I sometimes wonder whether it’s even possible to be a Serbian patriot and not to love France, or to be French patriot while opposing the Serbs? A special bond was forged between the two countries and peoples in the first half of the 19th century. After the restoration of Serbian statehood, the country sent its top cadets to French universities, thereby gaining a national elite that would go on to create one of the most progressive, democratic states in the Europe of the early 20th century. Fighting side by side in the trenches of the Great War, Serbian and French soldiers quickly established a relationship of brotherhood and solidarity, despite speaking different languages.

Thousands of Serbian children were also saved from the maelstrom of war and educated at French primary and secondary schools. During World War II, General Dragoljub ‘Draža’ Mihajlović, leader of one of the two resistance movements in the then occupied Kingdom of Yugoslavia, maintained close relations with the leader of the Free French forces, General Charles de Gaulle. During the post-war period, members of the Serbian community contributed to redeveloping the French economy, while Serbian artists created their works in France, or with French encouragement and support.

France and Serbia are today connected by new political challenges, and Serbia primarily desires to join France in the EU. Following two decades of fruitless pre-accession activities, the European Union is losing credibility among the citizens of Western Balkan countries. That’s why it’s necessary to find solutions that tangibly advance the Union’s enlargement policy. This September’s report of the Franco-German expert group, which received the support of ministers for European integration, could represent a positive step in that direction. It should be noted that difficulties in the functioning of the EU’s institutional system ensure that it isn’t able to receive a larger number of new member states simultaneously.

For France, due to historical and political reasons, Serbia is a key partner on the territory of the former Yugoslavia

Furthermore, current candidate countries find themselves at different stages of European integration and economic development. As such, the Franco-German idea of applying the regatta principle would represent an appropriate response. It is my consideration that Serbia and Montenegro, as the countries that have advanced the most in accession negotiations, should be accepted as members by 2030. The Union would thus send a clear signal validating its pre-accession policy. In the meantime, it is necessary to enable these two countries, but also other candidate countries, to be included in EU programmes in stages and to receive the same funding from the pre-accession funds as existing member states.

Viewed from a Serbian perspective, the Franco-German plan for Kosovo includes two compromise solutions and several others that would be difficult to implement. Firstly, the establishment of the Community of Serb Municipalities (ZSO) offers partial implementation of the 2013 Brussels Agreement for the ethnic Serb community in Kosovo. Unfortunately, the powers and responsibilities of the ZSO, as envisaged in the original text of the agreement, are being brought into question. Serbia will not be obliged to formally recognise the independence of Kosovo in the period ahead and, in return, will recognise Kosovo’s formal documents (passports, identity cards, stamps/seals), agree for Kosovo to appear at international summits without the star indicating that it is a territory under UN protection and allow Kosovo to become a member of international organisations. These demands will shake the very foundations of Serbian foreign policy.

The post The Regatta Principle Would be an Apt Response appeared first on CorD Magazine.

The Ukraine crisis opened a new chapter in geopolitical relations, which has certainly been reflected in the EU enlargement process. It is today clearer than ever that the Western Balkan region must maintain strong ties with the Union. Enlargement to encompass the Western Balkans has primarily become an issue with security implications for the EU, and has thus recreated the conditions to restore credibility to a process that has been in question for several years.

This, on the one hand, was a consequence of the unwillingness of candidate countries to truly get to grips with essential reforms, while on the other hand it reflects the unwillingness of the European Union to monitor these processes consistently, due to a lack of political consensus on enlargement and the need for internal EU reforms. In Serbia, this situation, coupled with the constant strengthening of soft Russian influence via different figures in society, has led to a significant increase in Euroscepticism, which has created space to further promote anti-European perspectives in the political sphere. Only the aggression against Ukraine has demonstrated possible long-term consequences of these processes for the region as a whole, and thus also for the Union itself.

Even though the European integration process could speed up significantly, candidate countries must still fulfil all set obligations

Accordingly, we have seen the intensifying of numerous processes which have the role of, on the one hand, restoring confidence within candidate countries regarding the seriousness of the EU’s enlargement intentions, while on the other hand their role is to motivate the speeding up of reform processes without which there can be no progress on accession. When it comes to the specific timeframe that’s currently on the table, it should also be viewed in the context of the EU’s recent Economic and Investment Plan for the Western Balkans, which was presented by EC President Ursula von der Leyen. Phased accession is probably a realistic plan, given the current capacities of the candidate countries, while it simultaneously also reflects a clear political intention to pursue enlargement, around which there is consensus among all member states.

However, from the perspective of obligations, this changes almost nothing for us, because one of the four pillars of the aforementioned Plan is still related to reforms and progress, especially within the framework of political criteria and the rule of law, which are areas where Serbia has received the harshest criticisms. The difference lies in the fact that institutions and citizens could now feel some tangible benefits long before the concluding of the accession process, such as, for example, access to the European single market or funds which, in previous rounds of enlargement, only became available with formal membership status. Experiences from previous enlargement rounds showed that there must be no turning a blind eye in these most sensitive areas, such as the rule of law and the struggle to curb corruption and fight crime, as this would threaten the fundamental values of the EU that set it apart from all other political alliances, now or at any previous time in history.

The post Phased Enlargement appeared first on CorD Magazine.

