Photo by Shubham Dhage on Unsplash

Biljana Vankovska*

July 6, 2024

The issue of state sovereignty under international law and its inconsistencies and duplicities has become more complex than ever, especially after the outbreak of the Ukraine war and the “Ukrainization” of the Taiwan issue (even though Taiwan is not a sovereign state like Ukraine). However, the focus of this analysis is relatively modest: we examine a region of the Western Balkans in which the countries have already (more or less voluntarily) lost or given up their statehood and sovereignty.

The concept of the so-called “Western Balkans” (WB) – comprising Serbia, Montenegro, Albania, Kosovo, North Macedonia, and Bosnia and Herzegovina – was concocted in the corridors of power in Brussels and Washington. This artificial sub-region, with its flexible geography and borders, lacks logical coherence. It effectively creates a buffer zone of weak states that are unlikely to ever meet the criteria for EU integration despite being offered European perspectives and hopes. However, these states are now expected to show solidarity with and provide military assistance to Ukraine. This issue warrants deeper exploration, but a brief diagnosis is as follows:

The recent decision by the EU elites to open accession talks with Ukraine—a state currently embroiled in war—speaks volumes about the current state and fallacy of the enlargement policy. It is clear that it is driven by geopolitical considerations rather than a genuine wish for European integration based on certain values and principles. This shift underscores the strategic use of EU enlargement as a tool in broader geopolitical games rather than as a means to foster stability and prosperity in aspiring member states.

De facto, it has been known for a long time, but it now becomes only bluntly and shamelessly obvious: the Copenhagen criteria are just a cover for a more dubious process of spreading the EU’s geopolitical influence despite the EU’s internal and inherent weaknesses.

As a prelude, one should point out a few facts about the state of affairs in this part of the Balkans today. The entire sub-region of the Western Balkans is essentially the periphery of the EU periphery. It faces severe structural problems in various sectors, including the economy, social capital, poverty, unemployment, brain drain, and the lack of prospects for socio-economic development in the near future. This area has become a “desert of post-socialism”, as Srecko Horvat and Igor Stiks have dubbed it, due to the application of neoliberal policies.

Secondly, in the last few years, even the most enthusiastic Europhiles had to admit that these countries had become so-called “stabilitocracies,” a term reflecting the EU and the West’s practice of legitimizing weak, inept and often corrupt political elites and leaders. In exchange for this legitimacy, these leaders pledge their loyalty to Western geopolitical interests, acting as guardians against other great powers perceived as threats by the West. This arrangement runs counter to the genuine interests of the citizens, who are excluded from the decision-making process on major national issues.

Furthermore, the US grip over the region has been persistent ever since the fall of socialism (and Yugoslavia), despite all the empty rhetoric about Europeanization and EU integration. No wonder that these states turned into semi-states, puppet states, or even protectorates. Despite being under EU oversight—since they have all expressed a desire to join the EU—the reality is that the Balkans has long been an American backyard.

Long before the Ukraine war, there were occasional invisible clashes and tensions of interest between Brussels and Washington. In these instances, Washington has always emerged as the winner, ostensibly for the sake of European security. The developments in Ukraine, beginning in the 1990s and becoming especially visible since 2014, have highlighted the US’s dominance over the EU and, by extension, its periphery. The ongoing proxy war in Ukraine has further demonstrated the extent of the US grip on the entire continent. These dynamics underscore the overarching influence of the US in European geopolitical affairs, often overshadowing EU initiatives and interests.

Thirdly, multipolarity has been knocking on the region’s door for quite some time. With the decline of the West and the rise of multipolarity, the geopolitical landscape has shifted. Today, the Western Balkans must be seen as a microcosm of multipolarity, with states adopting slightly differing foreign and security policies in response to external influences, pressures, and their own authentic national interests. This shift reflects the broader global transition towards a multipolar order, where multiple powers influence regional dynamics. It has resulted in a complex interplay of geopolitical interests, with countries navigating between the agendas of the EU, the US, Russia, Türkiye, China, and other influential actors. Simply put, this evolving macro-geopolitical setting underscores the region’s strategic importance and role as a barometer for the changing global power balance.

All these facts underscore the complexity and volatility of the Western Balkans, a region shaped by external pressures, internal divisions, and a precarious path towards potential EU integration.

The Balkans as the West’s “Sphere of Interest”

The alleged ‘end of history’ following the fall of the Berlin Wall opened the doors for Western ‘soft power’ politics. The concept of “soft power”, elaborated by Joseph Nye, emphasizes the capacity of states to attract others through the legitimacy of their policies and underlying values. Under this framework, the West initiated its march primarily into Eastern and Central Europe. Advocates argued that the democratic West prioritized integrating nondemocratic regimes into the liberal international order, hoping to coax autocracies toward meaningful political reform and eventual democratization.

