NATO – together in good times and bad

The arrival of Mike Pence, Vice President of the USA, at the Adriatic Charter summit in Podgorica is truly a historic event not only for Montenegro but also for the region, given the current situation in the region and the global constellation of power in international relations.

In the last at least 100 years, there has been no peace in Europe without the active role of the USA; of course, the importance of US engagement in Southeast Europe and especially the Western Balkans cannot be compared to any other (great) power. The EU was created as a peace project and grew into something more. US engagement was primarily in establishing peace and stability, and it grew into something much more. Therefore, the American Adriatic Charter should be viewed in this context.

The co-hosts of the Adriatic Charter in Podgorica were the Montenegrin and Macedonian Prime Ministers Duško Marković and Zoran Zaev. The symbolism is more than obvious. Montenegro recently became the 29th member of NATO, while the Republic of Macedonia is expected to become the 30th member of NATO. Macedonian Prime Minister Zaev signed in Skopje the Agreement on Friendship, Good Neighborliness and Cooperation between the Republic of Macedonia and the Republic of Bulgaria. The signed agreement can be compared to the agreements between post-war Germany and France. Both leaders, Zaev and Borisov, had the political strength and will to overcome many misunderstandings from their common past, which in many segments is a shared history.

NATO is a guarantor of peace and stability and an expression of the will that states, in common parlance, are together in good times and bad. This is perhaps not as pronounced when it comes to the EU. NATO is a much tighter and hierarchically structured organization. It is important to recall the words of US Vice President Pence, who said that in NATO we have larger and smaller states, but there are no larger and smaller allies. The foundation of relations in NATO is equality and democracy, and that is precisely what the signatory states of the Adriatic Charter need.

The fact that Slovenia and Croatia are actively involved in the work of the Adriatic Charter represents a return to the Balkans for these two countries, which geographically and certainly belong to that area.

The question of leadership in the region is being reopened, as the Summit in Podgorica already shows signs of changes in leadership. Some imposed or self-proclaimed political leaders are slowly but surely fading into political oblivion, while others, due to their nationalism, chauvinism, partly fascism, along with involvement in crime and corruption, are eliminating themselves from any kind of leadership.

The matter is simple. To be leaders of your country, they must be part of NATO or EU membership. Here, special importance is placed on NATO, without which no country can secure a quality defense and security system. It is precisely those countries that are members of NATO and/or the EU, or are close to achieving that goal, that have a chance to produce new leaders in the region. Everything else is a product of imagination and unfulfilled wishes. Politics is a very pragmatic activity, and interests are at the center of everything. How can you be leaders if you are not a member of something, or if you renounce the possibility of membership in advance? Countries that have such leaders are denying themselves a better future.

Therefore, the success of Montenegro, which became a full member of NATO, and soon Macedonia, is a signpost that all signatory states of the Adriatic Charter should strive for. Their success is a powerful driving force for BiH, perhaps even greater than certain internal political forces in Bosnia and Herzegovina. However, the trends that have been established are unstoppable. There will be blockades and obstructions, but what is inevitable and represents political and every other reality is that Bosnia and Herzegovina will become a full member of NATO and the EU.

This could also be observed from the American side, which expressed strong support for Bosnia and Herzegovina and the Chairman of the Council of Ministers of BiH, Denis Zvizdić, who represented BiH at the Podgorica summit.

The author is the Director of the International Institute for Middle Eastern and Balkan Studies (IFIMES) Ljubljana