January 1999

Stability and Conflict in 1999

Part I, January:

– The Americas

– Europe

Part II, February:

– Africa

– Middle East

Part III, March:

– Russia / Former Sowjet Union

– Indian Subcontinent

– Pacific / Asia

Part I, The Americas – Europe

Introduction

Now that we are nearing the end of the milennium we can conclude that the nineties were not as peacefull as many people had expected after the ideological conflict or the cold war in the world came to an end. Numerous conflicts between states but also between different people, religions and groups within a nation erupted. The conflicts range from a rise in tension between two or more parties to an outright genoïcide / polïcide of the opposing groups.

The world will see in 1999 an intensification of a number of conflicts. The conflicts will be mostly happening in the third world with a few exceptions which are at the perifery of the first/second world.

A large number of these conflicts will be carried into 2000 and will most likely also comtinue in the first decade of the next millennium. Most of these differences, at least the most important ones, will be mentioned down here. Where, how and who will be the questions which will be answered.

The Americas

The North and South American continent feature nearly all characteristics of geography, people and development which can be found on this planet, sometimes even in one country. There is however a clear division between the two continents. Where as the northern part belongs to the wealthiest region of the world, the middle and southern part play at best in the second league.

This sharp difference leads many times to feelings of supression by the South through the North. This northern domination is felt politically, economically, socially and historically. This domination exists and is real but it is not that influential as one might think and how it is conceived. The northern influence is very often more of psychological nature. The only real and usable northern power is based on economics. All countries in the South have some kind of economical dependency to the North but this is also reciprocal. If the South gets influenza the North gets a light cold.

North America

The North American continent is the most peacefull place in the world if one excludes Middle America from the North. There are no internal problems in the U.S.A. and Canada which could set off civil unrest, war or any other major problems. The North American continent remains one the safest places to invest directly or in the stock markets. There is political, economical and social stability which will continue to exist in the coming decade.

The only minor points is that there are some differences with some Indian tribes in both countries but these will and can be solved by negotiations. Thereby the majortiy of those groups are not in a position to use violence. Violence or civil disturbance will only complicate the affairs, make an acceptable solution more difficult to reach and the most important factor the groups are already to much integrated in the societal structures of the U.S.A. or Canada

Another problem in the U.S.A. is the existence of a number of militias / right conservative christian fundamentalists which feel their rights threatened by an increasing powerfull government. The number of people agreeing to the ideas of the militias might be higher than the government thinks but the actual menbership is still fairly low. The number of radical members is even lower, there are some rather dangerous people in those organisations but killing their own people on large scale is still a bridge to far. All “assaults” are more incidents and very specifically aimed at one person.

There is a potential problem in the U.S.A. with the militias. Admittingly there is a mission creep of the federal government. More power is centralised and legislation is introduced by Washington. Some problems have to be handled at federal level but not everything can be done by legislation. Environmental problems and organised crime can be at best solved at federal level but if other problems can be solved at state or county level leave it up to them. And as with most problems it is also a choice between legislation and education, than choose education it is the better option. Limiting peoples rights and freedom which are guaranteed by the constitution and which are inherent to the American tradition is a very dangerous development. Modern times and the accompanying problems do not justify any limitation.

South America

The South American continent, including Middle America, is a different story. There is prosperity and stability but there is also a latent conflict between two countries and internal problems, ranging from economic problems to a civil war, in several other countries.

There is an similarity for all South American countries beside that all are democracies except Cuba. They are nearly all governed by a wealthy elite which have the support of the military. There is a large division between the rich and the poor and this seems to increase. If the responsible government does not implement some social programmes to improve the situation of the poor, communist guerilla organisations will take their chance and will try to oust the sitting governments. And in some countries they would be successfull.

The continent is in general an emerging market with a lot of possibilities and growth potential. There are five groups of countries in this area. First, the economic well off with some kind of political stability. Second, the economic worser performing but without any internal conflicts. Third also the economic worser performing but with some problems. Fourth, the group whose economic position is not in that bad shape but who have an rather big problem. And finally the fifth group, countries or better country with a bad economy and with a large internal conflict.