While employing soft power, the West did not shy away from using hard military power to bolster its hegemonic position. Although Washington focused on the global scene—particularly concerning Russia, China, and other rising non-Western powers—the WB experienced both the soft and hard power of the West as part of a disciplinatory policy.

This dual strategy of the US and its allies has assumed a mix of soft power initiatives, such as promoting democracy and economic development, alongside military interventions and security measures. This approach aimed to stabilize the region, integrate it into the Western sphere of influence, and counteract the influence of rival powers. However, the impact of these efforts has been mixed, with ongoing political and economic challenges highlighting the complexities of integrating the Western Balkans into the broader liberal international order amidst evolving global dynamics.

During the critical years of Yugoslavia’s dissolution and its aftermath, there was a clear division of labour between the transatlantic allies: the US employed robust force and coercive diplomacy, as seen during the 1999 NATO intervention over Kosovo even without a UN mandate.

Meanwhile, the EU attempted to exert its influence through soft power. In essence, the US created the disruptions (“doing the mess”) while the EU sought to resolve them and establish a liberal order (“cleaning the mess”). The framework agreements that ostensibly ended violent conflicts in the region were all orchestrated by the US. These include the Dayton Agreement (1995), the Kumanovo Agreement (1999), and the Ohrid Agreement (2001). These agreements not only shaped the political landscape of the region but also influenced the constitutional orders of the involved countries. Over time, some Western Balkan countries were integrated into both NATO and the EU, while others joined only NATO, remaining in the queue to meet the EU’s membership criteria. Kosovo, for instance, functions as a de facto NATO state. Serbia stands as an exception, maintaining a policy of political and military neutrality and fostering broad cooperation with Russia, China, the United Arab Emirates, and other non-Western entities.

In the wake of the new multipolar world order, the Western grip and attempts at controlling the Western Balkans—a region it views as its legitimate and ‘natural’ sphere of interest—is intensifying. A kind of global/European “Monroe Doctrine” is being overtly implemented: what was once the well-known paradigm over Latin America as the US’s ‘own backyard’ is now being applied to other regions, along with attempts to establish a global NATO presence (in violation of NATO’s own Treaty).

This strategy in the Western Balkans is facilitated by previous Western investments in various spheres. The most effective investments have been in state-building, human capital, and propaganda. Whenever these methods fail to yield the desired results, more coercive and manipulative measures have been employed, such as inciting “colour revolutions”—externally motivated regime change operations. These actions reflect the Western determination to maintain control over the region despite the changing global dynamics and the emergence of a multipolar world order.

Until recently, the collective West took for granted that the entire region of former Yugoslavia (plus Albania) was unquestionably loyal to them. Their policy of Euro-Atlantic and European integration has been a tool of pacification of the region, while the Western corporations were plundering natural resources and taking advantages of the small states’ weaknesses in various spheres. The Balkan societies have become objects of a neoliberal agenda of political economy as part of a civilizing mission to introduce a ‘liberal peace’ to war-torn countries, which has made them both vulnerable and helpless.

Initially, energy security and economic growth concerns prompted Balkan states’ leadership to explore alternatives, such as securing access to Russian gas through initiatives like the South Stream project. Macedonia was among those considering such options. Under the leadership of Nikola Gruevski, the Macedonian government actively pursued avenues for non-Western direct investments across various sectors. They established “economic diplomacy/ambassadors” to explore new markets and expand cooperation with China, particularly in securing loans and implementing infrastructure projects.

However, these initiatives faced significant challenges, particularly with the emergence of the so-called 2015/2016 Colorful Revolution. This uprising resulted in the ousting of Gruevski’s government and the branding of all economic and infrastructure projects initiated during his tenure as corrupt and detrimental to Macedonia’s national interests. Similar dynamics are observable in present-day Serbia, although the extent of Western success in destabilizing the Serbian government and thwarting non-Western economic initiatives there remains uncertain.

To sum up, the WB states have been in limbo for far too long. The term WB was coined to emphasize the region’s specificity, which has never been seen as “truly Western” by the European elites and public. It has been a sort of a “troublesome frontier” towards the other parts of the world, something that the Western powers wanted to put under their control but not fully integrate as equals.

The concessions made for the sake of NATO and EU integration have always been far more costly (in the eyes of the ordinary people) than the benefits (which de facto remained on a level of promises and perspectives, but nothing more than that). The Western elites have betrayed the Balkan peoples many times with their changeable “methodologies” for enlargement and inconsistent application of the so-called Copenhagen criteria.

