Peace Blog
The views expressed in the blog are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent the views of the IIP.
Heinz Gärtner glaubt: Eine glaubwürdige, völkerrechtlich garantierte Neutralität der Ukraine, etwa nach dem österreichischen Modell, hätte Russland das Argument entzogen, dass sich die NATO weiter nach Osten ausdehnen würde. Eine neutrale Ukraine wäre auch eine Option für die Beilegung des Konflikts zwischen Russland und dem Westen.
For the 27th annual commemoration of the Srebrenica genocide, the Srebrenica Memorial Center has chosen to dedicate this year to the mothers and women of Srebrenica. Their heroic role in the events in Srebrenica during the war, the days after the fall of Srebrenica, as well as the struggle and activism in post-war society has been underestimated and neglected. Through their activities, projects and research, this year the Memorial Center has highlighted the role of women. It is to remind us that without their never-ending fight for the truth and justice, many aspects of the genocide would not be known today.
I am currently in Belgrade at the invitation of the Belgrade Centre for Security Policy. It is as hot here as in Vienna and many other parts of Europe, and the liveliness of the city is comparable to many EU cities. Nevertheless, the meeting of the European Council a few days prior failed to bring this or any other city or country of the Western Balkans any closer to EU membership. In all discussions I have had here in Belgrade, I can sense a deep disappointment over the decision -- or rather non-decision -- of the recent Council meeting.
I am still very much under the impression of the interview with Olena Halushka, a fighter against corruption in Ukraine, about the future status of Ukraine as a candidate for the EU membership. ( Watch the interview….) Asked about the future relationship with Russia she underlined, that reconciliation with Russia is only possible after a clear victory for Ukraine and a “deputinization”, demilitarization, denuclearization of Russia, the punishment of all generals etc. Emotionally one can understand this hard and uncompromising line, but is it a way to look forward, even considering all the atrocities committed by Russia in Ukraine? Can Ukraine with this stringent line join a European Union, which is built on reconciliation and cooperation?
Fifty years ago, an important decision was made in Vienna: the Vienna Institute for International Economic Studies (WIIW) was founded. As president of the Institute, I took the opportunity at the traditional spring summit to highlight the trajectory of Europe over these past 50 years. Europe has been divided, and no end to this division was foreseen 50 years ago. However, behind the decision to establish such an institute was the idea -- or rather the hope -- of a slow convergence between Europe’s east and west. Needless to say, things turned out differently. We have witnessed a mixture of gradual developments and disruptive changes as well as a combination of integration and disintegration -- sometimes at the same time.
Thirty years after the beginning of the atrocities in Srebrenica that culminated in genocide in 1995, Luka Cekic and I -- on behalf of the IIP -- paid a visit to the Srebrenica-Potocari Memorial Center and Cemetery in Bosnia and Herzegovina. The visit was organized by an engaged young Austrian who is spending his civil service at the Center. We spent an emotional two days talking to relatives of victims who manage the Center, and I signed a Memorandum of Understanding to serve as the basis for future cooperation between the Center and the IIP for the years ahead. In the coming weeks, the IIP will publishing several interviews completed by Luka Cekic during our visit. In this blog, I will try to present some reflections and conclusions -- particularly in light of the recent atrocities committed in Ukraine.
It is obvious and justified that for the moment, due to the Russian aggression against Ukraine, the attention of the West and particularly the EU is entirely directed toward the war in Ukraine and the threat of future attacks against Moldova or Georgia. In addition, we can anticipate a largely positive reaction by EU institutions to these three countries’ membership aspirations. But how can people in these countries have confidence in the EU’s reaction to their requests and aspirations when the countries of the Western Balkans have experienced so much neglect and disappointment over the years? What will they think about the promises given to them when they realize how many promises given to countries of the Western Balkans have been broken?
After a brief period of relative peace, stability, and prosperity, a seemingly all-out war is back in Europe following Russia´s invasion of Ukraine. The impact of the ongoing war is profound by all measures and for all practical purposes. From the outset, a caveat is in order: it is a fact that Russia invaded Ukraine, the victims are primarily Ukrainian citizens, and an invasion of a sovereign country is against a cherished norm of international law -- a war of aggression is a crime against peace. In fact, for Ukrainians, the war started not in February 2022, but way back in 2014.
Finland and Sweden have made political decisions to apply for NATO membership. While Turkey has expressed opposition to the idea and, therefore, the accession process will now face some unexpected difficulties, both Helsinki and Stockholm are most likely to succeed with their applications. As a result, their decades-long (200-year-long in the Swedish case) policies of non-alignment will become history. Irrespective of how smoothly and fast the new round of NATO enlargement goes the Finnish and Swedish decisions reflect the already extreme military-political polarisation in Europe and indicate that tensions are likely to grow further.
Jeder Konflikt und erst recht jeder Krieg hat auch seine kulturelle und vor allem literarische Dimension. Das gilt sicherlich auch für die Invasion der Ukraine durch Russland. Einerseits steht dahinter der auch kulturelle Anspruch Russlands - aggressiv vertreten durch seinen Präsidenten Putin - an ein Volk, das sie als Kleinrussen bezeichnen. Da kann man die kleinrussischen Schwestern und Brüder auch bombardieren, wenn sie sich nicht freiwillig unterwerfen. Der weißrussische Diktator hat sich lange gewehrt aber vor die Entscheidung zwischen Demokratisierung und Unterwerfung gestellt, hat er sich für Letzteres entschieden. Das kurzfristige Ziel Putins ist sicher die Wiederherstellung des gemeinsamen aber unter seiner Oberhoheit stehenden Reiches von Russen, Weißrussen und Kleinrussen.