I would say that the effects for the Western Balkans have so far been positive. Firstly, it forces the EU leadership to reconsider the current enlargement process. While it is clear that there will be no shortcut to membership for Ukraine, the EU is willing to think much more creatively about the process than it has for a long time. This can only benefit the Western Balkans, as the region is not going anywhere under the current dynamics. There is, however, no clear, unified plan of how to make enlargement work. Overall, there are two ideas that have been gaining support. The first is the notion of a timeline, such as the year 2030 that was mentioned by Charles Michel.

However, if this is just a talking point without foundation, it is meaningless. After all, former Commission president Juncker launched the year 2025 for Montenegro and Serbia not that long ago, and today that has been forgotten and rendered irrelevant. Thus, to make such a date useful, it has to be based on a broad EU commitment to enable the countries to join by that date if they are ready. This also entails establishing a clear timeline in order for governments to understand precisely what they have to do to complete the necessary steps to join by that date.

Although there is no quick path to EU membership for Ukraine, the EU is now open to considering a more innovative approach to the accession process than it has been for a while

Let’s keep in mind that 2030 is not as far away as it sounds. To join, negotiations have to be completed around two years earlier, which means that accession talks need to be completed by 2028, i.e., five years from now. This means that many laws and other decisions have to be taken and countries have to show a track record. This will not be easy and will require a much more tightly managed process, one that will also enable the public to see which country is lagging where and why.

A second idea that has been gaining support is that of joining the EU in stages, as proposed by the European Policy Centre in Belgrade and the Centre for European Policy Studies in Brussels. The idea here is that a country joins the EU in several stages. It initially receives some benefits prior to joining, such as access to EU funds and more inclusion in EU institutions, albeit without voting rights. Then, once it joins, there are some limitations that are only lifted after a transition period. In brief, it suggests a stepby- step process, rather than seeing the EU as being in or out. A number of EU governments, such as those of Austria and France, seem to like the idea, but it is unclear if it can gain the full support of the majority of EU member states. It certainly makes sense to combine these two ideas and create a new dynamic for enlargement.

The post No Clear Plan to Make Enlargement Work appeared first on CorD Magazine.

Russia’s aggression against Ukraine poses the greatest threat to European security since WWII, prompting the EU’s political elites to recognise that enlargement is the best way to secure the EU’s position in the parts of Europe that remain beyond the Union’s borders. The most visible change in terms of enlargement policy was the inclusion of three Eastern European countries in that process with the granting of candidate country status to Ukraine and Moldova, as well as offering broader European prospects to Georgia. The EU also exerted substantial efforts to overcome the obstacles hindering the opening of accession talks with Albania and North Macedonia, as well as granting candidate country status to Bosnia-Herzegovina. Furthermore, EU leaders have also acknowledged that the EU should prepare itself institutionally for the next round of enlargement.

By explicitly mentioning 2030 as a potential year for EU enlargement, the President of the European Council broke a long-standing EU taboo. At the same time, the European Commission continues to back the stance that the accession process must remain merit- based, and thus any promised dates are contingent upon the fulfilment of necessary reforms. In that context, promising a date can be viewed as superfluous and arbitrary. However, the European Policy Centre believes that these two views are far more complementary than they initially appear.

Setting a target year for the next round of enlargement might prove a crucial booster for reforms on the ground and trigger a much more dynamic accession process among candidate countries’ governments

Namely, predictability and credibility, as key values of the accession process, can only be achieved if the process is fully merit-based and if accession countries are being gradually rewarded for their improvements in the process. However, at the same time, these two values of the enlargement process could be seriously undermined if there is no indicative timeframe that would serve to motivate candidate countries to remain committed to the reform process, which will eventually result in them joining the EU, provided the required level of preparedness is reached by a mutually agreed date. In that context, the proposed target year should be viewed as a target towards which both sides (the candidate countries and the EU) should work together, rather than as a promised date of accession for any candidate country.

Membership in the EU requires that aspiring countries fully align with the EU acquis, prepare to compete on the EU’s Single Market and duly strengthen their public administration to handle this important step. Considering this long list and how difficult it has proven to be for Western Balkan countries that are already 20 years into the integration process, the road will most certainly be challenging for Ukraine and other Eastern European countries. In that context, the 2030 target sounds quite optimistic as a timeline for completing all the necessary reforms, especially given the ongoing war and all the devastation it is bringing to Ukraine. On the other hand, Ukraine last year managed to answer the Commission’s questionnaire in record time and secure candidate country status quicker than anyone expected. This certainly constitutes a basis for optimism.

The post Geopolitics is the Name of the Game appeared first on CorD Magazine.

The war in Ukraine has elevated the issue of enlargement on the list of EU priorities. It is enough to observe the rhetoric of the French leadership. Prior to the war, this country was rightly perceived as the top sceptic when it comes to accepting new members. However, speaking at the recent Bled Strategic Forum, France’s Secretary of State for European Affairs, Laurence Boone, insisted that “there will be no stability and security in the EU and neighbouring countries without enlargement”. The same panel included Natalie Tocchi, director of Italy’s influential Institute of International Relations, who wrote in a recent editorial piece for Brussels-based Politico Europe that the geopolitical argument in favour of EU enlargement must prevail in the near future.

Nevertheless, not everything is so simple. Although the war has significantly strengthened pro-enlargement currents within the EU, a consensus has yet to be reached. Over the past year and a half, there has been plenty of stumbling when certain steps needed to be taken, such as opening accession negotiations with North Macedonia and Albania. Viewed as a whole, no significant developments should be expected ahead of next year’s European elections. After that, the main elements that the region needs to pay attention to are who will be the new Commissioner for Enlargement and whether the reforming EU decision-making processes will be initiated, which represents an informal precondition for enlargement.