Despite certain initiatives for inciting regional cooperation (such as Open Balkans, mini-Schengen, etc.), the general impression is that these are just lip service, and the state leadership (and the public) do not perceive the region as a region! There is a lack of regional vision and awareness of their own regional interests. Paradoxically, this contrasts with the narrative of the EU as a success story of states that finally realized that it would be better to join their efforts and economies and to create a common polity. The United States often turns one state against another or insists on “peaceful settlements” that satisfy US interests rather than the ones of the local actors.

The rise of the multipolar order, coinciding with the most profound economic and financial crisis in the West since 2008, has presented a real test for the region. Local political elites began to recognize, at least partially, the opportunities emerging elsewhere in the world, particularly in China, the Belt and Road Initiative (BRI), BRICS, and other non-Western initiatives and entities. This shift alarmed Western power centres, prompting them to diversify their methods of strengthening their grip over the WB.

Despite financial injections and investments that failed to adequately address impoverished Balkan societies’ needs, Western influence remained dominant. The COVID-19 pandemic further underscored this disparity, with the EU failing to provide adequate assistance to its neighbouring countries and displaying a natural inclination toward self-interest. In contrast, China and Russia, despite their own domestic challenges, demonstrated solidarity with no strings attached.

In the following sections, we will provide an overview of the Western methods implemented across various spheres of Balkan societies to prevent any ‘non-Western influence’, highlighting the complexities and challenges inherent in navigating geopolitical dynamics in the region.

Methods of Western Influence Countering China and Other Non-Western Initiatives

One can discern four key arenas of competition between the collective West and China: 1) political and economic, 2) military, 3) media and civil society, and 4) academia and culture. Interestingly, Western scholars and policymakers often accuse China of co-opting and misusing the concept of soft power for its own ends—an accusation that reveals Western hypocrisy and underscores its resistance to any challenge to its dominance.

The sources informing the present analysis are diverse, ranging from personal experiences to formal statements by state officials and public figures and, not the least, reports from NGOs and think tanks. However, it’s essential to emphasise that the conclusions and findings presented here motivate further in-depth analysis.

The growing number of fact-checkers and events to promote their reports calls for systematic analysis and monitoring of trends and developments. However, the available reports display a rather bizarre picture of Western concern over the influence of Chinese soft power. Their findings are drawn from dubious (and definitively non-academic) methodologies, so no wonder there is a lot of bias in the interpretation of even elementary things. The intention is obvious: to please the donors rather than to present the objective state of affairs.

When browsing the available documents on the WB and China, the most remarkable impression is that the number of NGOs, think tanks, media portals, etc., has exploded in the last few years. The majority of them are funded by the usual well-known US and European foundations and policy-making centres, embassies, etc. The EU’s control mechanisms and fact-checkers are particularly influential as they often create regional hubs and networks.

For instance, Antidisinfo.net describes its mission in the following way: “The Anti-Disinformation Network for the Balkans (ADN-Balkans) serves as the basis of a cooperation between civil society organizations, media outlets, educational institutions and all other relevant stakeholders with a goal of forming a wide front on countering disinformation through affirmation of the highest standards of fact-checking and all other ethical principles of professional journalism, as well as promoting media literacy and critical thinking.”

ADN-Balkans brings together the following NGOs from the Western Balkans and neighboring EU countries, Bulgaria and Greece: Metamorphosis, Foundation for Internet and Society from North Macedonia, founder of Truthmeter.mk, Portalb.mk and Meta.mk, Faktoje.al from Albania, JAJ.gr (Journalists About Journalism) from Greece, empowered by News Literacy Center, NGO for Media & News Literacy, Crno beli svet (CBS), organization and online portal from Kosovo, Peace Journalism Lab, School of Journalism and Mass Media Communication, Aristotle University of Thessaloniki, Greece, Digital Communication Network SouthEast Europe Hub, Greece, Istinomer from Serbia, Ellinika Hoaxes from Greece, Internews Kosova, founder of KALLXO from Kosovo, BlueLink Foundation, founder of Evromegdan and BlueLink Stories from Bulgaria. It is noteworthy that a group of the same experts often work on multiple similar projects, suggesting a profit-driven engagement rather than a genuinely broad and effective influence of these NGOs.

The Macedonia-based NGO Estima, headed by Ana Krstinovska, is a typical example of the previously elaborated point that very same people (and NGOs) take part in a number of similar networks dealing with the non-Western negative narratives and disinformation. A very peculiar thing with Estima’s head is that Ms. Krstinovska (under her maiden name) used to work for Confucius Institute during the government of Nikola Gruevski, but as soon as he was toppled from power, she moved her business on the other side, now working with Western grants detecting “negative foreign influence’.

