Batı Balkanlar'da AB Demokrasi Teşviki Çabalarının Değerlendirmesi: Sırbistan Cumhuriyeti Örneği

Öz

Avrupa Birliği (AB), sınırları içinde ve ötesinde liberal demokratik değerlerin teşvikine kendini adamış, kararlı bir normatif güç olarak kendisini sürekli olarak konumlandırmıştır. Bu bağlamda, demokrasinin teşvik edilmesi dış politikasının temel bir hedefi olarak durmakta ve etki yaratmak için çeşitli araçlardan yararlanmaktadır. Sosyalizm sonrası Balkanlar, AB'nin bu alandaki çabaları için kritik bir test alanı teşkil etmektedir. Birlik, 2000'li yılların başından bu yana, demokrasi durumunun hala sorunlu olduğu bu bölgede Avrupalılaşma ve çatışma sonrası dönüşüm olmak üzere ikili bir süreç başlatmıştır. Bu makale AB'nin Sırbistan Cumhuriyeti'ndeki demokrasiyi teşvik politikasının bir değerlendirmesini sunmaktadır. AB'nin Sırbistan Cumhuriyeti'ni demokratikleştirmedeki sınırlı başarısını kabul ederek, eksikliklerin altında yatan nedenleri araştırmaktadır. Analiz, AB'nin Sırbistan'daki başarısızlığının üç temel faktöre atfedilebileceğini öne sürmektedir: tutarsız bir yaklaşım, krizler sırasında değişen odak noktası ve fırsatçı aktörlerin etkisi.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Avrupa Birliği
• Demokrasi Teşviki
• liberal demokrasi
• Batı Balkanlar
• Sırbistan

Evaluating EU Democracy Promotion Efforts in the Western Balkans: The Case of the Republic of Serbia

Abstract

The European Union (EU) has consistently positioned itself as a committed normative power, dedicated to the promotion of liberal democratic values both within its borders and beyond. In this context, promotion of democracy stands as a fundamental objective of its foreign policy, and it leverages a variety of tools to exert influence. The post-Socialist Balkans serves as a critical testing ground for the EU's efforts in this domain. Since the early 2000s, the Union has embarked on a dual process of Europeanisation and post-conflict transformation within the region where the state of democracy remains still problematic. This article provides an evaluation of the EU's democracy promotion policy in the Republic of Serbia. Recognizing the EU’s limited success in democratizing the Republic of Serbia, it delves into the underlying reasons for the shortcomings. The analysis posits that the EU's failure in Serbia can be attributed to three primary factors: an inconsistent approach, a shifting focus during crises, and the impact of opportunistic actors.

Keywords

• European Union
• democracy promotion
• liberal democracy
• Western Balkans
• Serbia

References

1. Anastasakis, Othon. “The EU’s Political Conditionality in the Western Balkans: Towards a More Pragmatic Approach”. Southeast European and Black Sea Studies 8, no. 4 (2008): 365–77. https://doi.org/10.1080/14683850802556384.
2. Aydıntaşbaş, Asli. “From Myth to Reality: How to Understand Türkiye’s Role in the Western Balkans” European Council on Foreign Relations, 2019. http://www.jstor.org/stable/resrep21609.
3. Balfour, Rosa, and Corina Stratulat. “The Democratic Transformation of the Balkans”. EPC Issue Paper No.66, 2011.
4. Barbulescu, Iordan Gheorghe, and Miruna Troncota. "EU’s ‘Laboratory’ in the Western Balkans: Experimenting Europeanization Without Democratization. The Case of Bosnia and Herzegovina". Revista Española de Ciencia Política. (2013): 63–99.
5. Bassuener, Kurt. “Pushing On an Open Door: Foreign Authoritarian Influence in the Western Balkans”. National Endowment for Democracy. 2019. https://www.ned.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/05/Pushing-on-an-Open-Door-Foreign-Authoritarian-Influence-in-the-Western-Balkans-Kurt-Bassuener-May-2019.pdf.
6. Bazić, Jovan. “Relations of Serbia and European Union: Socio-Historical Determinants and the Contemporary Political Issues”. Politeja 16, no. 3(60) (2020): 303–22. https://doi.org/10.12797/Politeja.16.2019.60.20.
7. Bechev, Dimitar. “The Russian Challenge in Southeast Europe”. In European-Russian Power Relations in Turbulent Times, edited by Mai’a K. Davis Cross and Ireneusz Paweł Karolewski, 187–216. University of Michigan Press, 2021. http://www.jstor.org/stable/10.3998/mpub.10202357.10.
8. Belloni, Roberto. “Serbia between East and West: Ontological Security, Vicarious Identity and the Problem of Sanctions against Russia.” European Security 33 no. 2 (2024): 284–302. doi:10.1080/09662839.2023.2290048.