Now that the EU seems readier to accept new members, candidate countries also need to demonstrate their commitment. However, the signals sent to date are disappointing

Now that the EU seems readier to accept new members, candidate countries also need to demonstrate their commitment. However, the signals sent to date are disappointing. The Albania PM and Serbian MFA immediately expressed scepticism over dates, with Serbia’s highest representatives – the president and prime minister – having so far completely ignored the announcement mentioning 2030. One gets the impression that those claiming that many political elites across the region are more comfortable with the status quo than a more serious commitment to the enlargement process are correct.

The year 2030 is indeed realistic for some candidate countries – those that will be ready for accession by that time. Although the Ukraine situation has reinvigorated this process, it is difficult to expect that it could achieve this state of readiness itself, which is certainly an impossibility while the war continues. On the other hand, Montenegro could achieve it, and probably also North Macedonia, and Serbia could make it too, provided it “buckles down” immediately. The fulfilling of the Government’s programme to adopt EU legislation has remained at a very low level in recent years. Serbia’s Minister of European Integration recently announced that the pace of reforms will be accelerated, and let’s hope that this will be the case – provided new extraordinary elections aren’t prevented in the meantime.

The post Positive Signs, But No Simple Solutions appeared first on CorD Magazine.

Germany provides Serbia with considerable support in introducing crucial political and economic reforms aimed at fostering democratic change, strengthening the rule of law and facilitating Serbia’s progress on its EU accession journey.

Development cooperation between Germany and Serbia is geared primarily towards assisting Serbia in its EU accession process. Key areas of focus include green initiatives, renewable energy development, energy efficiency enhancement and sustainable economic transformation. Notably, Germany has entered into a strategic climate partnership with Serbia and the Western Balkan region, demonstrating its commitment to environmental sustainability across the region.

Additional areas encompass vocational education and training, assistance to the Serbian private sector and the promotion of good governance. Germany has been a pivotal contributor in these areas since 2000, providing approximately 2.3 billion euros, fortifying its existing position as the largest bilateral donor.

By all measures, this cooperation is most fruitful when it comes to economic cooperation, while the two countries have differing positions on Kosovo independence and some issues related to foreign policy and views on the Ukraine conflict. Nevertheless, these differences have not hindered the overall relationship, which remains robust.

Accomplishments to date indicate that these two partner countries have the potential to achieve even greater success and strengthen their existing relationship

From an economic standpoint, Germany has emerged as a key partner for Serbia. The presence in Serbia of over 900 companies with German capital has been instrumental in driving economic growth and job creation. The German-Serbian Chamber of Commerce has played a crucial role in facilitating this economic cooperation. And indeed, judging by numbers, it is a success story. The commercial goods exchange between Germany and Serbia has experienced a remarkable surge, with an almost 18 per cent increase in the first four months of 2023 alone. This follows a substantial nominal increase of 26.3% in the trade exchange between the two countries in 2022. These positive results can be attributed to a growing number of German companies either establishing or expanding their manufacturing operations in Serbia. These endeavours primarily involve the production of components for the German industrial sector, further solidifying bilateral economic ties.

These achievements suggest that these two partner nations could move mountains and may further excel in their current relations.

In conclusion, while Serbia and Germany have enjoyed considerable economic success and maintain a strong partnership, it is essential to acknowledge areas requiring improvement and challenges that lie ahead. The continued growth of economic ties, coupled with efforts to mitigate risks and enhance market stability, will be crucial in ensuring the continued success of these bilateral relations.

Photo: Freepik

The post Moving Mountains appeared first on CorD Magazine.

The future of transport and logistics is dependent on the continued digitalisation, automation and optimisation of processes, the increased application of robots and artificial intelligence, the deployment of drones and the mass use of electric delivery vehicles, including heavy haulage trucks.

Living and working is easy in times of peace. The challenges come during times of turmoil that require continuous adaptation. It is then that long-term solutions that have remained unchanged for decades lose their value, particularly in areas of life and business that are strongly influenced by geopolitical happenings. And transport and logistics certainly fall into that category…

It was initially the pandemic – with its varied and numerous restrictions, but also large numbers of people infected with the Covid-19 virus – that destabilised movements of people and goods, and threatened supply chains, but fortunately didn’t cause them to break. Despite it seeming impossible for the situation to deteriorate further, with the end of the pandemic came even greater challenges to confront the transport and logistics sector – with the war in Ukraine, the energy crisis, rising inflation, driver shortages – which no country was protected against, including Serbia.

The transport community connects the EU and our region

Testifying to the idea that Serbia can overcome the global crisis and find itself on the right track just by cooperating with European countries and exchanging experiences is the decision to choose Belgrade as the location for the headquarters of the Permanent Secretariat of the Transport Community, representing an international organisation founded with the aim of further developing the existing transport network connecting the EU and the countries of Southeast Europe. The Transport Community’s members include the European Union and the six countries of the Western Balkans: Albania, Bosnia-Herzegovina, North Macedonia, Kosovo, Montenegro and Serbia, while its purpose is to extend the EU transport market’s rules, principles and policies to the countries of the Western Balkans through a legally binding framework.