Another similar platform is CHOICE. It presents itself in the following way: “CHOICE is a multinational consortium of experts providing informed analysis on the rising influence of the People’s Republic of China within the countries of Central and Eastern Europe. CHOICE provides a platform for discussion, information sharing, best practices, and collaboration for its members monitoring and evaluating Chinese activity in CEE.”

It is enough just to look at the titles of the reports/articles, and the conclusion is self-evident: hardly any text is favourable to China’s role in the region/Europe. Surely, since February 2022, the main focus has been on “Russian influence”, but China is mentioned right away, next to Russia. On the other hand, in the public sphere, it is hard to detect any particular response to such accusations by China or its officials, embassies, etc. The public appearances of Chinese diplomats are rare, while the public has no opportunities to see and hear Chinese intellectuals, journalists, professors, experts, etc. Western opinion-makers have total dominance over the public space, but this does not seem to satisfy the fact-checkers who want no other influence whatsoever.

Political and Economic Dependency

It is crucial to acknowledge the long-standing presence of Western powers in the political affairs of the WB region, often referred to as the Western ‘backyard.’ Their involvement has intensified since the fall of Yugoslavia, driven by the EU and NATO enlargement policies and promises of prosperity for the impoverished populations. The fact that all Balkan states have adopted a pro-EU stance and declared their wish for full membership underscores the EU’s leverage in the region.

Over more than a quarter of a century, EU and Western powers have been deeply involved in the internal affairs of these states. This involvement ranges from influencing electoral outcomes and political actors to shaping coalition governments. One significant aspect of this influence is evident in constitutional engineering and the insistence on implementing Western-brokered agreements, which directly shape the political landscape, dynamics, and elite formation.

For instance, Macedonian President Stevo Pendarovski revealed in an interview that the US ambassador played a direct role at a critical moment in the decision-making process for the 2019 constitutional change. This change, renaming the Republic of Macedonia into “North Macedonia,” was crucial for the country’s NATO membership bid. According to Pendarovski, the ambassador influenced eight opposition parliamentarians who were under criminal charges and investigations at the time to vote for the constitutional amendment.

This affair, the subject of speculation and rumours in the fall of 2018, is now confirmed by the highest state representative and is treated as a normal and acceptable practice. In contrast to Pendarovski, Serbian President Aleksandar Vučić has been more vocal and transparent about the overt external pressures concerning the Kosovo dispute. His openness highlights the ongoing and significant external influences exerted by Western powers in the political affairs of the region.

In the long term, it is essential to recognize that today’s WB leaderships and elites have been politically and psychologically shaped by the influence of the EU ‘ideology’. It operates almost like a religion, in which any dissent or questioning is immediately labelled as blasphemy. As a result, there is minimal difference between government and opposition stances regarding the EU and NATO, with Serbia being a notable exception. Over the past few decades, generational changes in politicians have occurred, but the new leaders and youth are essentially “made in Brussels.”

This influence is further evidenced by the regular practice of politicians visiting the US embassy for ‘consultations’. According to some rumours, the former candidate for the Macedonian presidency (and today’s president) visited the US Embassy on the eve of the electoral race. She received signals, if not overt threats, to not push the issue too far and to ensure Macedonia’s compliance with the Agreement with Greece. Consequently, she softened her campaign stance on that issue. One could speculate whether she also had reasons to fear for her safety.

The only real opposition, but with a limited influence on the political scene, are the far left (and a few far right) political parties. They may have no crystal-clear political vision and agenda, but they are still able to articulate confrontational views on the blind following of the Brussels medicines and advice. It often comes with a high price, as seen in the case of the Macedonian far-left political party Levica (The Left).

Levica is the fastest-growing political force in Macedonia, especially since it got seats in the Parliament. This fact gave it visibility despite the total media boycott and even slandering (as pro-Russian, pro-Chinese, and even fascist forces). Unlike the other parties, Levica’s leader Dimitar Apasiev, has introduced a new practice of meeting foreign ambassadors in the Parliament building and in front of the media and public eye. As a response, now already-former Prime Minister Dimitar Kovačevski has repeatedly been referring to Levica as a foreign-funded, extremist and inimical political actor. While discussing the EU perspectives, Kovačevski ridiculed Levica for allegedly advocating Macedonia’s “Euro-Asian perspective”.