9. Bieber, Florian. "Belated Transitions in South Eastern Europe." In The Routledge Handbook of East European Politics, edited by Adam Fagan and Petr Kopecky, 27–38. Routledge, 2018a.
10. Bieber, Florian. “The Rise (And Fall) of Balkan Stabilitocracies”. Horizons, 10, (2018b):176–185.
11. Bobic, Maja. "National Convention on the EU in Serbia: Tangible Result of Sharing Transition Experience." International Issues & Slovak Foreign Policy Affairs 25, no. 3–4 (2016): 78–95.
12. Bonomi, Matteo. “Off Track: The EU’s Re-engagement with the Western Balkans”. European Union Institute for Security Studies, (2019). https://www.iss.europa.eu/node/2161.
13. Börzel, Tanja A., and Thomas Risse. "One Size Fits All! EU Policies for the Promotion of Human Rights, Democracy and the Rule of Law." Paper presented at the Workshop on Democracy Promotion, 2004.
14. Burazer, Nikola. Democracy and Human Rights: Assessing Serbia’s Progress on the EU Accession Agenda 2016–2020. Friedrich Ebert Stiftung, 2020.
15. Büyük, H. Ferhat, and Ahmet Erdi Öztürk. "The Role of Leadership Networks in Türkiye-Balkan Relations in the AKP Era." Turkish Policy Quarterly 18, no. 3 (2019): 119–127.
16. Castaldo, Antonino. “External Democracy Promotion in Time of Democratic Crisis: Linkage, Leverage, and Domestic Actors’ Diversionary Behaviours”. East European Politics and Societies: And Cultures 36, no. 1 (2022): 96–117. https://doi.org/10.1177/0888325420954533.
17. Castells, Manuel, Olivier Bouin, João Caraça, Gustavo Cardoso, John B. Thompson, and Michel Wieviorka. Europe’s Crises. Polity Press, 2018.
18. Demirtaş, Birgül. "Türkiye and the Balkans: Overcoming Prejudices, Building Bridges and Constructing a Common Future." Perceptions 18, no. 2 (2013): 163–184.
19. Djordjevic, Olivera. "The Limits Of Europeanization 'From Without': Is There An Eu-Driven Democratization Process In Serbia?." Revista UNISCI, no. 18 (2008):77-93. https://www.redalyc.org/articulo.oa?id=76711404005
20. Elbasani, Arolda. “EU Enlargement in the Western Balkans: Strategies of Borrowing and Inventing”. Journal of Southern Europe and the Balkans 10, no. 3 (2008): 293–307. https://doi.org/10.1080/14613190802493600.
21. European Commission. A Credible Enlargement Perspective for and Enhanced EU Engagement with the Western Balkans, COM (2018) 65 final. 2018b. https://ec.europa.eu/info/sites/default/files/communication-credibleenlargement- perspective-western-balkans_en.pdf
22. European Commission. Commission Staff Working Document Serbia 2008 Progress Report, COM (2008) 674. 2008b. https://ec.europa.eu/neighbourhoodenlargement/ sites/default/files/pdf/press_corner/keydocuments/ reports_nov_2008/serbia_progress_report_en.pdf
23. European Commission. Commission Staff Working Document Serbia 2009 Progress Report, COM (2009) 533. 2009b. https://ec.europa.eu/neighbourhoodenlargement/ sites/default/files/pdf/key_documents/2009/sr_rapport_2009 _en.pdf
24. European Commission. Commission Staff Working Document Serbia 2010 Progress Report, COM (2010) 660. 2010. https://ec.europa.eu/neighbourhoodenlargement/ sites/default/files/pdf/key_documents/2010/package/sr_rapp ort_2010_en.pdf
25. European Commission. Commission Staff Working Document Serbia 2012 Progress Report, COM (2012) 600 final. 2012. https://ec.europa.eu/neighbourhoodenlargement/ sites/default/files/pdf/key_documents/2012/package/sr_rapp ort_2012_en.pdf
26. European Commission. Commission Staff Working Document Serbia 2013 Progress Report, COM (2013) 700 final. 2013. https://ec.europa.eu/neighbourhoodenlargement/ sites/default/files/pdf/key_documents/2013/package/sr_rapp ort_2013.pdf
27. European Commission. Commission Staff Working Document Serbia 2015 Report, COM (2015) 611 final. 2015. https://ec.europa.eu/neighbourhoodenlargement/ sites/default/files/pdf/key_documents/2015/20151110_repor t_serbia.pdf
28. European Commission. Commission Staff Working Document Serbia 2016 Report, COM (2016) 715 final. 2016. https://ec.europa.eu/neighbourhoodenlargement/ sites/default/files/pdf/key_documents/2016/20161109_repor t_serbia.pdf
