Dr. G?zim Visoka:

I will go back to the beginning of the question, which was on border disputes and open issues. The EU's long-standing position after Cyprus has been that it will not accept a country that has open territorial disputes or frozen conflict. That is why most of the focus of the enlargement at a political level has been on trying resolve inter-state disputes in the Western Balkans. I refer to the boundary dispute between Slovenia and Croatia. The demarcation of the border between Kosovo and Montenegro was also a crucial issue before Montenegro joined NATO. Actually, Kosovo had to make concessions, and this became a political dispute in the country, where the government fell. The EU promised visa liberalisation for Kosovo but it did not deliver on that. In North Macedonia, there is the name issue, as well as the issue of the language with Bulgaria. In a way, the EU has tried to learn from past mistakes but then Ukraine and Moldova came, especially Ukraine, which is in the middle of a war. A big fraction of its territory is being annexed and occupied by Russia. Moldova has an issue with Transnistria. The EU has given both of them a status and, in the process of enlargement, that is a big move. It has taken some other countries 20.

In a way, therefore, the EU has shown they actually can overcome all of these principles that have sat in the past, such as good neighbourly relations, no territorial disputes and all of that which is based in international law. Now, with Ukraine and Moldova, we no longer know what the standard should be. For the EU to include them - and again I am not against Ukraine and Moldova's association or their coming into the EU family - it shows a double standard because it has taken the countries in the Western Balkans decades to try to resolve these issues before the EU has given any promise to them. Yet, in the other part of eastern Europe, that was not an issue. What I see as a solution to resolving the dispute in the Balkans is a clear position from the EU. When it comes to Kosovo, the EU should be united and have a collective position, like they did in Montenegro in 2005 and 2006 around the independence referendum. That matter was closed and Russia and Serbia's influence in the country reduced over the years. For as long as the EU does not have a clear position on Kosovo, five member states will dispute it, will consider it a part of Serbia and it will be impossible for Kosovo to make concessions towards Serbia. As well as this, it will be impossible for the EU itself to offer Kosovo a clear perspective.

Membership of the EU is open only to European states. That is clear in the treaty. These five non-recognisers have said that they will not recognise Kosovo and they will not permit Kosovo's progress with regard to accession and the rest until the issue of Serbia is resolved.

I have done research on this matter and I am not even sure that if Serbia recognises Kosovo, countries such as Cyprus would recognise Kosovo afterwards because they feel that if the Kosovo issue is resolved, they will be next and they will have to deal with Northern Cyprus. They are hiding behind one another. Spain also has concerns about Catalonia and other regions. It is a multi-layered conflict and the EU is not managing to create internal unity. Ireland could make an impact here by taking a more proactive role to see whether Slovakia, Romania or Greece can move forward and overcome their position on Kosovo. If this matter is resolved, Kosovo will make concessions towards Serbia and it is likely the dispute in the north will be settled and there will be one conflict less in the EU. In Bosnia, the situation is different.