The fight against corruption holds a high place on the Western agenda regarding their oversight of the WB countries. Something that should be a legitimate part of the so-called good governance, however, has a twofold geopolitical dimension. On one hand, corrupt local politicians are easier to manipulate and keep loyal. The US ambassador to Macedonia came with an agenda to fight and even punish corrupted politicians. In reality, she blessed the highly suspicious and nontransparent (let alone non-constitutional) deal with the US-Turkish enterprise Bechtel and Enka. The criticism from the public was met with accusations that they work against the country’s national interests. This leads to the second dimension, namely that according to the Western power corners, corruption comes only from the East. Its entire apparatus works on blaming China on “economic coercion”, “debt trap diplomacy” and “spreading corruption”, but they turn their blind eye to evidently corruptive deals that spreads from the West.

As already mentioned, the Prespa agreement of 2018/2019 in Macedonia was intentionally pushed through using non-legal means. In other words, political corruption is something normal for the local elites as long as it is blessed by the West.

The most radical means employed for political gain are the so-called Coloured Revolutions (i.e. externally instigated regime changes). The first action of such type was implemented in Serbia when the Milosevic government was toppled. In the meantime, Macedonia was an object of such an operation in 2015/2016 when Gruevski was practically ousted because of his stubborn refusal to accept the name change and, consequently, NATO membership, but also because of his opening to the non-Western markets and investments. That colourful revolution did the trick by pushing a more obedient government led by Zoran Zaev into power.

The WB’s economic dependency on the West runs more on awaiting wellbeing (as the political narrative goes) than on real terms. The critical point is that the Balkan elites share a specific facet: the business sphere heavily depends on the state’s institutions and politics. There are hardly any conditions for a free market, and competition in the broader market is something the local firms can scarcely manage in their favour. Therefore, getting deals through the state/politics (i.e. the ruling party/coalition) is the easiest way to gain fortune and social position. Business people migrate back and forth into the political arena. The same happens to people from the non-governmental sector and academia.

Out of need, some WB states have turned to China (and other partners) for assistance and economic cooperation but with different speeds and forms of engagement. Serbia has been the most open-minded and pragmatic regarding regional and global cooperation, with a leadership that is trying to balance national interests with external pressures and opportunities. Experts point out that the biggest share of the total WB–China trade exchange goes to Serbia (almost 60%), China’s key strategic partner in the region and Europe.

On the other hand, Albania and Kosovo are the least available for China’s influence, as some Balkan think tanks and analysts argue. As for Kosovo, China’s reluctance is understandable, but the situation in Albania should be analyzed more carefully. At the margins of the conference on China and the region (organized by the Albanian Institute for Globalization Studies – AIGS), many local participants were talking of China with great fondness and gratefulness, remembering China’s humanitarian and economic aid during the hardest times of international isolation of Albania (i.e. in the country’s communist era).

One could also argue, on the basis of public opinion polls, that the general population of the WB states holds different opinions on global affairs and the friends & foes of their country than the ones expressed by the officials. The pro-Western analysts, for instance, argue that the positive attitude of the Serbian public is due to the media control and impact from the political top leadership, which intentionally creates a (fake) image that China is the best foreign partner and donor compared to the Western ones.

However, this estimation proves false in the Macedonian case, where the opposite is true: the media are under total control of the pro-Western government. For instance, the 2022 survey conducted by the American institute IRI shows that concerning foreign policy, 64 per cent of the Macedonian citizens believe that strong relations with China serve the nation’s best interests. The percentage concerning Russia was 60. In sum, it is an increase of 11 per cent for China (and 6 per cent for Russia) compared to the 2020 survey. The IRI regional director expressed concerns over the alleged “constant incursions” of China and Russia; however, he stressed that the public support for the close partnerships with the EU and the US remains very strong.

Western nervousness about the citizens’ opinion change has increased since the beginning of the war in Ukraine, so some political leaders openly complain that the citizens have shown sympathies that differ from the official policy. Freedom of speech is still possible to enjoy on social media, although the level of control is increasing, so many would rather stay silent about global affairs, affections and loyalties.

Obviously, there is one crucial problem with public opinion polls: Quite often, they are conducted in order to shape public opinion and to persuade the citizens of some trends and positions, regardless of the actual state of affairs. By publishing and raising the public’s awareness of some issues, the donors (that stay behind the local collaborators) influence the recipients who were never asked about their opinion. The opinion about China is easy to be manipulated due to the fact that very few people have firsthand experience and knowledge of this country (and the rest of the world).

