IRIS publishes second of its kind study on human security threats in Bulgaria

My organisation, the Institute for Regional and International Studies (IRIS), has published today a second of its kind study on human security threats in Bulgaria. It is authored by IRIS′s expert and Sofia University professor Stoycho P. Stoychev and is part of the efforts of the Citizens′ Network for Human Security (cn4hs) for the Balkans and Turkey as part of a project supported by the European Commission. I am author of the introductions in Bulgarian and the English summaries.

This year′s study comprises two parts: a novel, qualitative research component on prostitution and the sexual services market in Bulgaria and the existing threats to human security of the people involved in it, focusing among other things on the changes that have occurred after a similar such study conducted in 2010; and a quantitative research component on the impact which the so-called controlled vote phenomenon in Bulgaria has on human security, building upon a qualitative study on the issue which IRIS’s team implemented in the first phase of the current project (2014).

Please take a look at the announcement on the official IRIS website and find there links to the comprehensive texts in Bulgarian and the English summaries.

Protests and Plenums: Bosnia's Civic Awakening and Youth Participation

Image: Wikimedia Commons (http://ow.ly/4nbV6q) 

My paper on Bosnia's civil movements in 2012-14, the unique form of direct democracy that ensued - the plenums - and the role of the young in all that is available here. It was written for the book Good Governance and Youth, ed. Dr Melanie Sully, published by the Institute for Go-Governance in Vienna.

Новият дуализъм на Сърбия: повече прагматизъм?

Мой коментар за актуалните обществени и политически процеси в Сърбия е достъпен на сайта на ИРМИ.

Elusive Identity: Duality and Missed Opportunities in Bulgarian Foreign Policy in the Black Sea Region

The Sofia Platform has published the collection of policy papers, Unrewarding Crossroads? The Black Sea Region amidst the European Union and Russia (eds. Anahit Shirinyan and Louisa Slavkova). My contribution, entitled "Elusive Identity: Duality and Missed Opportunities in Bulgarian Foreign Policy in the Black Sea Region", is available here.

Homo Civicus (Re)Born: The 2012-14 Protest Movements in Bulgaria and Good Governance

"Bulgarian Protest against Oresharski Cabinet" by AlexaHR.

With Phone CameraPreviously published: No where.

Licensed under CC BY-SA 3.0 via Wikimedia Commons

http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Bulgarian_Protest_against_Oresharski_Cabinet.jpg

#/media/File:Bulgarian_Protest_against_Oresharski_Cabinet.jpg

My paper on Bulgaria's 2012-14 protest movements and their impact on good governance is available here. It's part of the book Governance and Participation, ed. Dr Melanie Sully, on recent developments in the Black Sea region, published by the Institute for Go-Governance in Vienna.

EP 2014 elections in Bulgaria: A hint at normality?

Bulgaria’s Central Election Commission is yet to announce the official final results of the European Parliament (EP) election held on 25 May, 2014, but it has processed all protocols from the precincts with counted 100% of the ballots. This was the third EP campaign in Bulgaria after the one following EU entry in 2007 and then the regular one in 2009. Turnout was traditionally low (some 35%) and somewhere on the average in Europe.

New policy brief: "U-turns and Ways forward: Armenia, the EU and Russia beyond Vilnius"

Take a look here at my fresh policy brief, co-authored with Anahit Shirinyan and entitled "U-turns and Ways forward: Armenia, the EU and Russia beyond Vilnius." It was published on the website of the Institute for Regional and International Studies (IRIS).

Are they reformed?

I am not a Socialist. Even less am I a Bulgarian Socialist. The transition in Bulgaria has been such a wayward, idiosyncratic exercise that I – as  one who caught the last years of communism but who has fought for democracy after coming of age afterwards – define myself as right-of-centre in Bulgaria and centre-left out of Bulgaria. I have spent time in London, Sarajevo and Belgrade, sufficient time. There, I felt comfortable with the centre-left option: I like Labour more than the Tories (and even the LibDems), I used to like the Social Democrats (SDP) in Bosnia and the Democrats (DS) in Serbia before they decided to ruin themselves. I also read a lot, and I think the social democratic parties in Europe are sensible.

After the Party of European Socialists (PES) elected the Bulgarian Socialist leader, Sergei Stanishev, as its head, I thought there was a real chance for reform in this decaying, oligarchic structure called the Bulgarian Socialist Party (BSP). I thought – okay, this guy is of the same dough, a totalitarian child, Moscow-educated, hadn’t had a real job except party posts, but PES elected him as its chairman. Maybe this is a good sign: he will reform the party secretly from within. He rants about the usefulness of the Russian Belene nuclear power plant project, he seizes every opportunity to disgrace true centre-right reformists in Bulgaria, but after all he may be Europe’s secret weapon to reform my own Communists. Every person in the ex-Soviet bloc has their own Communists. Ask Kundera.

I have many Bulgarian Socialist friends. I admire them for their perseverance.

