you are here: home > events> Lucian-Boian Brujan Seminar , April 2 2008

"Serbia and Kosovo: Unsolved Question, Grey Area? A Discussion on the Transition from Regions to States" 

Lucian-Boian Brujan, Institute of Geography, University of Tübingen, Germany

Venue: 1 pm, April 2 2008 Conference Room, Third Floor, John Hume Building, NUI Maynooth.

Lucian-Boian Brujan is a lecturer at the Department of Economic Geography and Transition Countries at the Institute of Geography in the Eberhard-Karls-University of Tübingen, Germany. His research interests focus on regional development and policy, EU-enlargement, EU-external border relations, post-socialist transitions, regional disparities, spatial planning and political geographies of conflict areas and border regions and his many publications reflect these interests. His PhD research has examined regional development in the border area of Serbia, Romania and Hungary focusing in particular on approaches of regional policy for the project of a cross-border Euro-region. Lucian Brujan is a Visiting Lecturer under the Erasmus programme to the Department of Geography at NUIM and will be with us from the 31 March to the 4 April 2008.

Abstract

"Too much history on km_!" This striking motto might be used to define one of Europe’s most active conflict areas, located in South-eastern Europe and being for the past 15 years always present in the news headlines. Although it’s considered to be one of the so-called "frozen conflicts" it keeps a vivacious own dynamic that becomes more complicated as one deepens its investigation. The "frozenness" of the conflict areas of the Western Balkans is in reality elusory; it is more the result of external intervention both in diplomatic and military form and doesn’t necessarily reflect the real development trends of the political, social and economic spheres. A complicated network of relations, causalities and influences defines a parallel system that functions within an internationally imposed and maintained framework of development. The gap between the reality on site and the one reported by politics increases as the concrete presence of statehood diminishes. A "grey area" emerges, where corruption, organised crime and political interests are combined with a nationalist rhetoric, violence and a continuous worsening of living standards. In this context, the appliance of double standards and the uncoordinated international political engagement in the Balkans appear as the least of real problems facing the region.

On February 17th 2008 the former Serb, former Yugoslav province of Kosovo declared its independence. The international feedback ranges from a euphoric welcoming of a new state to the harsh condemnation of a unilateral act. Among these reactions, one comment was particularly interesting: the independence of Kosovo was seen as the last act in the fragmentation of the former Yugoslavia. Has the independence of Kosovo really solved the status question? Is this really a problem "sui generis" and the last act in the violent disintegration of the former Yugoslavia? The chronology of this conflict offers an explanation of the current outcome of the situation but the challenge then is to draw the appropriate conclusions and learn from the mistakes of the past.

South-eastern Europe, as a space is marked by high contrasts. Regional disparities and the extended lines of division between ethnic-religious groups have widened. In the ethic-religious puzzle of the Western Balkans, such differences are automatically projected on territories (especially on regions). Even the forced policy of socialist ‘uniformisation’ has failed in keeping concurrent influence groups within a single state. The identification through territory combined with multi-ethnicity essentially contributes to the endorsement of a new sort of regionalism that enforces centrifugal tendencies. Decentralisation, federalisation or any other kind of subsidiarity is inevitably (and wrongly) linked to separatism. This vicious circle is supported by so called "grey areas", by instability and the preservation of influence groups and weak or failed states. This is a typical pathway for a conflict area such as the Western Balkans – from regions to states. Ultimately some critical questions arise: are such states capable of surviving? Is EU-integration a sustainable vision (solution) for South-eastern Europe? Is a "Europe of the regions" compatible with the "New Regionalism" of conflict areas? In answering such questions it becomes obvious that Geography does matter!