarodna politika, br. 114, str. 5-20.
    • O’Leary, Brendan. 2004. „Introduction”. In: Brendan O’Leary, Ian S. Lustick, and Thomas Callaghy (eds.) Right-sizing the State. The Politics of Moving Borders. New York: Oxford University Press.
    • Palokaj, Augustin. 2020. „Ovo je tajna velike moći relativno male države”. Jutarnji list, Zagreb, 22. jul 2020.
    • Радаковић, Милован. 2011. „Политички и војни аспект неутралности“. Политичка ревија, бр.1, стр. 297-307.
    • Републички завод за статистику Србије. 2020. База података о спољној трговини, https://www.stat.gov.rs/sr-latn/oblasti/spoljna-trgovina/ 31/05/2020.
    • Rujević, Nemanja. 2017. „Krajnja stanica – čekaonica“. Vreme br. 1379, 8. jun 2017.
    • Simić, Julija. 2020. „Serbia turns to China due to ‘lack of EU solidarity’ on coronavirus”. Euractiv, 18. 3. 2020.
    • Steinsson, Sverrir. 2016. „The Cod Wars: a re-analysis”. European Security, March 2016.
    • Стојановић, Радослав. 1982. Сила и моћ у међународним односима. Београд: Радничка штампа.
    • Stojković, Branimir. 2002. Identitet i komunikacija. Beograd: FPN: Čigoja.
    • Struver, Georg. 2020. „Diplomatija kineskog Strateškog partnerstva: Determinante i ishodi međunarodnog svrstavanja”, GIGA – Nemački institut za globalne prostorne studije, 29/05/2020.
    • Суботић, Милован. 2019. „Трансформација руске моћи у глобалном контексту и на примеру Србије“. Политика националне безбедности бр. 2, стр. 109-132.
    • Todd, Emmanuel. 2004. Kraj imperija, Ogled o raspadu američkog sustava. Zagreb: Masmedia.
    • Ćirjaković, Zoran. 2011. „Svođenje postjugoslovenskih država i njihovog stanovništva na pravu meru“. Bezbednost Zapadnog Balkana br. 21, str. 103-115.
    • UNHCR, OCHA, etc. 2007. Handbook on Housing and Property Restitution for Refugees and Displaced Persons. Turin: International Training Centre of the ILO.
    • Freedom House. 2019. Nations in Transit. https://freedomhouse.org/report/nations-transit 19/07/2020.
    • Hill, Christopher. 2003. The Changing Politics of Foreign Policy. New York: Palgrave MacMillan.
    • Hironaka, Ann. 2005. Neverending wars: the international community, weak states, and the Perpetuation of Civil War. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
PERIODICS The Policy of National Security 2/2020 2/2020 УДК: 327::911.3(497) 89-111
ç