29. European Commission. Commission Staff Working Document Serbia 2018 Report, COM (2018) 450 final. 2018a. https://ec.europa.eu/neighbourhoodenlargement/ sites/default/files/20180417-serbia-report.pdf
30. European Commission. Commission Staff Working Document Serbia 2019 Report, COM (2019) 260 final. 2019. https://ec.europa.eu/neighbourhoodenlargement/ sites/default/files/20190529-serbia-report.pdf
31. European Commission. Commission Staff Working Document Serbia 2020 Report, COM (2020) 660 final. 2020. https://ec.europa.eu/neighbourhoodenlargement/ sites/default/files/serbia_report_2020.pdf
32. European Commission. Communication from the Commission 2005 enlargement strategy paper, COM (2005) 561 final. 2005a. https://eurlex. europa.eu/legalcontent/ EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=CELEX:52005DC0561&from=EN
33. European Commission. Communication from the Commission to the Council and the European Parliament Enlargement Strategy and Main Challenges 2008-2009, COM (2008) 674 final. 2008a. https://ec.europa.eu/neighbourhoodenlargement/ sites/default/files/pdf/press_corner/key documents/reports_nov_2008/strategy_paper_incl_country_conclu_en.pdf
34. European Commission. Communication from the Commission to the Council and the European Parliament Enlargement Strategy and Main Challenges 2009-2010, COM (2009) 533. 2009a. https://ec.europa.eu/neighbourhoodenlargement/ sites/default/files/pdf/key_documents/2009/strategy_paper_ 2009_en.pdf
35. European Commission. Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament and the Council Enlargement Strategy and Main Challenges 2006-2007 Including annexed special report on the EU’s capacity to integrate new members, COM (2006) 649. 2006. https://ec.europa.eu/neighbourhoodenlargement/ sites/default/files/pdf/key_documents/2006/nov/com_649_st rategy_paper_en.pdf
36. European Commission. Continuing enlargement - Strategy paper and Report fot the European Commission on the progress towards accession by Bulgaria, Romania and Turkey, COM (2003) 676. 2003. https://eurlex. europa.eu/legalcontent/ EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=CELEX:52003DC0676&from=EN
37. European Commission. Serbia and Montenegro 2005 Progress Report, COM (2005) 561 final. 2005b. https://ec.europa.eu/neighbourhoodenlargement/ sites/default/files/archives/pdf/key_documents/2005/packag e/sec_1428_final_progress_report_cs_en.pdf
38. European Commission. Serbia Progress Report, COM (2014) 700 final. 2014. https://ec.europa.eu/neighbourhoodenlargement/ sites/default/files/pdf/key_documents/2014/20140108- serbia-progress-report_en.pdf
39. European Commission. The Stabilization and Association Process for Countries of South-Eastern Europe, COM (99) 235. 1999.
40. European Council. EU-Western Balkans Summit Declaration, 10229/03 (Presse 163). 2003.
41. European Parliament. Serbia’s cooperation with China, the European Union, Russia and the United States of America, 2017. https://doi.org/10.2861/234510
42. European Union. (7 February 1992). Treaty on European Union (Consolidated Version), Treaty of Maastricht, Official Journal of the European Union C 326/13; 26 October 2012. https://eurlex. europa.eu/resource.html?uri=cellar:2bf140bf-a3f8-4ab2-b506- fd71826e6da6.0023.02/DOC_1&format=PDF
43. European Union. Treaty of Lisbon Amending the Treaty on European Union and the Treaty Establishing the European Community, 13 December 2007. http://publications.europa.eu/resource/cellar/688a7a98-3110-4ffe-a6b3- 8972d8445325.0007.01/DOC_19
44. Fagan, Aadam. The EU and the Western Balkans. In A. Fagan (Ed.), Europe’s Balkan Dilemma Path to Civil Society or State-Building, 18–48. I.B. Tauris, 2010.
45. Freyburg, Tina, Sandra Lavenex, Frank Schimmelfennig, Tatiana Skripka, and Anne Wetzel. “Models of EU Democracy Promotion: From Leverage to Governance”. In Democracy Promotion by Functional Cooperation, by Tina Freyburg, Sandra Lavenex, Frank Schimmelfennig, Tatiana Skripka, and Anne Wetzel, 10–24. London: Palgrave Macmillan UK, 2015. https://doi.org/10.1057/9781137489357_2.