Constructing road and rail infrastructure is crucial to strengthening the economies and competitiveness of the entire region

The agreement is applied in the areas of transport by road, rail, inland waterways and maritime routes, and Serbia has obliged itself, with the adopting of the founding agreement, to harmonise its legislation with the EU acquis in these areas. Serbia attaches great importance to every project agreed and implemented in partnership with this international organisation, which has also been the case with the joint project of Slovenia, Serbia, Croatia, Austria, and probably also Italy, to develop a single rail route that would connect Belgrade, Zagreb and Ljubljana with Vienna and northern Italy, but also with talks on the inclusion of North Macedonia, Greece and Turkey in regional infrastructure projects following completion of the Belgrade-Niš high-speed railway.

Serbia Must Utilise Its Geographical Position

In order for Serbia to take advantage of the strategic regional position that it enjoys thanks to geography, it is essential to finalise many infrastructure works, including the launched construction of roads and highways, as well as the railway to Hungary; to introduce more efficient customs procedures, accelerate digital transformation processes and implement numerous other measures that will contribute to shortening goods transport times. New investments could secure, among other things, incomparably more efficient transit conditions for goods being transported from China to Europe, as well as improving Serbia’s positioning on the map of Europe.

Construction of the Belgrade-Niš highspeed railway is just one of the major investments in rail infrastructure that are long overdue. Freight transport by rail currently accounts for approximately 18 per cent of total goods transports, which is below the expected level, but is nonetheless commensurate with the current state of rail infrastructure, which is on the whole very poor, with low transit options of domestic rail routes. According to the expectations of transport experts, railways could achieve 25 per cent participation in freight transport flows over the next five years, increasing to 35 per cent over the next decade. The expansion of “dry ports”, built at intersections between important rail and road routes, would certainly contribute to achieving this goal.

Railways And Modernised Ports Needed

One of the Serbian Government’s strategic plans is to connect the Danube and Sava rivers to the rail and road routes of Pan-European Corridor 10. Considering that the problems hindering river and port transport haven’t been solved for years, estimates suggest that a minimum of 500 million euros needs to be invested in waterways infrastructure, but there’s no doubt that the existing picture will improve with the construction of a new port in Belgrade and investments in the port of Novi Sad and to increase the capacities of the ports of Prahovo, Bogojevo and Smederevo.

Advancing rail infrastructure will undoubtedly lead to an increased reliance on rail transport, especially if it is accompanied by the entry of private operators and additional investments in intermodal terminals. This would lead to large quantities of goods being transferred from trucks to trains, but also to the development of combined transport that fuses road and rail and is considered the future of the sector.

Providing an additional reason to switch from road transport to rail is the fact that road haulage operations currently account for a quarter of all greenhouse gas emissions in the European Union and that pollution is a huge problem in the countries of the Western Balkans.

Apart from developing sustainable operations and reducing CO2 emissions, the future of transport and logistics includes the further digitalisation, automation and optimisation of processes, the increased application of robots and artificial intelligence, the deployment of drones and the mass use of electric delivery vehicles, including heavy haulage trucks. Demonstrating that this is neither some distant future reality nor pie in the sky is the current scene on U.S. interstate highways, where AI-controlled trucks already cruise.

Europe is now trying to catch up, and its success will mean smart, autonomous trucks also arriving in our region.

The post Combined Transport is Our Future appeared first on CorD Magazine.

Agency Fitch Ratings recently confirmed Serbia’s credit rating at the BB+ level. Despite Serbia having yet to receive an investment rating, this ratings decision reflects positive economic factors and the progress achieved by the country regardless of the extremely unfavourable global trends that have also manifested on the domestic business climate. Contributing the most to this rating are a credible economic policy, increased economic activity, improved administration, regulated public finances and the level of development of human resources compared to countries with a similar rating. 

Despite the challenges of external demand, Serbia has succeeded in preserving its stability, attracting significant direct investments and achieving growth on exports. 

Announced falling inflation and projections indicating an improved external position further contribute to the forming of a favourable picture. Moreover, the country’s fiscal deficit is also expected reduce, while public debt should remain at a level below 50% of GDP, which further buttresses macroeconomic stability. 

GDP is expected to enjoy further growth, driven by rising exports, an improved agricultural season and positive trends in the services sector. These are key factors that could support the achieving of higher rates of economic activity. 

Completing this positive picture are the views of representatives of international financial organisations, representatives of the Foreign Investors Council, individual companies and members of the Government of Serbia.

The FIC has addressed the vital issues of digitalisation and adherence to ESG principles over the past year, but also Serbia’s shift towards more sustainable agriculture development and environmental protection

It firstly seems that significant room for improvement still exists in Serbia when it comes to advancing the business climate and removing obstacles to further development internally. Although several new laws have been adopted and existing ones updated – such as the Law on Safety and Health at Work, amendments to the Law on Foreigners, the Law on the Employment of Foreigners and others – there has been a lack of significant activity in the country on the harmonising of regulations with the EU acquis. Furthermore, there are serious hindrances when it comes to the implementing of a large number of regulations. This is also reflected in the slowing dynamics of the adoption of recommendations provided in the FIC White Book. 

Secondly, certain areas are progressing in an unbalanced way. The recent FIC conference on financial services provided an example of good cooperation with the National Bank of Serbia, which has resulted in the introduction of numerous useful innovations for the benefit of the economy and citizens. In contrast to this, when it comes to the areas of the food sector and tax regulations, only slight advances have been recorded in terms of both dialogue and results. 

