The Balkans in the shadow of the geopolitical vacuum

Selim Ibraimi- The vacuum of power has been a feature of geopolitics or geostrategy since antiquity. The vacuum often appears when dominant powers decline or withdraw. Other powers then strive to fill the resulting power gap. Theoretically, the vacuum reflects the anarchic nature of international politics. In political life or practice, the vacuum encourages conflicts, wars, and sometimes balance. There is no specific phase when a vacuum emerges. Various factors and societal dynamics can contribute to the vacuum’s growth and persistence over an extended period. Throughout history, the geopolitical vacuum has always been interpreted and used differently by empires, states, and modern governments.

Let us now analyze the vacuum from a theoretical to a practical perspective, focusing on the Balkans. The Balkans is partially ready to join the EU. However, there have always been legitimate concerns about what will happen to the rest of the region. Some countries, such as Albania and Montenegro, are near EU membership. EU reports highlight their reforms and close alignment with EU policies. Others, like North Macedonia, Serbia, Kosovo, and Bosnia-Herzegovina, are outside the process of rapid integration. This is due to disputes, a lack of the rule of law, and many unresolved issues. This situation puts the region at risk of becoming a “desert” of states with high corruption and crime. During a period of growing concerns about Ukraine and other fragile states, the Balkans needs close monitoring. Historically, it has been a hotpot for wars and instability. It is crucial to observe what will happen to the region in the next 3-5 years of the political vacuum.

Regarding the Serbia-Kosovo dialogue, there have been many reports that both governments are ready to move forward with substantive agreements. However, the Brussels and Ohrid Agreement (2023) has not produced good relations between the two countries. Kosovo has stated it is ready to move forward when Serbia is. So far, Serbia has played politics, and the situation remains unchanged. There is no clear path for what the future holds for Serbia and Kosovo. The latest statement by Serbian President Aleksandar Vučić indicates no positive movement between the two states. There is also no positive movement from the states that do not recognize Kosovo. “We had very successful meetings here in Odessa. This is my fourth time participating in the Southeast Europe-Ukraine Summit and my first time on Ukrainian territory. I thanked our Ukrainian hosts, President Zelensky, for respecting Serbia’s territorial integrity. As you saw, there were no representatives from Pristina here,” Vučić said. “This is about Kosovo. As you know, we adhere to the UN Charter and Resolution 1244, which states that Kosovo is part of Serbia. Twenty-two out of 27 EU member states have already recognized Kosovo’s independence. However, five have not recognized it, and that is the problem. Belgrade is not ready to recognize Kosovo’s independence,” Vučić added.

Bulgarian-Macedonian relations are entering a critical era. This is due to the rise of nationalism in North Macedonia. The current government in Skopje has implemented these policies. Relations are at a critical stage and show no signs of improvement. The Mickoski government hopes to discuss the future of the deadlock in relations with Bulgaria. This discussion is expected to occur in The Hague, Netherlands, during the NATO Summit at the end of June (2025). Skopje officials hope for a revision of the French Proposal. They believe this could resolve strained Skopje-Sofia relations. It might open the door for North Macedonia’s EU membership. Meanwhile, the Bulgarian government has made it clear that Skopje must adhere to agreed commitments. There are two key issues in the Balkans. A geopolitical vacuum could be exploited by both external and internal actors. This situation was evident in Banjska in 2023 in Kosovo. Operating in such a vacuum requires skill and strength for any government.

Since the collapse of the SFRY, the Balkans have lacked a great power authority. This authority is needed to fill the political, social, and economic vacuum. In the current situation in the Balkans, authority has collapsed. There is economic and social decline. We also see a rise in internal and external conflicts. The continuation of the vacuum over three decades has created a situation that remains unchanged. It changes only under external pressure from authoritarian states and non-state actors. The power vacuum is inevitable. It will remain with us for decades. This is due to the lack of strong and stable institutions in the Balkans. This is particularly evident in fragile states struggling with reform and EU integration in the future. The Balkans remain divided. Some states are moving toward a stronger unified authority. Others aim to stay outside it. The recurrence of conflicts will remain active. This region tends to never fully become European.

It must be reiterated that in this vacuum, there has always been a tendency for a stronger authority. This is especially true for states such as Serbia. Over the last hundred years, Serbia has aimed to be a dominant power. This ambition started after its break from the Ottoman Empire. The repetition of this scenario in the Balkan vacuum will always bring tensions and instability. In this regard, international actors often face difficulties in coordinating failures. Keeping crises under control is challenging, except for interventions in November 1995 in Bosnia-Herzegovina and Kosovo in March 1999. Over the past three decades, the EU and NATO have tried to fill this geopolitical vacuum. However, as the world changes, the East gains power. Such institutions will find it difficult to remain active for long. This will happen if the Balkan states do not function within this vacuum. These are some examples for readers of what the vacuum brings and how it manifests in politics. Other cases could be explored, but fundamentally, the vacuum must be seen as an integral part of politics. In theoretical and practical terms, all major international relations theories address the vacuum, power, benefits, and consequences. Likewise, in political philosophy, the power vacuum has been part of the debate. It spans from Machiavelli and Hobbes to recent existentialist authors and many others.

This article was written specifically for Portalb.mk. The publication rights belong solely to Portalb.mk and the author, as per their agreement.