46. Gafuri, Adea, and Meltem Muftuler-Bac. “Caught between Stability and Democracy in the Western Balkans: A Comparative Analysis of Paths of Accession to the European Union”. East European Politics 37, no. 2 (2021): 267–91. https://doi.org/10.1080/21599165.2020.1781094.
47. Gkasis, Pavlos, and Marko Kmezić. “Contextualizing Refugee ‘Crisis’ and EU Integration: Interrelatedness and Mutual Reciprocity.” In Migration, EU Integration and the Balkan Route, 1–11. Routledge, 2024.
48. Greer, Scott L., Anniek De Ruijter, and Eleanor Brooks. ‘The COVID-19 Pandemic: Failing Forward in Public Health’. In The Palgrave Handbook of EU Crises, edited by Marianne Riddervold, Jarle Trondal, and Akasemi Newsome, 747–64. Palgrave Studies in European Union Politics. Cham: Springer International Publishing, 2021. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-51791-5_44.
49. Jano, Dorian. “EU-Western Balkans Relations: The Many EU Approaches”. In B.V. Steenbergen (Ed.), Special Issue on the Mediterranean Beyond Borders: Perspectives on Integration 2 no.1 (2008):143-160.
50. Kavalski, Emilian. “The Western Balkans and the EU: the probable dream of membership”. SEER: Journal for Labour and Social Affairs in Eastern Europe 6 no.1 (2003):197–212.
51. Kemp, Walter. “Stuck in the EU’s Eternal Waiting Room: The Western Balkans, Organized Crime, and Corruption.” Horizons: Journal of International Relations and Sustainable Development, no. 19 (2021): 192–201. https://www.jstor.org/stable/48617364.
52. Le Corre, Philippe. “Serbia: The Open-Door Balkan Space.” Chinaʹs Rise as a Geoeconomic Influencer: Four European Case Studies. Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, 2018. http://www.jstor.org/stable/resrep20979.8.
53. Lišanin, Mladen. “Prospects of European-Chinese Contest for Influence in the Western Balkans: The Case of Serbia”, In F. Attinà & Y. Feng (Eds.), China and World Politics in Transition How China Transforms the World Political Order, Springer, 2023.
54. Manners, Ian. “The Concept of Normative Power in World Politics.” Danish Institute for International Studies, 2009. http://www.jstor.org/stable/resrep13211.
55. Metedoieva, Asya. “Russian Narrative Proxies in the Western Balkans”. GMF Policy Paper (No.16). 2019. https://www.gmfus.org/sites/default/files/Russian%2520Narrative%2520Proxies%2520in%2520Balkans.pdf
56. MFA Turkey. “Relations between Turkey and Serbia”. 2011. https://www.mfa.gov.tr/relations-between-turkey-and-serbia.en.mfa.
57. Mucznik, Marta. “Normalisation between Serbia and Kosovo Must Come from Within.” Welcome to EPC - European Policy Centre, July 18, 2023. https://www.epc.eu/en/publications/Normalisation-between-Serbia-and-Kosovo-must-come-from-within~527b3c.
58. Müller, Patrick. ‘EU Foreign Policy: No Major Breakthrough despite Multiple Crises’. Journal of European Integration 38, no. 3 (2016): 359–74. https://doi.org/10.1080/07036337.2016.1140157.
59. Nechev, Zoran, and Florian Trauner. “Fostering Resilience in the Western Balkans.” European Union Institute for Security Studies (EUISS), 2017. http://www.jstor.org/stable/resrep06873.
60. Nikolayenko, Olena. ‘Origins of the Movement’s Strategy: The Case of the Serbian Youth Movement Otpor’. International Political Science Review 34, no. 2 (2013): 140–58. https://doi.org/10.1177/0192512112458129.
61. Obradović-Wochnik, Jelena, and Alexander Wochnik. ‘Europeanising the “Kosovo Question”: Serbia’s Policies in the Context of EU Integration’. West European Politics 35, no. 5 (2012): 1158–81. https://doi.org/10.1080/01402382.2012.706415.
62. Pavlović, Dušan. ‘The Political Economy behind the Gradual Demise of Democratic Institutions in Serbia’. Southeast European and Black Sea Studies 20, no. 1 (2020): 19–39. https://doi.org/10.1080/14683857.2019.1672929.
63. Pelit, Simge. “It takes two to tango! An analysis of the EU's failed democracy promotion efforts in Serbia” Master’s Thesis, Hacettepe University, 2022.
64. Pridham, Geoffrey. ‘Change and Continuity in the European Union’s Political Conditionality: Aims, Approach, and Priorities’. Democratization 14, no. 3 (2007): 446–71. https://doi.org/10.1080/13510340701303303.
