New Majorities and Minorities in the Changing Balkans - Project on ...

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Success, of course atthis po<strong>in</strong>t would mean<strong>the</strong> establishment ofstable <strong>and</strong> democraticgovernments whichall groups, majorities<strong>and</strong> m<strong>in</strong>orities view aslegitimate <strong>and</strong> <strong>the</strong>ir own.progress has been achieved <strong>in</strong> Macedonia, not just by this government,but by <strong>the</strong> previous government, as well. This period was a great testfor <strong>the</strong> country <strong>and</strong> all citizens are grateful for <strong>the</strong> progress thathas been achieved. There was participation<strong>and</strong> support from <strong>the</strong><strong>in</strong>ternational community for thisprogress, but Macedonian politiciansshowed real consensus on <strong>the</strong>basics.” This participant argued that“noth<strong>in</strong>g done by <strong>the</strong> governmenthas been <strong>in</strong> violation of <strong>the</strong> constitution,”<strong>and</strong> questioned “why aresome parties still question<strong>in</strong>g <strong>the</strong>legitimacy of <strong>the</strong> government?” Thecreation of <strong>the</strong> government coalition was achieved <strong>in</strong> a manner entirelyconsistent with constitutional <strong>and</strong> parliamentary procedure. This participantacknowledged that “<strong>the</strong> big issues will be driven by <strong>the</strong> EU <strong>and</strong>NATO, not by <strong>the</strong> parties of government or <strong>the</strong> opposition. They arenot a question of political will, only implementation of what <strong>the</strong> EU <strong>and</strong>NATO dem<strong>and</strong>.”With respect to <strong>the</strong> use of Albanian <strong>in</strong> Macedonia, this participant notedthat language use is governed by a pre-exist<strong>in</strong>g law, not by any newaction or policy on <strong>the</strong> part of <strong>the</strong> government. “Macedonia is a civicstate, not a national state,” this participant argued. “The pr<strong>in</strong>ciple oftrust requires open m<strong>in</strong>ds <strong>and</strong> an effort to take a civic perspective onshared <strong>in</strong>terests.”A participant from Romania suggested that <strong>the</strong> Romanian “approach” —“not model” — might be <strong>in</strong>structive for o<strong>the</strong>r countries. This approachwas developed <strong>in</strong> cooperation with PER <strong>and</strong> <strong>the</strong> Council of Europe, <strong>the</strong>most important organizational guardian of human rights <strong>and</strong> m<strong>in</strong>orityrights <strong>in</strong> Europe.The Romanian approach <strong>in</strong>volved, first, a debate over <strong>the</strong> nature of <strong>the</strong>state; over what <strong>the</strong> term “national state” means today. This participantsuggested that <strong>the</strong> word “nation” <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong> first article of <strong>the</strong> Romanianconstitution does not mean ethnic nation, but civic nation. “Even <strong>in</strong>order to streng<strong>the</strong>n national security, <strong>the</strong> state must be civic <strong>and</strong> multicultural.There is no room <strong>in</strong> Europe today for a state <strong>in</strong> which onegroup dom<strong>in</strong>ates o<strong>the</strong>rs. No state is homogeneous, <strong>and</strong> <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong> modernera dom<strong>in</strong>ation is impossible.” This participant went even fur<strong>the</strong>r,argu<strong>in</strong>g that even <strong>the</strong> term “multi-national” no longer makes sense. Thisterm suggests some groups are recognized, he suggested, while o<strong>the</strong>rs arenot. “The term civic, or multi-cultural, captures <strong>the</strong> notion of diversityof <strong>the</strong> state, <strong>the</strong> idea of <strong>the</strong> state as a legal personality.”The second element of <strong>the</strong> Romanian approach, this participant reported,was a debate over <strong>the</strong> character of <strong>the</strong> national m<strong>in</strong>orities as communities.“The status of groups changes over time, with majorities becom<strong>in</strong>gm<strong>in</strong>orities <strong>and</strong> m<strong>in</strong>orities becom<strong>in</strong>g majorities. The psychologicallegacies of chang<strong>in</strong>g statuses create sensitivities that must be addressed.Only <strong>the</strong> strategy of a common project offers an opportunity to overcomepsychological issues.”Third, <strong>the</strong> Romanian approach <strong>in</strong>cluded <strong>the</strong> shar<strong>in</strong>g of political power.Rights are not predeterm<strong>in</strong>ed, this participant suggested, <strong>the</strong>y are <strong>the</strong>result of political dialogue, which itself is a form <strong>and</strong> a consequence ofpower shar<strong>in</strong>g. “Are rights social, political, or economic?” This participantargued <strong>the</strong>y are not economic; economic rights are determ<strong>in</strong>ed bymarkets. They are cultural, identity rights. “Cultural, identity, <strong>and</strong>spiritual rights should not be conceived on a territorial basis. The territorialissue should be put aside.” Dispersed groups, this participantargued, have <strong>the</strong> same rights as those concentrated <strong>in</strong> certa<strong>in</strong> territories.The fourth debate <strong>in</strong> Romania concerned<strong>the</strong> scope of m<strong>in</strong>ority rights.