1. Balkans ’ Integration Process at the Crossroads Rethinking Southeastern Europe through a pan-European perspective Transcending Europe’s Borders: The EU and its Neighbours — ICCEES Regional European Congress — Berlin, 2 August 2007 Center for European Integration Strategies (CEIS) Geneva — Vienna — Sarajevo Christophe Solioz

2. 2 Welcome

3. 3 Focus  Assess the current situation in Southeastern Europe  Review the EU Integration process  Outline a pan-European perspective

4. 4 [ 1. Economy is doing fine - take GDP ] 20022003200420052006 2007 2008 1st quarter Forecast Croatia5.65.34.3 4.86.07.055 The fYR Macedonia0.92.84.13.83.12.27.044 Turkey7.95.88.97.46.16.7.5.56.5 Candidate countries7.55.78.37.05.96.5.5.46.3 Albania4.35.86.25.64.9..55.5 Bosnia and Herzegovina5.53.06.05.56.2..66 Montenegro1.72.44.24.06.56.86.655 Serbia4.22.58.46.25.77.08.755 Potential candidate countries4.53.17.35.8..5.25.3

5. 5 [ 1. An overall positive picture ] ò Continued growth can be assessed to be sustainable ò Business climate has improved ò Rapid growth of exports ò Increased foreign investments ò Recovered labour market ò Macroeconomic stability and low inflation ò Employment tends to recover more slowly 4Southeast European countries clearly show signs of the catching-up economies

6. 6 [ 1.a. Transition indicators for 2006 ] large scale privatization small scale privatization restructuringprice liberaliz- ation foreign trade and exchange rate regimes compe- tition policy Banking reform and interest rate liberalization Albania3.004.002.334.33 2.002.67 Bosnia and Herzegovina 2.673.002.004.003.671.672.67 Croatia3.334.333.004.004.332.334.00 The f YR Macedonia3.334.002.674.33 2.002.67 Montenegro3.333.002.004.003.331.002.67 Serbia2.673.672.334.003.331.672.67

7. 7 [ 1.b. Transition indicators for 2006 ] Stock- exchange and other non- banking financial services Other infrastructure reforms Telecommu- nications railroadselectricityroadswater and waste-water Albania1.672.003.002.002.672.001.67 Bosnia and Herzegovina 1.672.33 3.00 2.00 Croatia3.00 3.672.673.00 3.33 The f YR Macedonia2.33 3.002.003.002.33 Montenegro1.672.003.001.002.332.00 Serbia2.00 2.33 2.671.67

8. 8 [ 1. Consequences of the ‘pause’ ]  ‘ Enlargement fatigue ’ has had negative consequences  ‘ Reform fatigue ’ characterizes the public governance  ‘ Soft powers ’ show some limits in Bosnia and Kosovo 4EU needs to rethink the European project in the region and, above all, embrace politics in order to make Southeastern Europe work

9. 9 [ 2. Towards a EU ‘Reform Treaty’ ] ò Aimed to replace the defunct proposed constitution  Improve the EU international presence with a High Rep ’ ò Provide the institutional framework to resume the enlargement ò Would-be EU members will face monitoring regime ò Planning for 2007-09 Instrument for Pre-Accession Assistance (IPA) 4The institutional and financial capacities to proceed with the EU integration process are now available

10. 10 [ 2. SEE EU Accession Forecast ] SAANegotiationsEUEuro Bulgaria1995199920072009 Romania1995199920072012 Croatia2005 20102012 The fYR Macedonia200520082012-20132015 Albania20062009by 2015by 2017 Bosnia and Herzegovina20072009by 2015by 2017 Serbia20072009by 2015by 2017 Montenegro20072010by 20152002

11. 11 Outlook no 1 4EU membership perspective: not as a false hope, but as a realistic development prospect 4The EU integration process remains essentially a country-by- country approach that partly undermines regional co-operation in spite of the rhetoric 4The fostering of effective neighbourhood relations, regional co-operation should be seen not as a conditionality, but as strategic setting

12. 12 [ 3.1. Necessity of a broader Approach ]  Individual strategies and good-neighbourly relations cannot tackle all the challenges that the countries in the region face  National and bilateral solutions are not enough when it comes to economic development, climate change, migration pressure, energy policy strategies and international terrorism etc. 4Only a pan-European vision sets the bilateral issues and the regional dimension in a coherent and significant framework

13. 13 [ 3.2. A pan-European approach ] òLinks national and regional, local and global perspectives in a multilateral cooperation framework òEncompasses political and socio-economic aspects, the security dimension and the development challenges òCovers Eastern and Southeastern Europe, the Black Sea Region, the Caucasus region, Russia, reaching out towards Eurasia

14. 14 [ 3.3. A pan-European approach ]  Fosters these countries ’ European identity  Contributes to the development of a common EU-U.S.- Russia approach to the open questions  Promotes a pan-European economic integration and co- operation process, beyond too narrowly conceived regional frameworks. 4Complementing the EU integration process, pan-European institutions should give life to a renewed pan-European dynamic.

15. 15 Outlook no 2 Taking into account that  Europe has to face new divisions  A newly assertive Russia  The necessity to enhance co-operation in a new environment. 4Pan-European organizations have an obvious role to play in restoring confidence and building new bridges

16. 16 Thank you for your attention