Thirdly, the top investors in Serbia are also leaders on activities that steer the country towards an improved business culture. Among corporations, ESG reporting is becoming increasingly important, with these aspects prompting responsible companies to join efforts aimed at preserving the wellbeing of workers and local communities. The FIC’s well-attended conference was dedicated to this specific topic and the launch of implementation of the Due Diligence Act in Serbia. 

Fourthly, the number of investments in Serbia’s innovative sectors is on the rise, but so is awareness of the necessity and obligation to shift the business community towards sustainable operations. One such example is the introduction of the principle of regenerative agriculture. Recognising the necessity of introducing new business practices, the FIC – as a leader in advancing Serbia’s business climate – is organising a conference on this topic in late September.

The post New Approaches Reinforce Economic Growth appeared first on CorD Magazine.

In the absence of a better alternative, Vučić remains a credible EU partner, as demonstrated at the August meeting in Athens between EU representatives and those of Western Balkan countries, Ukraine and Moldova. Vučić signed a declaration supporting Ukraine’s territorial integrity and thus distanced himself from Russia in a sufficiently euphemistic way (by condemning crimes without imposing sanctions) and indirectly through his meeting with Zelensky. 

Compensating for his pro-Western stance in Athens is the propaganda rife in Serbia, which fills a pro-Russian public opinion stance with appearances by Milošević-era cadre. 

Support for Western Balkan efforts to join the EU is emphasised in the Athens Declaration, but that doesn’t provide reason for optimism, given that Ukraine and Moldova are supported for the same efforts, which suggests some kind of disheartening “package”. 

Everything is made even more depressing by the fact that the Athens Declaration comes two decades after the famous EU-Western Balkans Summit of Thessaloniki, when the region’s countries were also promised a European accession perspective. 

The Summit in Thessaloniki only proved to be an encouraging gathering for Croatia – the only country from the Western Balkan “package” to have since joined the EU. In Athens this time around, Croatian PM Plenković was certainly there more as a leader from the EU than as a leader from our region. 

The essence of the relationship between the EU and the Western Balkans since Thessaloniki in 2003 was perhaps best described by Carl Bildt, when he said: “That promise would be as hard to keep as it was important to make”

A flatbread may well have cost a dinar in Thessaloniki, but – when it comes to EU membership – Thessaloniki is a hundred flatbreads away (as the old Serbian proverb goes). Another popular phrase at the time spoke of the regional “regatta” that Croatia would lead towards the EU, only for Croatian officials to expressly distance themselves from such metaphors (rightly so, as it would turn out) by stressing that each country should advance according to its own merits. 

What seems more surreal: from the current perspective, the fact that the Serbian Prime Minister in 2003 was Zoran Živković; or, from the perspective of the Thessaloniki summit, the possibility that Aleksandar Vučić will be Serbian president for 20 years, and in a second term!? Back then, Živković had showed great enthusiasm as a representative of the “level 2007” stance (on Serbia’s EU membership). Hey, membership in 2007!!! Can we today even imagine that level of naivety? Živković was introduced in Thessaloniki as a fighter against Milošević and against crime – representing an advertisement that Serbia doesn’t have today in terms of personnel. The country was in a tough situation following the assassination of Đinđić, whose political capital Živković utilised. We also mustn’t forget that Milo Đukanović spoke in Thessaloniki about the European consensus of Serbia and Montenegro, as had also been done by Slovenia and Estonia. 

It was an atmosphere of European idealism, and perhaps also a time of European innocence. Brexit, the migrant crisis and the war in Ukraine were still far away. The Constitution for Europe, as it was dubbed by its creator, former French President Giscard d’Estaing (a champion of Greece’s EU accession), which was adopted in Thessaloniki was supposed to create the framework for a functional community. The then 77-year-old European constitutionalist had hoped that the EU would be at full capacity and fully operational in another 20 years – so by today, when Macron is absurdly seeking EU reform. The essence of the relationship between the EU and the Western Balkans since Thessaloniki in 2003 was perhaps best described by Swedish diplomat and regional expert Carl Bildt, when he said: “That promise would be as hard to keep as it was important to make”.

The post From Thessaloniki to Athens appeared first on CorD Magazine.

A ccording to the 2023 Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, average global temperatures in the 2011-2020 period were up 1.1°C compared to the period from 1850 to 1900. This rise corresponds to an average temperature increase of 0.90°C in Europe compared to the levels from 1961 to 1990.

Meteorological measurements for Serbia show that, compared to the 1961-1990 period, this temperature increased by more than 1.4°C in the 2001-2020 period (1.8°C from 2011 to 2020). In other words, the territory of Serbia is warming faster than the global and European average, which can lead us to conclude that the country is more exposed to climate change.

Alongside exposure, vulnerability also depends on sensitivity (the level of losses and damage) and the capacity to transform to handle altered climatic conditions (adaptation). Extreme weather events caused by climate change during the 1980-2021 period led to losses of 560 billion euros in EU member states. Minimal damage and losses sustained in Serbia in the period from 2000 to 2020 totalled a value of approximately seven billion euros. A simple calculation leads to the conclusion that losses and damage in Serbia are much greater than those sustained in the EU and that they are growing over time.

Such a ratio between losses and damage in Serbia and the EU provides an indirect indication of Serbia’s lack of capacity for adaptation. This is also confirmed by some global analyses and indices that position Serbia as the hardest hit country in Europe, ahead of Bosnia-Herzegovina and Albania when taking into account systemic readiness, or the economic, social and political readiness to adapt in a timely manner.