“Harmonization <strong>and</strong> stabilization”of <strong>in</strong>terethnic relations contributedto consolidation of <strong>the</strong> democraticstate <strong>in</strong> Romania, he argued.“There should be no contradictionbetween respect for <strong>and</strong> recognitionIf you don’t grantrights, you will have togrant territory.of diversity, <strong>and</strong> cohesion of <strong>the</strong> state.” Ultimately, <strong>the</strong> limit on scope ofrights is def<strong>in</strong>ed by <strong>the</strong> requirements of cohesion of <strong>the</strong> state. “If youdon’t grant rights, you will have to grant territory. <strong>M<strong>in</strong>orities</strong> must feelsecure, <strong>and</strong> feel a sense of dignity.” Security <strong>and</strong> dignity, this participantwent on to conclude, require “equality;” between <strong>in</strong>dividuals <strong>and</strong>between communities, but not between groups <strong>and</strong> <strong>the</strong> state. Thereare two approaches to security <strong>and</strong> dignity. One may be labeled “protection,”<strong>the</strong> o<strong>the</strong>r “association.” The “protection” approach def<strong>in</strong>es onegroup as protected, <strong>the</strong> o<strong>the</strong>r a protector. It is asymmetric. “Association”89
calls for decentralization or devolution as a means for achiev<strong>in</strong>gsecurity <strong>and</strong> dignity.A participant from Hungary disagreed with some of <strong>the</strong>se po<strong>in</strong>ts. Hesuggested that <strong>the</strong>re is no “golden rule” with respect to whe<strong>the</strong>r m<strong>in</strong>orityrights should be based on territory. He po<strong>in</strong>ted out that <strong>the</strong>re are someexamples of territorial rights that are “good <strong>and</strong> viable <strong>and</strong> work<strong>in</strong>g,” <strong>and</strong>some examples of cases that are not “work<strong>in</strong>g.” “We should not say thatthis pr<strong>in</strong>ciple is right or wrong. We should simply <strong>in</strong>sist that every solutionmust be based on <strong>the</strong> agreement of <strong>the</strong> concerned parties, <strong>in</strong>clud<strong>in</strong>g <strong>the</strong>majority <strong>and</strong> <strong>the</strong> m<strong>in</strong>ority. I do agree that no solution can be expected tolast forever, <strong>and</strong> that <strong>the</strong>re is no solution that can be applied to everycountry.” He noted a tendency <strong>in</strong> Europe toward decentralization <strong>and</strong>devolution <strong>in</strong> governance, “processes which sometimes result <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong>creation of ethnic entities, <strong>and</strong> sometimes not.” This participant alsonoted <strong>the</strong> longst<strong>and</strong><strong>in</strong>g debate between advocates of <strong>in</strong>dividual rights<strong>and</strong> advocates of collective rights. He acknowledged <strong>the</strong> validity of arguments<strong>in</strong> favor of <strong>in</strong>dividual rights, but wished to argue <strong>in</strong> support ofcollective rights. He also noted that <strong>the</strong>re are many labels for collectiverights, <strong>in</strong>clud<strong>in</strong>g community rights <strong>and</strong> even <strong>in</strong>dividual rights that canbe exercised only <strong>in</strong> collectivities, but wished to focus on <strong>the</strong> substanceof <strong>the</strong> pr<strong>in</strong>ciple. “There are many rights that are very substantial <strong>and</strong>important for m<strong>in</strong>orities, <strong>and</strong> cannot be exercised by <strong>in</strong>dividuals alone.These are mostly l<strong>in</strong>guistic rights. And <strong>the</strong>se cannot be attached to every<strong>in</strong>dividual <strong>in</strong> society. These can be attached to some of <strong>the</strong> groups [<strong>in</strong> asociety]. In Hungary, <strong>the</strong>re are 13 national communities that enjoy collectiverights to self-government, school<strong>in</strong>g, etc. There are many o<strong>the</strong>rs,such as immigrants, who do not have such rights. Only <strong>the</strong> old, traditional,groups <strong>and</strong> <strong>the</strong> major ethnic m<strong>in</strong>ority, <strong>the</strong> Roma, have <strong>the</strong>se rights.”F<strong>in</strong>ally, this participant questioned <strong>the</strong> wisdom of adopt<strong>in</strong>g a new constitution<strong>in</strong> Serbia at this particular moment, especially a constitution conta<strong>in</strong><strong>in</strong>gprovisions on Kosovo that, <strong>in</strong> his view, complicated <strong>the</strong> issue.On <strong>the</strong> question of territorialization of rights, <strong>the</strong> prior participant noted <strong>in</strong>response that <strong>the</strong> Parliamentary Assembly of <strong>the</strong> Council of Europe hadrecently asked member governments to avoid <strong>the</strong> organization/adm<strong>in</strong>istrationof <strong>the</strong>ir territories on an ethnic basis. Decentralization <strong>and</strong> devolutionshould, <strong>the</strong>refore, be conceived <strong>in</strong> civic, not ethnic terms. And, f<strong>in</strong>ally,he offered a legal nuance to <strong>the</strong> def<strong>in</strong>ition of collective rights. He po<strong>in</strong>tedout that “<strong>the</strong> subjects enjoy<strong>in</strong>g <strong>the</strong> rights are collective, not <strong>the</strong> rights.”A participant from Serbia viewed <strong>in</strong>terethnic relations as <strong>the</strong> key to fullsecurity for all states <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong> region. “Serbia, like o<strong>the</strong>r states <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong>region,” he declared, “views its future <strong>in</strong> terms of membership <strong>in</strong>Europe.” He affirmed that ethnic diversity <strong>in</strong> Serbia is a nationalresource; “it enriches <strong>the</strong> country.” But he also acknowledged it is an area<strong>in</strong> which <strong>the</strong> quality of democracy <strong>in</strong> Serbia will be measured. This participantpo<strong>in</strong>ted out that <strong>the</strong> law on national m<strong>in</strong>orities adopted <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong>Federal Republic of Yugoslavia <strong>in</strong> 2001 (this law is still valid <strong>in</strong> Serbia)gave all ethnic m<strong>in</strong>orities <strong>the</strong> opportunity to establish <strong>the</strong>ir own nationalcouncils as representative organizations, <strong>and</strong> arenas for debate over community<strong>in</strong>terests. The presidents of <strong>the</strong>se councils constitute an advisorybody on policy for <strong>the</strong> government through <strong>the</strong>ir membership on <strong>the</strong> statecouncil for national m<strong>in</strong>orities, established two years ago. It is chaired by<strong>the</strong> Prime M<strong>in</strong>ister <strong>and</strong> <strong>in</strong>cludes o<strong>the</strong>r key m<strong>in</strong>isters among its members.The new constitution adopted recently <strong>in</strong> Serbia, this participant reported,was supported by <strong>the</strong> full consensus of all political parties, <strong>and</strong> by <strong>the</strong>people of Serbia, <strong>in</strong> a referendum. “It <strong>the</strong>refore enjoys a high level ofpolitical legitimacy <strong>and</strong> consensus <strong>in</strong> Serbia.” The new constitution, heargued, embodies <strong>the</strong> pr<strong>in</strong>ciple of full protection for all ethnic identities.He reported that it recognizes not just <strong>in</strong>dividual rights, but collectiverights, as well. These <strong>in</strong>clude protectionsaga<strong>in</strong>st discrim<strong>in</strong>ation orforced assimilation, <strong>the</strong> right ofassociation for members of ethniccommunities, <strong>the</strong> right to equality<strong>in</strong> public services, <strong>and</strong> o<strong>the</strong>r provisions.A new constitutional mechanismhas been established, <strong>the</strong>There is no room <strong>in</strong>Europe today for a state<strong>in</strong> which one groupdom<strong>in</strong>ates o<strong>the</strong>rs.“constitutional appeal.” The office of an ombudsman has also beenestablished, <strong>and</strong> enjoys a m<strong>and</strong>ate to protect m<strong>in</strong>ority rights. Beyond<strong>the</strong>se legal provisions, he argued, <strong>the</strong> new constitution also affirms <strong>the</strong>responsibility of <strong>the</strong> state to ensure equal economic opportunities, equaldevelopment, for all citizens, regardless of ethnic identity. The constitutionalso calls for decentralization of <strong>the</strong> Serbian state, which <strong>the</strong> governmentviews as a precondition for achiev<strong>in</strong>g <strong>the</strong> development of Serbia as awhole. A council on national m<strong>in</strong>orities is about to be established <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong>multiethnic prov<strong>in</strong>ce of Vojvod<strong>in</strong>a, which represents <strong>the</strong> application ofconstitutional pr<strong>in</strong>ciples at <strong>the</strong> level of <strong>the</strong> prov<strong>in</strong>ce. This participant1011
Page 1 and 2: PROJECT ON ETHNIC RELATIONSR e p o
Page 3 and 4: TABLE OF CONTENTSPreface 1Note on T
Page 5 and 6: whether each count
Page 7: BUILDING DEMOCRATIC INTERETHNICGOVE
Page 11 and 12: Nonetheless, he af
Page 14 and 15: he argued, “when it comes to m<st
Page 16 and 17: Council of EuropeMarc Scheuer, Dire

New Majorities and Minorities in the Changing Balkans - Project on ...

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?