But Stanishev and his BSP now took a huge shit on both my friends’ beliefs and on my hopes that one day the Bulgarian left may be worth it. He appointed a mafia guy to take care of national security; he relies on the support of a far-right populist and Bulgarian neo-Nazi in parliament, even tolerating this guy’s appointment as head of the parliamentary ethics and anti-corruption committee; his foreign minister appoints former communist state security spies as chiefs at the ministry. He refuses to admit that there are tens-of-thousands-strong legitimate protests against him and the essence of this government taking place every single day in the capital. He says “these are only a couple of thousand of Sofians; it’s not Bulgaria.” It’s just like a quarter of a century ago, when his mother party invented the “Sofia citizenship” thing to separate people.

I am asking now – asking PES and all the people of Europe, for whose values I won’t stop fighting; Europe, our sacred home: Are they reformed?

Will Bosnian ethnoelites take heed, finally?

Take a look at my comment on the June mass civic action in Bosnia against the inadequate behaviour of its ethnic elites and the implications for the country. It was written for the Institute for Regional and International Studies (IRIS) and is available here.

A couple of analyses from March and April (the UK's Bulgarian/Romanian migrants hysteria and the EU's Balkan successes in Jan-Apr)

Following are links to two analyses I wrote for the Institute for Regional and International Studies (IRIS) in March and April which for а reason were not published until today. Though a bit old, I think they offer interesting insights. The first one, "While an EU member, Britain should behave like one," discusses the anti-Bulgarian and -Romanian hysteria in British society vis-a-vis potential immigration waves from these countries once EU labour restrictions for their citizens fall in January 2014, all this amidst the recently rising eurosceptic moods in the UK. It is available here. The second one, "Brussels should step up its involvement in Balkan disputes because it works," looks at the relative successes of EU foreign policy in the Balkans (this was written before the landmark success of the Brussels agreement between Serbia and Kosovo) and urges a more consistent involvement by Brussels. It is available here.

The importance of the Serbia-Kosovo deal is yet to be realised

Springtime is a precarious time in the Balkans. It is a time of agitation, oftentimes unrest, and sometimes open and deadly conflict. Looking at more recent history, hostilities in the Croatian war of independence from Yugoslavia broke out in March 1991; the war in Bosnia began a year later, in the spring of 1992; and the conflict between Serbia and NATO over Kosovo erupted in full force in March 1999. Conflict and unrest have regularly occurred afterwards, always in the time of spring – in Macedonia in 2001 and in Kosovo in the form of ethnic clashes, blockades and tensions.

What makes the spring of 2013 different is that it witnessed an agitation of a slightly different nature. For the majority of interested parties and observers, the deal for improvement of relations between Serbia and Kosovo of 19 April is a giant step forward in the ‘normalisation’ of politics and democratisation in the Balkans. It is one of the most important reconciliation achievements in the geographic domain of the former Yugoslavia, one of the last sore wounds long waiting to be healed. Western diplomats, policy makers, observers, mainstream Kosovo and Serbia political factors, as well as neighbouring Balkan leaders all praised the reached agreement. For others – extreme nationalist elements in the north of Kosovo, where an ethnic Serb enclave exists, similar-minded people in Belgrade and their Albanian counterparts in Prishtina – the agitation of spring 2013 is negative in nature. They denounced the deal and promised to fight it.

Is the Post-2000 Improvement of Relations Between Serbia and Croatia Irreversible?

Despite recent drawbacks, relations between the two Balkan neighbours are destined to improve. Read my piece written for the blog of the German Marshall Fund of the United States here.

New policy paper: "A ‘Balkan Autumn?’ Party Politics and Civic Manifestations in Bosnia and Montenegro before and during the 2012 Elections"

Take a look at my new policy paper published with the Institute for Regional and International Studies (IRIS). The paper reflects on party relations and civic trends in Bosnia and Montenegro in the time when the two countries held local and general elections, respectively - in October 2012. Is there a new hope for an emerging true civic participation in rigid, post-conflict societies as Bosnia (esp. the Republika Srpska) and Montenegro, dominated by a single party as of late? The paper is available here.

A new strategic overview of energy issues in the Western Balkans

In a recent short overview for the Institute for Regional and International Studies (IRIS), I am looking at the strategic implications and perspectives of the energy situation in the Western Balkans. The paper is available here.

Serbia's election saga and the implications for its EU path

Following is my comment on the presidential runoff vote held in Serbia on 20 May and its implications, as published on the site of the Institute for Regional and International Studies (www.iris-bg.org):

Tomislav Nikolić of the opposition Serbian Progressive Party (SNS) has won the runoff presidential elections in Serbia held on 20 May and will be the country’s next president. He beat the incumbent Boris Tadić of the Democratic Party (DS) with 49.8% to 47%, according to preliminary estimates made by pollster CeSID. The election results have several implications.

Serbia’s novel, mysterious ways with the ex-Soviet Union

Serbia has lately shown a surprising activity in its relations with some countries from the former USSR. These seem to be just the next embodiment of the Balkan country’s wandering dualism in foreign policy, predicated on the two imperatives of European Union membership and inalienability of Kosovo.

