The dispute with Skopje: nine things Sofia obviously does not realize – Analysis

© Valentina Petrova

The analysis was republished by Deutsche Welle.

Bulgaria is about to make a strategic mistake in its foreign policy. By blocking North Macedonia (MC) negotiations for EU membership, our country is actually working against itself: it is holding back the integration and connection of the region necessary for its own prosperity, supporting anti-Bulgarian sentiment in the MC and falling into international isolation due to his incomprehensible position. Furthermore, instead of a principled foreign policy, Bulgaria is turning its romantic interpretations of its own history into a criterion of its relations with the rest of the world.

This may be a popular position within the country, but it is not a functional model for conducting foreign policy with sovereign and equal states. In the end, there must be

some division between politics and history, these are different areas for the following reasons:

1) History is not a matter of negotiations between countries. The truth does not depend on the signatures of governments or the negotiation of intergovernmental commissions;

2) International law regulates the basic relations between states. In it, states do not recognize the national identity, nationality, language and religion of others. Two things are recognized: the state (sovereignty) and the state government, if it has not come to power in the normal constitutional order. At least since 1648 (of the Westphalian Peace Treaty) part of the sovereignty of the state includes the exclusive right of the state to regulate its internal affairs: religion, language, nationality and, consequently, the educational system, textbooks, etc. Bulgaria has recognized North Macedonia as a sovereign state since the 1990s;

3) The idea of ​​a joint commission on historical issues aimed to improve relations between the two countries through a process of dialogue. However, with the fixation on the negotiation of a common position on all issues, the effect of the activity of this commission begins to generate the opposite result: it inflates negative spirits on both sides of the border. The strong anti-Bulgarian sentiment in Macedonia is a fact among some members of society and the media, but at least at the moment the CM has a government that wants to improve relations between our countries and bring the CM into the EU. Bulgaria’s blocking of the Council of Ministers negotiations on EU membership will only intensify and strengthen negative attitudes there and worsen the positions of those who are benevolent towards us in our neighbor. Furthermore, Bulgaria runs the risk of becoming a major “enemy” of Macedonia, which is absurd;

4) The legal value of “contracts” for history is almost negligible. If they are violated, will we be tried in The Hague for token compensation? Even if such a treaty is signed, it cannot link the thinking and speech of the people in the CM (or in our country); however, as part of the European area, the principle of freedom of expression is valid for all of us. These history treatises also cannot stop research that leads to inconsistent conclusions;

5) Even if we force the Council of Ministers to sign a new annex to an agreement on history, identity, anti-Bulgarian campaigns in the media, etc., this agreement will not change the mood towards Bulgaria in North Macedonia. On the contrary, it will strengthen them and mobilize the opposition against them. Bring VMRO-DPMNE to power, which is in fact the main anti-Bulgarian force;

6) There are (many) agreements between the two countries for the renunciation of territorial claims and an obligation due to lack of state support for groups and movements seeking secession; this is a necessary and good step. The agreements between us do not speak of minorities and this is also a good approach: the issue of minorities is internal to each country. Only binding international conventions and other instruments that are valid for us as part of the Council of Europe and the EU apply to you; it is not necessary to add anything to them through special bilateral agreements;

7) In the long term, it is important for Bulgaria to have better communication with the CM – media, scientific conferences and exchanges, roads, railways, communications. If these things become common or at least related, there is a possibility of a change in mood in North Macedonia towards Bulgaria. Our western neighbor’s membership in the EU – and even just the negotiation process – will only increase the opportunities for greater connectivity between the two countries;

8) The Bulgarian position is incomprehensible to the world and only generates reproaches and mockery in the EU. The Greeks were in a similar situation and barely managed to get out of it with the Prespa Agreement. The moment they did, we took their place. Greece has not gained anything from the confrontation with the Republic of Macedonia. It is unlikely that we will win anything.

Furthermore, Greece did not want a sovereign state with a specific name next to its border. This was a position that many criticized, but it still fell within the familiar framework of international law: the recognition of a sovereign state. We are testing new territories in international law: the non-recognition of the identity, language, and interpretation of the history of a state whose sovereignty it has already recognized. This is an internally contradictory position: as has been said, sovereignty includes the right to self-determination in matters of identity, language and religion. And history is not a matter of negotiation at all;

9) In the end, North Macedonia’s accession to the EU has been rightly defended as a strategic priority for Bulgaria since the beginning of the transition. And so far we have always upheld this priority consistently. But for the moment we are undermining it ourselves.