Chile – Argentina – Brazil

The countries who belong to the first group are Chile, Argentina and Brazil. All three countries have shown a very good economic performance in the last decade. The change to democracy have been successfull. There is more or less political stability in those countries. The only negative about it are possible problems with some Indian tribes who claim a part of the country but these will all be solved by the political and judiciary process.

The economical and social situation are more likely to cause a problem. The uneven sharing of wealth and additionally for Brazil the high debts and weak currency could create some kind of unrest in the country. The position of Brazil is the worsest. They have a very large rural population which increasingly have no means to exist. The landless farmers in combination with a weak economic performance and a currency devaluation could become a threat to the stability of Brazil.

But these socio-economic problems can be solved by the implementation of social plans, a more even distribution of wealth and power, some support from the North and a positive economical development in the world.

The perspectives of Chile and Argentina are very good, Brazil is however under pressure and demands a more carefull approach to everything planned for or with some entity in Brazil.

The mediocre countries

The second group of countries are essentially weak performers and do not have any kind of minerals or other valuables which would make them atttractive. They have not experienced the same kind of economic boom as the first group. They have experienced some progress but not something really substantial. The political situation is stabile as far as that there are no serious threats or better competitors to it. The government is elected but the power and interests of the people do not count for much in these countries,

The social and economical situation are typical South American. There is a small elite which control all capital and power. They are supported by the military. The division between the rich and poor is therefore very negative. Consequently the governments of those nations tend to be unreliable,slow and corrupt. But not in a big way which would be damaging to the country.

Countries like Uruguay, Paraguay, Trinidad and Tobago, Panama, Nicaragua, Honduras, Costa Rica, El Salvador, Guatamala, Belize and several Caribbean islands like Bahamas, Grenada, Barbados, St. Vincent, St. Lucia, Dominica, Antigua belong to this group.

The mediocre with a problem

The third group of countries are also weak performers but in contradiction to the second group they all have some problems which makes them less stabile. Their problems could be a life threat to the government.

If a special constellation of circumstances would come together there would be a very good possibility that the conflict would come to live and be disastrous to the government and people of that country. The following countries are under threat of internal turmoil.

The Domincan Republic and Jamaica.

These countries suffer from a lagging economy and unemployment. The governments of those countries are to a high level corrupt.

Haïti.

Haïti did not recover yet from the authoritarian regimes of the Duvaliers and the regime under the leadership of Raoul Cedras. The U.N. reinstated democratic government had to rebuild all facets of governmental institutions. Corruption of government officials is widespread, without a payment nothing is possible. The result of this is that Haïti does not have a functioning legal system and police force. Together with the organised crime organisations of the former security people of the dictatorial regimes this has created anarchy. International support keeps the country more or less peacefull and running. If the U.N. would leave in the coming year civil war or at least widespread chaos would be back again within a month.

Surinam

The problems in Surinam are of economical nature but they could end in a political problem. The economy of Surinam have been in downward spiral during the last two years. To much government expenditures, to little revenues, inflation and a lagging economy.

The economic problems could easily lead to social problems which would automtically lead to a political crisis. And we should not forget that there already have been an armed struggle against the government.

The government seems not to be able to bring some improvement to the economic misery. They are to occupied by securing their own power position and protecting the advisor of the state, Desi Bouterse, from accusations of narcotic trade.

If the turnaround is not achieved in 1999 we will see another conflict erupting shortly later.

Guyana

The problems in Guyana are of the same nature as in Surinam. The economic problems which are inherited from the 18 year long regime of the PPP, People’s Progressive Party, under the leadership of Desmond Hoyte, can not be solved that easily. The PPP policies have changed a potentially rich country into poverty.

The new government has been under presure of the PPP which cannot accept that they have lost the last elections. The PPP will therefore take any excuse to make live more difficult for the government. Violence might a bit to much but civil disturbances are however more likely.

Bolivia

The situation in Bolivia is much more secure than in the other countries in this group. Where as the other countries have an internal problem Bolivia could become entangled in an external conflict. The problem of Bolivia stems from a long time ago. Once Bolivia had their own seaboard which had been lost in a war with Chile.

The Bolivian government has since been active to regain an own naval harbour. Several constructions have been proposed but all were not acceptable to Chile or Peru.

