Selim Ibraimi- Understanding international relations from the news or social media alone can be an easy task. In 1991, after the fall of communism, thinking changed rapidly in those closed societies, with a particular focus on international relations.
In the rest of the former Eastern Bloc, in Central Europe, changes in this area were much easier because these societies were less closed than Albania and the former Soviet Union states. Life and governance in such societies were rooted in philosophies and theories based on the October Revolution of 1917, where capitalism was seen as the enemy of the working class and society in general.
While the theory of Marxism and Leninism was promoted before the Russian Revolution, changes in worldview took shape after Lenin took the reins of the event, along with Trotsky, who would later be assassinated. But most importantly, Stalin shaped Russian politics after Lenin’s death by establishing a different paradigm in international relations.
The end of World War II (WWII) also brought about the formation of two blocs. The Eastern Bloc, led by the Soviet Union, lasted until 1991, with the complete collapse of the system, including the global ideology for understanding international relations.
It should be noted that for more than seven decades, the communist understanding of international relations was based on Lenin’s theory that “capitalism causes war and colonization.” The period between the two world wars in the West was different, because Soviet-style communism had more influence in Europe and, of course, in other parts of the globe.
Meanwhile, the United States on the other side of the Atlantic was experimenting with different approaches. The end of the war in 1945, as mentioned above, changed the material and the way the two superpowers saw the world.
The US was going through a period between idealism and deterrence and realism until 1989, when the Berlin Wall fell. On the other hand, European states were in a pact with the US under the umbrella of NATO until today, when the American approach changed with the “transactional realism” of President Donald Trump.
In the context of two competing paradigms- that in the West and in the communist world under the leadership of Moscow and later by China- the Balkans after1945 became a new battlefield, while after 1948 it was transformed into an area of experimentation, including Yugoslavia, Albania, Bulgaria, etc.
The main leader here was Tito, who was experimenting between the Soviet Union, the US, and the United Kingdom. The 1948 movements and the alliance with the Non-Aligned Movement (1955-56) gave the two paradigms different speeds until 1991, when Yugoslavia disintegrated, along with Albania as the most isolated state in the world.
The Western Balkan states since 1991 have essentially followed the US approach with integration into the EU and NATO, but still remain fragmented to overt or material influence from external factors, as was the case with Yugoslavia after 1948 and then with the balance continuing until its dissolution.
Meanwhile, the material capacity of the Western bloc, with its paradigms and strong economy, technology, education, advanced social structure, and artificial intelligence, does not yet show a complete and realistic premise that the EU, the US, NATO, and its institutions will win over China, Russia, and their allies. Because China has made extraordinary progress in recent years.
Now the West is entering into a competition with China, just as it once did with the Soviet Union. In this context, we can freely place the Western Balkans in a kind of deterministic status, as some states have aligned with the EU and some with China and Russia, balancing.
Just as 100 years ago or after World War II, when paradigms changed and shifted, the same thing is happening in this century, because the material for superiority has also changed. Therefore, by 2040 we will have a mixed impression of who will lead the world in terms of material and paradigms. Over the past three decades, the Balkan states, despite the wars, have leaned more towards determinism, so we may not see a full recovery or reconciliation between the peoples for a long time.
The case of Serbia with Kosovo, Bosnia-Herzegovina, North Macedonia with Bulgaria, and the open interethnic problems in the Balkans prove more than ever that the old will dominate for decades. In the end, when the problems of small states will fall on top of the problems of large states, then national catastrophes will become commonplace and invisible to others, because it is the paradigms themselves that make them their own. The strong and the realistic world will continue despite dreams of an ideal world and international relations where international law is respected. In the coming decades, we will read and hear other news, just like before and after 1917.
The article was written specifically for Portalb.mk. The publication rights are owned only by Portalb.mk and the author, according to the agreement between them.