Military Presence

At first sight, it looks as if the WB is one NATO land. The only exceptions to the rule are Serbia (with its policy of military neutrality) and one of the entities of Bosnia and Herzegovina, Republika Srpska. The latter’s obstruction apparently blocks the country’s membership in the Alliance. It is, however, a different question whether NATO is genuinely committed to embracing a weak and internally explosive state. However, the war in Ukraine introduces a geopolitical chasm in an already deeply divided society. Republika Srpska is blamed for being a Russian satellite in the Balkans, and the same applies to Serbia to a much higher degree. The NATO narrative reads that the WB is a zone of peace and stability, i.e. representing a security community.

Ironically, NATO prevented such a peace zone in the WB by taking sides in Yugoslav wars and meddling in the internal conflicts by taking the side of the Albanians anywhere they live). Thus, the security puzzle in the WB remains unfinished. Even in the states that have joined NATO, such as Montenegro and Macedonia, the state of affairs internally is quite uncertain. In other words, NATO did/does not bring peace and stability.

Instead of the promised economic developments (allegedly, the foreign investors rush to new member-states, as they would be seen as stable and secure), the new member states are exposed to (un)expected costs and increase of the military budget at the expense of the other civilian/public sectors such as health and education. The impoverished and underdeveloped states have to make greater military budget allocations for the sake of “interoperability”, but that is also a sort of de facto political and economic corruption. (That was also the case with Croatia’s purchasing of French fighter planes that hardly serve any logical military purpose; the hypothesis is that the Croatian prime minister has ambitions to become a high NATO official and obtained Macron’s support through an expensive military deal).

The war in Ukraine creates even bigger stress on these small states. For instance, Macedonia had to send its available weapon systems as military assistance to Ukraine, and according to the defence minister, there is an ongoing process of rearming the Macedonian army with more modern weapon systems. Hence Macedonia has paid quite a lot and will be paying even more in the future.

In terms of military presence, a contingent of 3500 NATO military personnel is still stationed in Kosovo (KFOR), but the situation on the ground is far from stable due to the unsolved conflict between Serbia and Kosovo. In 2022, a US military base was opened in Albania. According to the Western military observers, the decision to place Special Forces near “countries such as Greece, Kosovo, Montenegro, Bosnia, North Macedonia and Serbia, where Russian political, economic and military influence has been growing steadily stronger,” obviously has a strategic importance.

Furthermore, the Macedonian government has been calling for the establishment of a military base in the region of Krivolak (one of the best military training polygons so far). However, amidst today’s global security crisis, the most important fact – not widely known by the local populations in the region – is that a nuclear base has been established in the northern part of Greece. According to Greek colleagues, the location is still secret, but an investigative journalist discovered the secret decades ago. Yet, no one is interested in raising the issue. In sum, in a worst-case scenario, the region would be a legitimate target and may suffer if things go nuclear.

Media and NGO propaganda

The media and NGO (civil society) sectors have probably always been the most significant part of the ideological apparatus of the West. A wide range of predominantly younger people (often with Western education) make a living out of Western grants in the sphere of media and civil society. They could be dubbed “brown sahibs” to refer to colonialism in the past. Neocolonialism also uses the services of these people to establish cultural hegemony (to use Antonio Gramsci’s concept).

Interestingly, media independence is regularly measured by Western think tanks and similar institutions, and it is done according to Western (geopolitical) standards. It is even ironic that they pretend to care about media professionalism and independence at a time when the cancel culture and censorship is rapidly increasing throughout the West.

The idea of media penetration is to close every space to the “Others” (usually Russia and China, but also other parts of the world). For this purpose, Western donors invest heavily in new initiatives that seek the so-called “malicious influence” and “spread of disinformation”. It is fair to stress that the focal point of this “investigation” is still Russia, but more and more frequently, it is China too (with a footnote that Chinese malicious influence is of “lesser degree”). However, in view of the global changes and developments, it is highly likely that Russia and China would be coupled and referred together as inimical power centres.

When doing research for this article, the author detected countless newly established media laboratories in the region. An overview of their activities and particularly the list of donors that financially support their work speak volumes of the well-orchestrated Western activity. For instance, the Institute for Communication Studies sponsored an ad on social media with a call to young people to apply for small grants and to work on the detection of “malicious foreign influence”.

The aforementioned institute is just one of the three or four registered institutions. They all work under the same umbrella, but in the public create an impression that many different institutions/NGOs/institutes come to the same conclusion about the sources of the “malign influence”. As for the funding, it is enough to see the item of “financial transparency” of the “Prespa Institute” in Skopje: almost 100% of the grants come from the USA/West. The public rhetoric is hostile to anyone/anything that is non-Western. But in many cases, this aggressiveness in imposing certain narratives creates odium among ordinary citizens who more frequently combine national frustrations with external Western pressure.