This problem will very unlikely end in armed conflict between neighbours. The economical situation and the possibilities of the armed forces exclude any agression towards one of its neighbours in the coming decade.

The political, economical and social stabilty of Bolivia is in order as long as the expectations are not to large.

Progress at a cost

The fourth group of countries consists out of nations which have seen a positive economic development or they have large mineral reserves at their possession. And they all have experienced problems with organisations which opposed the form and policy of the government.

As usual in South America the economical growth has been very profitable to just one group of the society. This unfair distribution of positions, wealth and property led to much discontent in the countries. Out of these large groups of discontented grew a sense of resistance to the existing order. Three options were available to the discontented. First, they joined a criminal gang. Second, they joined one of the socialist-marxist organisations. Or Third they joined one of the nationalistic organisations with socialist tendencies.

Most of the countries have a long history in civil disturbance or even active resistance, read querilla warfare, against the government. Most of the organisations date back to days when the dictators were in power in the majority of the countries in South America.

The change to democracy was no reason to stop their fight against the government. At first they sometimes tried to use the ballot to gain more influence but they soon realised that the old elites very quickly upsurped the power the authoritarian regimes gave up. Voting districts could be created, votes could be bought, people manipulated by campaigns and finally results changed to reach a positive result.

The governments could and can suppress the movements or even eliminate them but they can not eliminate the ideas as long as the unfair situation remains in place.

A couple of countries in South America have experienced growth which profits and positions are only shared among the elites of the country. But where an effective resistance have been successfull. There are four countries which fit more or less in this description.

Peru

Peru has experienced several economic developments in its history. The benificiaries of the progress has always been the old elites of Spanish-Indian descent. These have shared the best government and business positions, control the most fertile tracts of land and own the majority of the companies.

The original population of Inca indians have been demoted to small farmer or tenant or as a cheap employee. This inequality has been the reason of the rise and initial success of two organisations who fight for the rights of the poor and the Indian population.

Two organisations are still fighting the government. The city querilla organisation MRTA, Movimento Revolucionario Tupac Amara, or in English Tupac Amaru Revolutionary Movement. The MRTA receives most support out of the urban areas and especially from students. Their last famous action was the occupation of the Japanese embassy in Lima. The impact of the MRTA is at the moment limited. No actions have occurred in the last year. The security forces have been hunting the MRTA and were succussfull. The MRTA is at the moment more of a debating club but they can be reactivated if they feel that they have a chance.

The other organisation is the rural Shining Path, Sendero Luminiso, or sometimes referred as the People’s Liberation Army, EPL. In their best days they contolled large tracts of inpassable and wild terrain and their policy was based on cruelty against everybody who did not agree and support their goals. As for the MRTA, the operations of the Shining Path have been minimized because of an intensive military operation to crack down on the querilla organisations.

The Shining Path has become marginalised after their whole staff had been arrested and convicted in the last years. The secretive cell structure became without leadership and less effective after the staff was jailed.

The territorial problem between Peru and Ecuador is for the moment solved. There is new demarcation plan under development about the disputed area. And as long as the U.N. observers of the Military Observer Mission Ecuador-Peru, MOMEP, remain in the area the treaty will be respected by both parties and the hostilities will remain ceased.

The latent internal and external problems have kept the armed forces awake and they have improved their capabilities in the last years.

Every new conflict can be dealt with, with new and intense vigour. This improvement of the political situation has been at a cost, the economic and especially social position of the poor have been deteriorating.

The political stability in the country has been restored with the exception that the president has granted himself with extraordinary powers and a longer serving term.

The economical stability, the investment postion, has consequently improved but this have not yet translated into more foreign investments and a better economical position of poor. The social stability is in the same shape as before a large and increasing division between the have and have nots.

Ecuador

The position of Ecuador is not that bad if the they can eliminate the nasty habit of South American governments to use or better abuse the natural resources of the country for the improvement of the private wealth of the elite.

The oil resources brought some economic prosperity to the country but if better used the advantages could be beneficial to the whole country. Existing economic and social problems could be circumvented. But there remains a big but.

The oil revenues are limited, especially now the oil prices are at a historical low, therefore a choice has to be made between economical and social investments or security investments. And you need a stabile political situation to create economic and social stability. The security situation have been under threat from the outside and the inside.

