The disintegration of the new countries which are destined to join the European Union proposes problems that it would be disingenuous to overlook. Current affairs has all eyes focussed on Kosovo, but in the past, attention focussed on the splitting of the former Czechoslovakia into two separate countries, the independence of Montenegro - and then there is the case of Cyprus which has still not been settled (see my column in yesterday's bulletin). On top of all that, Bosnia Herzegovina is a failure and new parts of it may still decide to split off. My comments include no value judgements - if a community feels it is being oppressed and is not free, then it will aspire to self-determination. But the EU has the duty to look after its modus operandi. At least six MEPs per member state; 'fair rotation' at the European Commission; calculating double majorities at the Council - these rules are not easy to apply when the number of countries goes above a certain level. Any unified state that divides up into separate parts will see itself given greater weight in Brussels and this destabilises the way the EU operates. On the fringes of the UN negotiations in New York two days ago, Serbian Prime Minister Vojislav Kosturica responded in answer to a question about the possibility of the EU absorbing Serbia and Kosovo as two independent countries, by commenting that this option would pave the way for a whole raft of calls for self-determination by different minorities within the EU. This answer cannot be generalised - each case has its own merits, and this goes for Kosovo as much as for the others. Moreover, people calling for self-determination have to live with the consequences. Countries whose state structure has only survived by being propped up for decades by subsidies from elsewhere cannot be allowed to continue.
New groupings can safeguard everyone's identity. After listing the troublespots above, I would now like to move on to discuss changes in the opposite direction, new groupings and cooperation beyond national boundaries. The word 'Euroregion' has been around for a long time and the EU has always encouraged such moves. Important examples already exist (between France and Germany for example) and others are being developed (concerning Spain for example). The concept is currently being extended and taking shape, building upon the restoration of links and cooperation that existed in the past, which are now being relaunched with a new characteristic - safeguarding the identity of each. If this criterion is met, anything is possible for anyone whose eyes are not blinkered by nationalist fanaticism or (even worse) religious fanaticism. For three reasons, I will focus today on a single case - that of the Euroregion that is made up of part of Slovenia, Italy and Austria, to be joined in the future by the Istrian part of Croatia.
A special case. These lands were once part of the Austro-Hungarian Empire. Writer Boris Pahor explains with a grin: “I was born an Austrian. I was deported as a Slovenian. Then, as an Italian, I became a language teacher.” The different lands started by winning back their autonomy and then had to survive a black period when it was virtually impossible to cross the borders between them - borders guarded by armed soldiers. A new phase is opening today. Already a member of the eurozone, Slovenia became an operational member of the border-free Schengen area this Friday (21 December 2007), and passport controls have been abolished. In a few days time, the Slovenian government will hold the presidency of the Council of the EU for six months, during which time two EU summits will be held.
The new Euroregion will be formally established in the spring of 2008. Its capital will be Trieste, Italy's most international city, where three languages were spoken in the past - Italian, Slovenian and German. Three countries (Austria, Italy and Slovenia) will share a natural park and their seaports will work together. There will be common projects and cooperation covering the economy, transport, health, the environment and tourism. But each community will keep its own cultural and economic identity. Investment should receive a boost and the railway between Italy and Hungary and beyond will be updated.
With less ambitious aims, the Adriatic Euroregion has been created at the Council of Europe, between the local governments of six different countries (Italy, Slovenia, Croatia, Bosnia Herzegovina, Montenegro and Albania) and it already has an office in Brussels.
Communities are starting to write their own history. Land, ethnicity and language will mix, match and mesh again, this time on an equal footing, each with its own identity. I do not claim that all will be plain-sailing. Differences continue to exist and more will rear their heads in the future. But this type of initiative shows us the right path.
(F.R.)