Even the most pro-EU activists and journalists admit that public support for the West (NATO and the EU, in particular) is in declining these years. The counter-responses usually emphasise that, despite the anti-Western sentiments, the citizens still prefer to go to the West if asked about the preferred regions for emigration, seeking better health or educational services. Of course, nobody emphasises the fact that non-West (the Rest, or 85 per cent of the world) is kept unknown to the general public. Some surveys among the youth of the countries of former Yugoslavia showed shocking results: over 80% of the young people have never travelled abroad! The Ukraine war and Gaza developments show how media freedoms and the spread of alternative information are seen as perilous for the Western agenda. It did not take long to ban certain media outlets, even against the domestic regulative and international standards.

For years now, there has been a phenomenon of media autism, i.e. self-centred and Euro-centric media reporting. In other words, the citizens in the region are kept in a sort of “there is no world beyond the Western hemisphere”. The narrative control is getting harsher than ever. Even from the top state positions, anyone who calls for more balanced public debate on global issues risks to be canceled or smeared. The media’s owners and CEOs lead discriminative editorial policies, so there are few opportunities to open a dialogue on global issues.

The media framing of certain stories is particularly telling. For instance, the highway construction deal with the Chinese company Sinehydro in Macedonia was portrayed by pro-opposition media as corrupt and unnecessary. There was pressure on the Public Prosecutor’s Office to open a corruption case. The Miladinovci-Štip highway was almost operational in 2017, but it took time for the government to open it to be used. Some circles still argue that it has been an economically irrational project that allegedly wasted too much money on infrastructure. On the other hand, the Kičevo-Ohrid enterprise risks becoming a ‘mission impossible’ due to internal political obstacles and the creation of a ridiculous perception that the Chinese company is incapable of building a 57 km-long highway. The 2019 CHOICE report by Ana Krstinovska, titled “Exporting Corruption? The Case of a Chinese Highway Project in North Macedonia,” highlighted the issues surrounding the project. During the 2024 electoral campaign, Artan Grubi, the then Vice Prime Minister, overtly admitted that his wish was to prove that a project built by an American company like Bechtel & Enka on the same line as the Chinese one would be completed faster than the Chinese one that started 11 years ago.

The government tacitly withdrew from the project for the modernization of the Corridor 10 railway with Chinese funds and instead signed a legally dubious agreement for Corridors 8 and 10 with the US-Turkish joint venture Bechtel-Enka, without calling a tender. The government has been trying to push through revisions of eight laws to satisfy the investor’s demands. The entire deal has been conducted not only in a secretive manner but is also not available to members of Parliament, as it is veiled in secrecy.

The US ambassador, who has called for a fight against corruption, has openly discredited the opposition and anyone else seeking insight into the most expensive deal ever signed by any Macedonian government. It is furthermore believed that the highway is intended to connect all Albanian-populated parts in the region through high-speed highways, giving it both an ethnic and geopolitical dimension. In short, the deals with Chinese and Western companies have been framed differently by the political, media, and NGO complex.

The impact on the academic and cultural cooperation

Generally, the WB region suffers from degradation of the university education and from brain drain. However, university education often serves the elites in two ways: first, it helps mimic the high unemployment rate among the youth, so instead of wasting time, the families are willing to invest the last funds into further education for their children. Thus, the number of youngsters who continue their education at the university level (and even at the MA level) is relatively high. That postpones the rise of the unemployment rate (and societal frustration) at least for some time, which makes the lives of the government elites easier.

The second dimension refers to the ideological and substantial aspect of the university education. One of the important aspects is that the academic discipline of international relations is almost undeveloped. There are few textbooks in local languages, and even the existing production is clearly pro-Western. For some time, European studies have been very popular, but the failure of the EU enlargement causes students to lose interest in this field. Except in Serbia, there are practically no academic centres that deal with world affairs/regions. Individual researchers are left alone to invest efforts and expand their interests in regions outside the EU and other West. Regrettably, their engagement in studies and projects with a focus on Asia, Africa and Latin America is seen as something suspicious.

The author of this analysis has often been publicly reprimanded for publishing articles outside the West. There is no academic critique or review of the published texts; the very fact that something was published in Russia or China makes it undesirable and suspicious. The overview of the submitted MA and PhD theses shows a clear dominance of topics related to NATO and the EU or other subjecta but solely from the Western point of view.

Since Macedonia joined NATO, and as soon as the pandemic was over, the Ss. Cyril and Methodius University in Skopje has become a hub for militaristic attitudes and propaganda among the young students. At least a couple of times per month, the students meet the defence minister or other officials, visit the military academy or military objects and attend the so-called NATO Academy, etc. To make things more bizarre, many of these activities are organised within an institute that deals with peace studies.