The Ecuadorian armed forces have in the last years been busy to improve the fighting power of the forces through the acquisition of several new weapon systems. They are now in the position to handle short term low intensity external conflicts. It could prove that they should have better made that investment in the internal security apperatus.

The external problems with Peru are now under control and a political solution is possible in the near future. The internal situation is much more complicated. Since last year a new threat emerged. There have been several bombings in Ecuador like the bombing of the U.S. embassy in November 1998. This internal threat could keep the security forces busy and this would refrain money from the badly needed economic and social programmes.

This instabile political, economical and social situation is likely to increase if the people behind the new threat are not quickly stopped. The future is therefore highly uncertain for Ecuador.

Venezuela

The position of Venezuela is delicate and a little different from the other South American countries. Venezuela also has the South American disease of a small and wealthy elite backed by the military but it did not experience the same militant political opposition to its regime as other countries like Chile or Argentina did.

The large deposits of oil delivered a boom of prosperity in the 70ties and the beginning of the 80ties. The incompetent government, the particuliar distribution of the oil revenues, the consumer minded investments and the behaviour of the population turned the prosperity sour as soon as the oil price dropped significantly.

The political elite have become that corrupt that the support for the two major parties which have been in power for decades lost dramatically at the recent elections and only received a couple of percent each of the votes. The population have become poorer in the last decade. People who belonged to the middle class fell back to the slumps.

The economical and social problems get worser by the day. The recently elected president Hugo Chavez promises to make things better. Chavez is a former officer from the armed forces who staged a coup d’etat some years ago. After a short detention he decided to run for president to clean up the country. His advantage is that he has no connection what so ever with the former government parties.

There should not only be political changes like the clean up of the governmentsystem and the improvement of education and health care but also social plans have to be introduced to limit the high unemployment in Venezuela.

The people have to do something themselve to, prosperity is build on production and that is something they have not done for some time. Private initiative is needed to start companies and to stimulate people to work. And finally family planning should be introduced to limit the drain on the national and family resources and give the children and the country a better future.

The government and people of Venezulea relied on the paper wealth of the oil fields. But that will never be sufficient to let all people take part in the prosperity.

The political, economical and social stability depends largely on the skills of the new president and the goodwill of the population. At the moment however and in the coming year Venezuela will remain a rather instabile country with a latent insurgency on their hands if the poor in the country do not get a share in the wealth.

Mexico

The country on the border with the first world, Mexico, has seen many political and economical developments. The division between rich and poor and powerfull and powerless is the same as in all other South American countries. But Mexico has long been a democracy or at least something like a democracy. For several decades one party is essentially running the country, with the oddly name PRI, Institutional Revolutionary Party. Revolutionary is however a misnomer because the same elites were and are in charge during the government of the PRI, nepotism is a very popular game in Mexico and changes are an unknown thing in this country.

As with Venezuela the oil boom has brought Mexico fortunes but the revunues were also disappropriately used and to much debts were incurred on the future earnings of the oil. The closeness to the U.S.A. has been beneficial to Mexico. A large number of unemployed could find work in the U.S.A, illegally but to the advantage of Mexico, and a large number of U.S. industries have been relocated to the Mexican border region to take advantage of the low wages and the small or even non-existent legislation.

The economical situation is not that bad, the restructuring of the debts, the high number of new industries in the border region and an improving home market is creating a promising situation. Promising with regard to the macro-economic situation and the elite of the country.

The remaining large division between the rich and the poor is creating political and social instability. The low income, underpaid, workforce, the small or landless farmers and the Indians are a liability which could lead to a number of problems. These unsatisfied people could, if nothing is done to improve their worse situation, become a pool for violence.

There are already a number of radical organisations which want to implement changes to the society and they are prepared to use violence and have already done so. They have nothing to loose. Some are operating regional but some have a national organisation.

The Zapatista Liberation Army is a regonial organisation of native Indians who want to improve the position of the Indians in the Chiapas province. They want a re-allocation of land in the region, the Zapatistas want a fair share of the land. They have used violence to support their case but through the use of force and the hermetically closing of the region from all outside influences, the Mexican security forces could stop the violence but this suppression of the Indian population is not a long term solution.