65. Pridham, Geoffrey. “Securing Fragile Democracies in the Balkans: The European Dimension”. Romanian Journal of European Affairs 8 no.2 (2008):1-16. http://papers.ssrn.com/abstract=1173703
66. Radeljić, Branislav. “Semi-Authoritarianism Accepted: The European Union’s Problematic Involvement in Serbia”. Institute for Sociological, Political and Juridical Research, XLII Special Issue, (2018): 67–82.
67. Ramet, Sabrina P., and Aleksander Zdravkovski. “Serbia and the War in Ukraine.” Insight Turkey 24, no. 3 (2022): 53–65. https://www.jstor.org/stable/48733377.
68. Richter, Solveig. “Two at One Blow? The EU and Its Quest for Security and Democracy by Political Conditionality in the Western Balkans”. Democratization 19, no. 3 (2012): 507–34. https://doi.org/10.1080/13510347.2012.674360.
69. Riddervold, Marianne, Jarle Trondal, and Akasemi Newsome, eds. The Palgrave Handbook of EU Crises. Palgrave Studies in European Union Politics. Cham: Springer International Publishing, 2021. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-51791-5.
70. Schenker, Harald. “The Stabilization and Association Process: An Engine of European Integration in Need of Tuning”. Jemie 7, no.1 (2008):1–19.
71. Schimmelfennig, Frank, and Ulrich Sedelmeier. ‘Theorizing EU Enlargement: Research Focus, Hypotheses, and the State of Research’. Journal of European Public Policy 9, no. 4 (2002): 500–528. https://doi.org/10.1080/13501760210152411.
72. Schimmelfennig, Frank. ‘EU Political Accession Conditionality after the 2004 Enlargement: Consistency and Effectiveness’. Journal of European Public Policy 15, no. 6 (2008): 918–37. https://doi.org/10.1080/13501760802196861.
73. Schimmelfennig, Frank. “Liberal Intergovernmentalism and the Crises of the European Union”. JCMS: Journal of Common Market Studies 56, no. 7 (2018): 1578–94. https://doi.org/10.1111/jcms.12789.
74. Simmons, Peter. “The State of the Art in the EU Democracy Promotion Literature”. Journal of Contemporary European Research 7, no.1 (2011):129-142.
75. Smith, Karen E., and Helene Sjursen, “Justifying EU foreign policy: the logics underpinning EU enlargement”, In T. Christiansen, and B. Tonra (Eds.) Rethinking Eu Foreign Policy. Europe in change. Manchester: Manchester University Press, 2004.
76. Smith, Michael. “Negotiating New Europes: The Roles of the European Union”. Journal of European Public Policy 7, no. 5 (2011): 806–22. https://doi.org/10.1080/13501760010014966.
77. Stratulat, Corina. “Democratisation Via Eu Integration: Fragile Resilience and Resilient Fragility.” Edited by Sabina Lange, Zoran Nechev, and Florian Trauner. Resilience in the Western Balkans. European Union Institute for Security Studies (EUISS), 2017. http://www.jstor.org/stable/resrep07086.5.
78. Tonchev, Plamen. “China’s Road: into the Western Balkans”. European Union Institute for Security Studies (EUISS), 2017. http://www.jstor.org/stable/resrep06772
79. Tonra, Ben., and Thomas Christiansen. Rethinking European Union Foreign Policy. Manchester: Manchester University Press, 2004
80. Tripkovic, Milena. “Beyond punitiveness? Governance of crime and authoritarian heritage in Serbia”. Punishment & Society 18, no. 3, (2016):369-386.
81. Türkeş, Mustafa, and Göksu Gökgöz, G. “The European Union’s Strategy towards the Western Balkans: Exclusion or Integration?”. East European Politics and Societies 20 no. 4 (2006): 659–690.
82. Vejvoda, Ivan. “Serbia after four years of transition. In J. Batt (Ed.), The Western Balkans: moving on”. Chaillot Paper. (No. 70). 2004.
83. Venice Commission. European Commission for Democracy Through Law Opinion on the Constitution of Serbia. No.405/2006. 2007.
84. Vesnic-Alujevic, Lucia. “European Integration of Western Balkans:From Reconciliation to European Future”. Centre for European Studies, 2012.
85. Zweers, Wouter, Vladimir Shopov, Frans-Paul van der Putten, Mirela Petkova, and Maarten Lemstra. “China and the EU in the Western Balkans: A zero-sum game?” Clingendael Institute, 2020. http://www.jstor.org/stable/resrep26541