Both the Western-funded Antidisinfo.net (see above) and the “Prespa” Institute express concerns about the rising number of Macedonian higher education institutions that have established cooperation with their Chinese counterparts through bilateral projects. According to the “Prespa” survey, China is one of the top three countries that have some involvement/cooperation with Macedonian higher education. At first sight, it looks as if the Macedonian academic space is open and welcoming to non-Western initiatives, but things are more complex.

For instance, a professor at a Chinese university of Macedonian origin invested considerable effort in making the then-rector of Ss. Cyril and Methodius University sign a memorandum of cooperation and a long-term project which would have involved quite a generous Chinese funding. The project was meant for various fields of social sciences (politics, law and economy). At last, upon the recommendation of the author of this analysis, a new contract was established instead with a lower-ranked university in the city of Štip. The conclusion seems to be that it is much easier to accept cooperation within the natural or technical sciences, while the social sciences are left to individual initiatives and efforts.

Interestingly, the deal with Štip-based University was signed thanks to the fact that the rector is an alumni from a Chinese university. One of the hopeful signals is the recent establishment of the Global Changes Center, which has ambitions to provide space for much wider cooperation with the emerging multipolar world. It may even become a regional hub for cooperation on behalf of other university centres from the WB region.

Personal contact with young alumni speaks volumes of their fascination with China’s higher education system. A young person from Albania expressed her frustration with how China is portrayed in her home country’s media and public sphere. Recently, she joined a university in China as a professor. Another student who graduated from China has just enrolled on PhD studies while making her living here by teaching Chinese language in Macedonia. There are a growing number of Tai Chi Chuan clubs in the region. The work of Confucius Institutes is quite impressive and gaining momentum, but what is missing is a wider popularization of their work.

Yet, such developments are a matter of concern to the European think tanks. Often one eloquent and brilliant person can make a difference. For instance, a former PhD student in China, now returned home with his Chinese wife and two children, makes a very powerful impact on the public discourse, through newspaper columns, translation of Chinese poetry, and giving public lectures on Chinese history and philosophy.

One should bear in mind that in the WB countries there is still preserved memory of the communist times, and the fact that Yugoslavia was widely opened to all parts of the world through its policy on non-alignment. A few generations have grown up ever since, but all they witnessed are empty promises from the West and even decay of the Western civilization (woke culture, militarism, neocolonialism), but also distancing the Balkans as something primitive and corrupt. The last couple of years have shown many people that there are alternatives and that the world is changing rapidly. These facts bring back the old memories of a different foreign and cultural policy that was open and welcoming to cultural and other communications with the majority of the world.

Facts such as these create lots of worries in the Western power centres. Their response is quite systematic and harsh. On 23 May 2024, US officials announced the introduction of the formal U.S.-EU coordination mechanism on information integrity in the Western Balkans. This is not the first or last attempt to strengthen overall control of the freedom of media and academic thought in the WB region. Its rationale is to spread fear and self-censorship among journalists and scholars, and consequently free the public space exclusively for Western influence.

Can China Respond to the Western Influence in the Western Balkans?

Unlike the West, which wants “quick fix” policies and behaves arrogantly to others, China’s attitude is quite the opposite. This fact should be made more obvious to the general public in the Western Balkans. There is an ongoing geopolitical and even more geo-economic battle going on on a global scale.

Relatively speaking, the Western powers currently win the geo-economic battle in the region of the WB. Bearing in mind the population’s needs and the fact that the West is in decline and militarisation is an expensive endeavour, one should be patient and creative in finding ways to promote cooperation between the region and China. Here, we are facing a powerful obstacle from the MIMAC – the Military-Industrial-Media-Academic Complex – run by the USA/NATO world, but the dissent is present. It just needs time to find a way to express itself.

China is one of the few global powers that can assist in rebuilding the continent/region and shaping the future global order. In the meantime, one needs to work on promoting adequate knowledge about China among the youth and society through various events or other forms of raising public awareness that China is not what Western media propaganda argues it is. For many ethnically divided Western Balkans countries, it is of utmost importance to move the focus of the society and governance away from identity politics of divisions and confrontations.

The new focus that would be welcomed by people from all walks of life should be on economic, infrastructural, scientific and cultural collaboration, i.e. everything that is already envisaged in Belt and Road Initiative.

The author

Biljana Vankovska, professor, is Director of the new GCC – Global Changes Center, Ss. Cyril and Methodius University, Skopje, Macedonia and a long-time TFF Associate. Follow the GCC on Facebook here.

  #NOTONATO, Balkans between China and the West, Macedonia squeezed, NATO expansion, Western Balkans, Western manipulation in the Balkans