Other national operating organisations, with the goal of radical changes in the Mexican society to improve the situation of the poor, landless and Indians, are the CND and the EPR, Ejercito Revolucionarias Popular, Popular Revolutionary Army. These national organisations are better structured and have a greater impact on the national government.

The regional aimed organisations can be controlled fairly easily but the national ones are to large and widely based to be suppressed that simple. The activities of the CND and EPR are at this moment relativily modest but they are pressuring the government to change their policy.

The government of Mexico is sensitive to all kind of pressures from all sides. In 2000 are the next elections and the domination of the PRI might be ended if there is to much opposition. The likes of the Zapatistas, EPR and CND can not only use violence to present their case but they also can rally considerable support in the population and they could evict the PRI or at least weaken their position dramatically.

The economical situation is not ideal but more or less stabile. The political and social situation is on the other side tensed. The have nots of the society have gotten less patient to wait for any improvement. Organisations with radical ideas gather ever more support and the preparedness to use violence is also increasing.

The security forces can at the moment still control, minimize, the actions of the opposition movement. Only if the things deteriorate dramatically and the opposition, the radical movements, could unite into a single front the security of the state could be in danger. This will be very unlikely however.

With a little patience things could change at the ballot box. The election could alter the course of Mexico. The investment opportunities and security situation will remain the same but the poor, landless and Indian part of the society could eventually get a fairer share of the wealth.

Near the edge

The fifth group is the worst group. Where as the others might have problems they all can be solved or at least an acceptable solution can be implemented to pacify an uproar. The problems in this group encompass all facets of the society. There is political, economical and social instability and a cure is not insight in the coming year. The country in this category is Columbia.

To speak about Columbia is talking about an area which is partly under control of the central elected government in Bogota. The areas under the control of Bogota are the large cities, the important tracts like the oil fields and some territories around the cities. The other parts, the largest part, is under control from the leftist guerillas, the rich land owners with their own right wing militias and some narco organisations.

The central government is not able to retake or even subdue the several movements which undermine the power of the government. The military is not capable to eliminate those forces because the military is to weak in manpower, training, organisation, weapons and they have to guard to many other installations, buildings and VIP’s to have an effective force at hand to beat the guerillas.

The negotiations with the guerilla, which started after the election of president Andres Pastrana, under the leadership of Victor Ricardo had no real improvement. The guerilla force can negotiate out of a position of strength where as the government is in deep trouble.

There are essentially three opposition groups which are fighting the government. The leftist guerilla organisations of which the strongest and most powerfull is the FARC, Fuerzas Armadas Revolucionaries de Columbia or in English the Armed Forces of Columbia, under the leadership of Manuel Marulanda. Marulanda builded and consolidated the FARC in 50 years into the largest and most effective communist guerilla organisation in South America. Large parts of the country are under their control, including a territory of around 42.000 KM2 in the South of the country. The government forces turned over the territory for an exchange of prisoners and to stimulate the FARC to end the conflict by negotiations.

The second most powerfull group is the group of rich landowners with their right wing militias. These right wing militias work semi independently, locally / regionally and fight mainly against the guerilla forces who want to change the title of the land. Organisations like the AUC, Autodefensas Unidos de Columbia, or translated the United Self-Defense Forces of Columbia, fight primary against the guerilla forces but the government is on the second place. With massacres and intense cruelty peasants are persuaded not to support the guerilla forces. The battle against the guerilla is in the same way. The right wing militias are to small and independent to really diminish the power of the government or the guerillas. But on the regional level they can protect their interests and beat their opponents.

The third group is the group of narco organisations. These cocaine growers, processors and traders are less influential as used to be. The large cartels of Cali and Medellin have been destroyed by the government with the support of the U.S.A. But a number of smaller organisations survived the crack down and can still run their business, often undercover from the guerilla or right wing militia, against a protection fee or tax.

The narco business is partly used to finance the guerilla organisations like the FARC and some of the right wing militias. Beside their narcotic trading and protection taxes of the narco organisations the guerillas and the right wing militias levy taxes in the territories under their control.