Every dollar invested in adapting to altered climatic conditions brings a total economic benefit of between two and 10 dollars

Serbia, thus, is not in an enviable position in both cases. More specifically, it is among the worst hit countries with the least systematic readiness to adapt in Europe. Setting aside assessments of capacity and political readiness – though I believe they are interdependent and also determine the level of investment and financing – the fact is that Serbia does not have the required funds designated for adaptation. It isn’t even known that detailed sector-specific assessments of the needs exist, despite it having been shown that every dollar invested in adapting to altered climatic conditions brings a total economic benefit of between two and 10 dollars.

An effective and systematic approach to adaptation could be ensured by the adopting and implementing of the National Adaptation Plan of the Republic of Serbia, as well as the determining of specific measures and actions at the level of subnational regions and local governments. It is essential to integrate expected future changes to the climate into sectoral and local policies and measures, which currently isn’t the case. Securing the full implementation of the Law on Climate Change, in the section related to monitoring and reporting on adaptation, would also ensure the strengthening of capacities and the raising of public awareness. It is essential to work systemically with the population on improving their understanding – both of the need to respond to changes that we are all aware of, and of the multiple benefits brought by those responses.

Early announcements and advanced warnings represent a significant “measure” when it comes to reducing the risks caused by extreme weather events. Viewed globally, there are various methods of providing early announcements and advanced warnings that are based on detailed analyses that’s distinctive to specific countries.

The post Why We’re Vulnerable appeared first on CorD Magazine.

A ccording to the Notre Dame Global Adaptation Index (ND-GAIN’s Country index), Serbia currently ranks as the third worst country in Europe. The countries that have a lower rating are Bosnia-Herzegovina and Albania. This is a complex index with a value that depends on two key dimensions. The first dimension is the vulnerability of individual sectors to climate change, which considers six sectors: public health, food production, water resources, infrastructure, human habitat and ecosystem. The second dimension of this index is readiness to adapt to altered climatic conditions, considering the components of economic, social and governance readiness. If we observe only the part of the values of the index that relate to the vulnerability of individual sectors to climate change, Serbia is in the worst position among countries in Europe. In global frameworks, Serbia is in the middle of this list when it comes to both the aggregate index and when it comes to vulnerability.

One of the reasons for this high vulnerability is the fact that, in the case of Serbia, climate change brings a significant increase in the number and intensity of extreme weather events and climate extremes, and that first and foremost means heatwaves and high temperatures, droughts, extreme precipitation and accompanying storms, which can have negative consequences on public health, agricultural production, water supply etc., but also increase the risk of floods, forest fires and habitat loss for certain plant and animal species etc.

It would be good if recent experiences caused by major storms don’t remain yet another missed opportunity, but rather a clear call that we must make adaptation to climate change one of the priorities

Adaptation to climate change represents a way to improve this currently unfavourable situation. 

Unfortunately, Serbia has yet to adopt an umbrella document that would represent a solid basis to conduct this complex process, and the first such document is only expected to be adopted in the months ahead, or with the adoption of the Programme for Climate Change Adaptation.

Serbia’s lack of preparedness to handle climate change, and the absence of adequate plans and programmes, is also reflected in the consequences of events that we’ve witnessed over the last few months. Such a situation is more than clear if we observe the consequences of the floods that took place in late May and early June and impacted more than 80 municipalities in Serbia, as well as the consequences of July’s stormy weather. We also had devastating floods less than ten years ago, in 2014, which made it abundantly clear to us that climate change is no longer a risk of the future, but rather that it already has a direct and measurable negative impact on our lives. That plainly didn’t happen.

The post Lesson Not Learned appeared first on CorD Magazine.

Serbia has been hit by various storms in different seasons this year. Since the beginning of the year, Serbia has been hit by floods caused by watercourses, primarily first order watercourses, bursting their banks. These floods were expected in most locations, so there were also fewer consequences.

Serbia was hit by major floods, primarily of a torrential nature, in May and June. In most areas, these floods hit suddenly. In the month of July, particularly the second half of the month, a large number of local government units in Serbia were hit by storms that included hail. A systemic response to floods – especially when it comes to larger rivers bursting their banks – has been in place since 2014 and have an upward trajectory. However, the storms and hail of July 2023 represent “something new”, i.e., they happened for the first time in recent history, so the existing systemic response is perhaps inadequate.

Alongside funds and communication channels, the notification system implies constructed institutions, established procedures, adequate material resources for recording and notification. Moreover, informing on and responding to various dangers and signalling implies a system of training and exercises, which was unfortunately systematically abolished in Serbia in previous decades.

It isn’t possible to mitigate the consequences of disasters without the participation of citizens, but also the business world, particularly private businesses, as well as local communities

In accordance with the Law, the early warning system in the Republic of Serbia implies the establishment of a 112 (emergency telephone number) system. When it comes to targeted notifications, it is also essential to introduce special systems and communication channels and links (like the ALERT system in the U.S. or some European countries). I expect the early warning system in Serbia to develop alongside the development of the disaster risk reduction and emergency management system.

Citizens, as the first and last link in the chain, depending on their point of view, or rather their position and role, represent the weakest link in the system for multiple reasons. The most important reason is their insufficient knowledge and awareness of the importance and implementing of preventative measures aimed at reducing the risk of disasters. The lack of a special educational programme/subject, such as civil protection and first aid, over many decades, has also led to an insufficient level of training among citizens and their readiness to react in the case of an emergency. As a good example, I would mention the City of Kraljevo and the establishment of simultaneous civil protection exercises in all primary schools every 13 October (International Day for Disaster Risk Reduction). On that day, teaching staff, working independently with school pupils, conduct earthquake and evacuation exercises.

