By Selim Ibraimi- In the turbulent times of this decade, a dilemma remains. Can nations and states survive in the harsh anarchic world solely by protecting their interests? Can they succeed without entering into cooperative relations? In 2025, the world is navigating a fragmented landscape marked by changing alliances, economic and trade rivalries, and regional conflicts. Since powerful states decide on all issues, including peace, wars, the economy, trade, etc., it is impossible to achieve all objectives without adaptation and sustainability.
Lessons from ancient times are good examples for today’s problems. More than two thousand years have passed since the death of Xenophon (430-350 BC). Yet, his publications and military experience can serve us now. They are relevant for current geopolitical and geoeconomic dynamics. Xenophon’s experience, especially in the Anabasis, highlights the importance of coalition building, sustainability, and adaptation. “For my part, I think that if we are to be saved, we must take action ourselves… If we do not provide for ourselves, who will? And if we do not stand together, how can we expect to defeat our enemies? Let us resolve to move forward with courage, each doing his utmost, for there is no safety in retreat.” (Anabasis, Book III, Chapter 2, sections 16-17, Carleton L. Brownson, 1922).
Xenophon’s experience in the Anabasis is not simply a story of survival. It is a testament to the ability to turn disadvantages into opportunities. This is achieved through adaptability, alliances, negotiation, and diplomacy. For example, ongoing tensions exist between great, middle, and small powers. They involve politics, trade, natural resources, and technology. These tensions echo Xenophon’s teachings on the need for “strategic flexibility.” His account of leading tens of thousands of soldiers through foreign and hostile territories is notable. It shows how smaller players, or middle powers, can use diplomacy and pragmatism. These strategies enable them to survive amid competition and unfamiliar situations. In the current context, it is again impossible not to mention the war between Ukraine and Russia. Kyiv, although dominated by a larger military power, showed flexibility and diplomatic-military support. This enabled them to withstand the Russian invasion until a possible peace agreement between the two states. US Secretary of State Marco Rubio said that Ukraine wants to make peace, but Russia must decide. “Putin and Russia need to make a decision: whether they are serious about peace or not”. “We will see that in a few weeks, not months”.
A statement that has a connection with Xenophon’s teachings on flexibility and adaptation to a new reality. We can further cite as an example the imposition of tariffs by the US government on several countries. Most countries want to preserve their national trade interests. They have warned of imposing tariffs against the US. These countries pledge to act like all nations. This action starts with China, Japan, South Korea, Mexico, Canada, Great Britain, etc. Here, the countries of the Balkan region have not been outside this concern that requires addressing and adapting. The Balkan countries, like all others, must decide whether trade tariffs will affect diplomatic-economic relations with the US. Serbia and North Macedonia have higher tariffs compared to Kosovo and Albania.
Despite this, the President of Kosovo Vjosa Osmani has proposed. She suggested that the Kosovo government not apply trade measures against the US. In particular, the tariff policy may change the attitude of governments in the Balkans towards the US. It is not necessary to worsen the close diplomatic and strategic relations with the US. The Prime Minister of North Macedonia, Kristijan Mickoski, mentioned that the trade measures were within predictions. They were not surprising. This shows an effort by both Skopje and Pristina. They aim to ensure the tariff policy remains outside the long-term interests of their countries with the US. This is the case despite the policy having a direct impact. These examples are supported by the historical experiences of the countries. We can take sources as a reference from antiquity, the Middle Ages, and even the 20th century events. We are unclear about the damage the tariff war policy will cause. However, we know the Balkan trade is strongly interconnected. The economic bonds among Balkan countries are strong. The economy is closely tied to the EU and interregionally. Since they cannot function in isolation, governments will be forced to balance and cooperate. They need to negotiate just as the Greeks once had to talk to local tribes. This was necessary to maintain unity and cooperation as a policy. They did this to face the long-term threats coming from Persia.
The revival of military and economic alliances takes place in the Balkans and globally. This trend emphasizes “collective strength”. Meanwhile, wars over rare natural resources and strategic materials occur. The case of Greenland is an example. Attempts for an agreement between Washington and Kiev demonstrate the same “geographical determinism” that Xenophon offers us in “Anabasis.” According to him, geographical space and resources shape both military and economic power. Another example is Canada, which must take an approach to building economic and military independence. To achieve this, it must cooperate with other countries such as Mexico and European states. Moreover, in a Euro-Balkan reality, Balkan governments would learn from Xenophon’s lessons. They would focus on cooperation and aim for the EU’s military independence. A European army and an independent financial system are two main examples that correspond to Xenophon’s ideas. The Head of the European Central Bank is Christine Lagarde. She “called for an alternative to ‘American Visa’ and ‘Mastercard’ in a march towards independence”. Navigating such a harsh geopolitical environment is certainly not easy. Nations must adapt their actions to reality to survive. They must also incorporate self-defense and national interest measures. Recently, Croatia, Albania, and Kosovo enhanced their military cooperation. They signed an agreement to deepen cooperation within existing alliances. The same has been proposed by representatives of Republika Srpska, with the idea of Serbia and Hungary providing a counterbalance.
Here are some recent examples of actions by EU and Balkan governments. These examples reflect efforts to maintain balance in regional and international politics. The EU’s €6 billion “Growth Plan” for the Western Balkans is in place. The US and EU have imposed sanctions on Republika Srpska leader Milorad Dodik. NATO has increased its troop presence in Kosovo. EU-led diplomacy in the Serbia-Kosovo dialogue continues to mediate between Belgrade and Pristina. This is a continuous European effort to avoid a new conflict in the Balkans. From the last century, we can highlight several agreements. These include the division of Germany into East and West. Another example is the Dayton Agreement of 1995. Additionally, there is the Ohrid Agreement of 2001, etc. Similar examples with characteristics that we find in Xenophon’s “Anabasis”, but with importance for our time, we have many. Statesmen and decision-makers should consider the same experiences carefully. They should use them as a preventive and balancing policy. This applies whether in the context of the Balkans, the EU, etc.
Today’s wars and future threats differ from those of ancient times. Wars and threats also differ from what Xenophon faced in the Anabasis. States, when faced with threats, either fight or cooperate. In our difficult times, resolving issues through diplomacy is the best option. Negotiations help overcome disadvantages arising from various factors and other geopolitical forces.
The article was written specifically for Portalb.mk. The publication rights are reserved solely by Portalb.mk and the author, according to their agreement.
Comments are closed, but trackbacks and pingbacks are open.