The presidential bid in Serbia remains important, both for the show and for the institutions

Serbia held on Sunday, 6 May, a comprehensive election that didn’t pose many surprises but remains important in terms of the repositioning of the main political players on the domestic scene and the implications for the institutional checks and balances. Serbian citizens went to the polls to elect members of the national parliament and the regional parliament of the northern Vojvodina province, local councillors and mayors and a president. However formal and inconsequential the election of a president in a parliamentary democracy may seem, in Serbia this vote carries a special charge. It is both an outright, individualised expression of the performance of the main parties and actually a determinant of the balance of power among Serbia’s main institutions, given the president has the right to be formally member of a political party and keeps his influence there and in the parliamentary caucus.

Four chapters in a study on the Western Balkans

The Institute for Regional and International Studies (IRIS) just published a study, The Western Balkans in 2010/11: Departures in Democratisation and European Integration in Europe's Southeast, in which I have four country-chapters on Bosnia & Herzegovina, Croatia, Montenegro and Serbia. I also contributed the conclusion. The study covers developments in the period from October 2010 to January 2012. It is accessible here.

Waiting on the Protocols: Armenian-Turkish Relations and Possible Areas of Cooperation

The uneasy, contentious, history-ridden relationship between Armenia and Turkey has been important in the security and development of the South Caucasus region ever since Armenia gained its independence from the Soviet Union in 1991. Turkey was among the first to recognise the small landlocked Armenia’s independence, yet over the last almost two decades the two neighbours have been at loggerheads – for historical and geopolitical reasons, due to military conflicts with third countries and simply as part of some inertia. As of late, there appeared a new light on the horizon signalling re-establishing of diplomatic relations and opening of the closed mutual border, namely the signing of official Protocols to these ends by the two foreign ministers late in 2009; the Protocols are to come into effect after ratification by the respective legislatures. But ratification prospects have started to dim in view of a tangible slowdown in the process, mutual accusations by the two sides of each one’s attempts at introducing preconditions for ratification, and even threats of abrogation.

The current moment seems to be geopolitically opportune for a general rapprochement, establishing of relations and opening of the border. Turkey and Armenia have shown a tendency in the last couple of years for softening towards each other and readiness to talk, despite nationalist outbursts at home and the slowdown in the ratification process. Many a major stakeholder in the Black Sea region seem to favour a normalisation of Armenian-Turkish relations: the United States and the European Union have traditionally supported it, while Russia’s position has transformed after the 2008 Georgian war from neutral and even negative to tacitly approving of rapprochement. Also, in times of world economic slump, the moment offers a valuable chance of opening one border and spurring development on both sides of it. And last but not least, it is high time for normalisation to happen in view of the approaching 100th anniversary of the April 24, 1915, events when Armenia commemorates the mass killings and deportations of Armenians committed by the Ottoman Empire and when nationalist sentiments are expected to rise.

Restored diplomatic relations between Armenia and Turkey, a reopened border and a launched cooperation, which is immediately feasible in a number of spheres, will be of tangible benefit to both countries, especially their border regions, and will boost regional cooperation and stability in the Caucasus in the long run. The present inertia and lack of resolve for changing the status quo towards conflict settlement and cooperation in the Caucasus as a whole has led to no improvement in relations. An open, pragmatic and economically advantageous relationship between Armenia and Turkey should serve as an example for the rest in the entire Black Sea area.

There are a number of possible areas where cooperation between Armenia and Turkey could take immediate effect even before diplomatic relations are re-established, given the border is opened. These are spheres of common interest that could be logical object of pursuit for every modern state in the 21st century. I first shortly examine the background of oscillating relations between the two countries since the early 1990s; try to identify the basic factors that have been determining those relations; and then juxtapose to them the areas of possible cooperation and common interest. Surprisingly, the possibilities for mutual benefit are not fewer in number than the drawbacks pulling for preservation of the status quo. It remains to be seen whether they are stronger.

Serbia and Croatia Face Chance to Warm Ties And Lead Western Balkans Closer to the EU

Balkan neighbours Serbia and Croatia, whose relations have been historically tense and deteriorated to war in the 1990s, may be on their way after recent domestic developments to warming up ties and becoming the locomotive of a reinvigorated integration of the Western Balkans into the European mainstream. Traditionally suspicious of each other after sharing the same Yugoslav roof for decades and Yugoslavia’s collapse in bloody warfare in 1991-95, Serbia and Croatia now share the same foreign policy priority which unwittingly brings them together – EU membership. The election by clear margin of the moderate technocrat Ivo Josipovic as president in EU candidate Croatia in January 2010, as well as the advent of the pro-European coalition in Serbia in 2008, led by President Boris Tadic, and the country’s official application for candidate status in late 2009, signal an opportunity for normalisation of bilateral relations aimed at faster EU track for both countries. The two republics are the largest of rump Yugoslavia and, naturally, the most powerful players in the Western Balkans. A commitment on their part to reconcile old memories in the name of new pragmatic, European-style partnership could work also to position their neighbours Macedonia, Montenegro, Albania, and especially Bosnia, more firmly on the EU accession path.