The post Citizens Represent Our Weakest Link appeared first on CorD Magazine.

Our country is the most vulnerable in Europe when it comes to climate change. Testifying to this claim is the fact that the average temperature in Serbia has already increased by 1.8°C as of this year, while the global average is 1.1°C, and this summer is the hottest on record. This year’s floods and winds testify to the dangers of climate change. Moreover, Instead of the existing frequency of every four to five years, we can now expect to be hit by drought every year, and we can expect severe droughts as much as four-five times every 10 years. These changes can be mitigated, and their consequences reduced, if we apply the emergency measures that have already been defined in national strategic documents as soon as possible. UNDP assists the Government in this area. It is particularly important to work on the construction of an irrigation system and advanced announcements of droughts in the region of Central Serbia.

Some advances are already evident. It rained almost as much as in 2014 this year, although incomparably less damage and fewer losses were sustained. And the Interior Ministry’s Emergency Situations Sector and the civil protection units of local governments responded successfully. The Government of Serbia, through the Ministry for Public Investment, adopted national programmes for family housing, as well as bespoke public facilities, in order to ensure schools are ready for September. It is particularly important that the investments in prevention following the 2014 floods yielded results. The least damage was sustained in areas where investments were made in training employees and improving procedures. That is a great lesson for the Government, local governments and other countries that are considering public investment priorities.

This year’s heavy rains caused the least damage in areas where employees were trained and procedures improved. That’s a great lesson for the national and local governments, but also a roadmap for public investment

Numerous municipalities and cities in Serbia today regularly inform citizens electronically about weather problems and their possible consequences, as well as providing advice on how to protect themselves and their property. It is important not to limit oneself to a single way of providing notifications. People with visual and hearing impairments, the elderly, and those who do not have mobile phones also need to receive timely information.

Thanks to financial support from the EU, the Geoportal of the Republic Geodetic Authority has a Risk Register, where it is possible to check the extent to which a certain building or location is threatened by landslides, floods, forest fires and other hazards by searching the cadastral parcel, address or name of the object.

The EU has also – in cooperation with UNDP, the Interior Ministry and the Ministry for Public Investment – allocated over 16 million euros that has helped to train over 1,000 local stakeholders throughout Serbia to respond to emergencies, as well as rescuers of the Mountain Rescue Service of Serbia. Preparations are also underway for a new national strategy for emergency situations. Moreover, vehicles for forest fires, ambulances and decontamination vehicles have also been procured. Special attention has been paid to strengthening the local civil protection system: municipalities and cities in the Western Morava basin have received equipment and mobile anti-flood systems, which they use in emergency situations, and the construction of the first training centre for municipal civil protection units should soon begin in Kraljevo.

The post Flood Prevention Investments Yield Results appeared first on CorD Magazine.

It was back in 2001 that Jim O’Neill, a renowned economist of investment bank Goldman Sachs, coined the acronym “BRIC”, for Brazil, Russia, India and China. These four are all large, middle-income countries that are also characterised by their fast-growing economies. He predicted that they would become the world’s leading economies by 2050. It was five years later, in 2006, that these four countries decided to join forces to form the BRICS group. They were joined by South Africa in 2010, and BRICS was thus born. The BRICS countries have a combined population of 3.24 billion, or 40 per cent of the world’s total population, and collective GDP of $26 trillion, which is almost a third of the world economy. In terms of purchasing power parity, the five BRICS member countries’ contribution to the global GDP has already surpassed that of the G7 – the group of the seven most advanced and wealthiest countries. However, BRICS countries control only around 15 per cent of the voting rights at the IMF, the world’s chief financial institution. BRICS emerged as part of efforts to identify new ways of reforming international financial institutions like the IMF and the World Bank, to create a “stronger voice and better representation” of developing economies.

The BRICS countries established the New Development Bank (NDB) in 2014, with funds of 100 billion dollars, in order for developing countries to be able to borrow money for progress and development without conditions.

It should be noted that BRICS is a conglomerate of diverse countries in both the political and economic sense, which will require lots of time and compromises in order to form stronger links. 

Greatly hampering institutional links between these countries are the major disparities in the extent and level of their development and stability. Each of the BRICS countries is a major nation in its own region, and China has become a “big player”. The BRICS countries are also divided when it comes to their relations with Western countries. Russia perceives BRICS as forming part of its own fight against the West, as an aid in circumventing the sanctions imposed on it following the invasion of Ukraine. After Western countries imposed sanctions that banned imports of Russian oil, India and China became its biggest consumers. However, other BRICS countries don’t want it to become an explicitly anti-Western pact. South Africa, Brazil and India don’t want a divided world, as confronting the West would have a negative impact on their security and progress.

This year’s 15 BRICS summit took place in Johannesburg, South Africa, from 22 to 24 August. Leaders of more than 60 countries were invited to attend the Summit, while 23 countries submitted applications to join. The main discussions revolved around expansion of the bloc’s membership and further de-dollarisation, i.e., the gradual abandoning of the U.S. dollar in international trade and increasing trade in local currencies. As stated previously, BRICS doesn’t want to compete with the West, but rather is striving to find its own place on the global market.

The idea of leading Russian and Brazilian politicians to create a common currency for the BRICS bloc, which was proposed last year, was not discussed at the Johannesburg summit

The five existing members were first tasked with determining the criteria to be met by candidate countries in order to join the economic bloc, and BRICS is based on a consensus model (with decisions brought only provided all five countries agree). Documents have also been adopted that set guidelines, principles and processes for the consideration of countries wishing to become BRICS members.

Members welcomed the idea of expanding BRICS, with at least 23 countries having already submitted membership applications and another 40-plus being told that they are also welcome to join, in an effort to advance their joint development.

The last day of the summit saw the adopting of the Johannesburg Declaration, which summarises the conclusions of the 15 BRICS summit. The new declaration is entitled “Johannesburg II”. Existing BRICS members agreed on the expansion of the bloc to include Saudi Arabia, Argentina, Iran, the United Arab Emirates, Egypt and Ethiopia, all of which will be admitted as members as of 1st January, 2024.

This enlargement, which aims to boost the bloc’s influence, could also pave the way for dozens of other interested countries seeking to join BRICS, which would bolster efforts to develop BRICS into a viable counterbalance to the West. The admission of new members is the first phase of expansion from the original five countries.

The Johannesburg summit included the establishing of a broad plan to move away from use of the U.S. dollar as the world’s main reserve currency for trade among BRICS countries, in favour of local currencies. The dominance of the U.S. currency is one of many problems in the developing world, where many don’t believe that their interests are being served by international institutions like the UN, IMF and World Bank. BRICS countries have repeatedly called for the creation of a fairer world order and for the reform of global institutions. It should also be stated that the expressed intention of the BRICS group regarding the dollar will not cause this currency to collapse overnight.

According to the calculations of the U.S. Federal Reserve, 96 per cent of trade conducted in America from 1999 to 2019 was invoiced in dollars, while in Asian trade that total was 74 per cent. Beyond Europe, 79 per cent of all trade was conducted in dollars, all of which serves to highlight the U.S. currency’s status as the de facto world currency.

Members are focused on the creation of a model to secure mutual trade, joint economic projects and investments beyond the confines of the system controlled by the U.S. and its Western allies

Participants in the summit emphasised the need to use national currencies in invoicing. It was estimated that we have entered a global juncture that favours the use of local currencies, alternative financial procedures and alternative payment systems. It was with this in mind that BRICS leaders tasked the finance ministers of their countries with working on these issues. They will establish a group by the next summit, which is to be held in Kazan (Russia) and will consider “the issue of form ing an alternative payment system”. BRICS is prepared to seek opportunities to improve stability and reliability, as well as fair and equitable relations, in the global financial architecture.

Leading Russian and Brazilian politicians last year proposed the creation of a common currency for the BRICS bloc, as a way of countering the U.S. dollar’s dominance in international trade and finance. However, the possibility of creating a BRICS single currency was not discussed at the Johannesburg summit. All attention of members is currently being directed towards finding ways to secure mutual trade, joint economic projects and investments in a way that does not depend on the system controlled by the U.S. and its Western allies.

It is believed that the U.S. dollar, despite having already weakened, will remain important to global payments. The dollar’s role as the world reserve currency will decrease gradually, but it is expected to remain the currency of the collective West in the process of moving from a unipolar to a multipolar order and reducing the role of Western currencies. Across the rest of the world and the “Global South”, the diversification of regional currencies will strengthen, with increased use of national currencies as a means of payment and settlement between individual countries.

Main points of the BRICS Johannesburg II Declaration

– BRICS will strengthen cooperation on food security between member countries and beyond;
– BRICS leaders expressed concern over the use of unilateral sanctions and their negative consequences for developing countries;
– BRICS member countries consider the UN as the cornerstone of the international system;
– BRICS emphasises the African initiative to resolve the ongoing conflict in Ukraine;
– BRICS member countries are committed to strengthening their macroeconomic coordination and deepening their economic cooperation;
– BRICS member countries call for UN reform and increasing the representation of developing countries in the UN Security Council;
– BRICS is committed to the peaceful resolution of conflicts in Niger, Libya and Sudan, on the basis of the UN and the African Union;
– BRICS member countries support the desire of Brazil, India and South Africa to play a greater role in the work of the UNSC;
– BRICS member countries express their concern over conflicts around the world and insist on peaceful resolution through dialogue;
– BRICS member countries oppose trade barriers imposed by developed countries under the pretext of combating climate change;
– BRICS leaders advocate the use of national currencies in trade and financial transactions between the countries of the association;
– BRICS member countries favour the strengthening of mechanisms aimed at preventing the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction;
– BRICS member countries welcome mediation proposals aimed at peacefully resolving the conflict in Ukraine;
– BRICS member countries are committed to resolving the conflict over the Iranian nuclear programme through diplomatic channels;
– BRICS member countries support the development of an international convention against the use of Information and Communications
Technology (ICT) in criminal activities;
– BRICS member countries call for the expansion of the representation of developing countries in international organisations
and multilateral forums;
– BRICS leaders stress the importance of the G20 as a leading multilateral forum;
– BRICS member countries agree to work on increasing their mutual tourist flows;
– BRICS member countries consider that the unbalanced economic recovery after the pandemic is only increasing global inequality;
– BRICS supports the African Union Agenda 2063, including the introduction of the African Continental Free Trade Area.

Dr Dejan Jovović is a scientific advisor, international finance expert and full member of the Scientific Society of Economists in Serbia (NDES)

The post Striding Towards a Multipolar Order appeared first on CorD Magazine.