Columbia is actually a disintegrated country where the power of the national government of president Pastrana is limited to where the territory of the guerilla or right wing militia starts. In and between the government, guerilla and right wing militia are the narco organisations which do not possess that much hard power, men under arms, but who possess soft power, capital.

Political stability is an unknown property in Columbia, where three to four entities fight over power, influence and territory. This political instability leads to economical and social instability.

The economy is in very bad shape. The majority of companies and financial institutions are writing losses, the debts are of lower quality than junk bonds, the inflation is at record high (over 20 %), interest rates are at an equal high level (over 30 %) and unemployment is over 15 % of the population. The worse eonomic situation is deteriorating by the negative world economic develoment and the high costs of the military to keep a little order in the country.

The political and economical misery is the reason for the hardships on the population. There is widespread discontent under the people but there is now way that they can show their discomfort, they are politically and economically trapped.

The situation will not see an improvement in 1999. Instability will remain the key word for Columbia. Before any recovery is possible the government has to be cleaned up, a compromise with the guerilla, FARC, has to be reached and the international economic situation has to improve.

Europe

Europe, or better the Western part of Europe, every state from the Atlantic to the the Baltic states, Poland, Slowakia, Hungary and Rumania are in this region. The majority of these states belong, beside the North American continent, to the most stabile and wealthy region in the world. The exception are ofcourse the former countries under communist rule. But even they are having potential to become more stabile and prosperous on the short term. At least for the most of them. A closer look at them after the more or less stability countries in Europe.

The countries who are members of the European Union and Switzerland and Norway are examples of political, economical and social stability. There are small problems in some of these countries like the high unemployment but social mechanisms take care to eliminate tensions which could be a threat to the stability in these countries.

The political differences are limited to internal problems in three to four countries. We will list them below.

Belgium

One of the countries with a problem is Belgium. There is a sharp division between the French and Dutch speaking parts of the country, which is as old as Belgium itself. The division and the accompanying tensions between the two groups is regulated and will not end up into a conflict. And any further integration of the European Union will minimize the problems in Belgium.

France

The problem of France is Corsica, the country has a history of disobedience, but the wish for independence or autonomy is complicated. There are a number of organisations in Corsica who proclaim independency or autonomy for the island. Their wishes vary from time to time and it has been influenced with the level of support and benefits the French central government was providing to the island and the organisations.

To state their case, to pressure the central government or to fight out a conflict with a concurrent organisations assaults are committed towards government officals, offical buildings, houses of foreigners or at buildings of rival organisations. This has been a real nuisance to the island and Paris. As a reaction the island was very often granted more grants and benefits but the policy seems to change in Paris. Especially now when the goals of the organisations started to change from political to economical and private objectives.

The acquired social and economical benefits created an above normal wellfare for the island and stability. The political instability was not a threat to the island as a whole but the effects could now create a backlash. The central government gets tired of the independent movements and want to eliminate them and the extraordinary benefits for Corsica. If this new policy is implemented it will lead to a short outburst of violence and more instability and would mean in the end a worser position of Corsica. Whether as a part of France or a more autonomeous / independent region.

The United Kingdom

The problem in the United Kingdom is in North Ireland. For decades the Katholic part of the society is stuggling for more rights, independency from the UK and a reunion with the republic of Ireland.

The more radical part of the Katholics rallied behind the Sin Fein and its armed arm the Irish Republican Army. Where as the Sin Fein could not change much to the position of the island, the IRA has attacked the British forces and political representants in northern Ireland and other places in the world.

Only after both sides, Katholic and protestant and UK government, considered there position as not winnable a political solution, with diplomatic support and pressure from the U.S.A., became a viable option.        After prolonged negotiations between the Sin Fein, the Social Democratic and Labour Party, the British government, the Irish republic and the most important protestant parties, Ulster Unionist Party, Ulster Democratic Party and the Progressive Unionist Party, in northern Ireland a cease fire and a political solution became possible.

The deal is far from ideal but the fighting or better assaults have stopped and the armed wings, the IRA of the Sin Fein, the Ulster Defence Association and the associated Ulster Freedom Fighters of the UDP and the Ulster Volunteer Force of the PUP, have accepted the political solution. Even the Loyalist Volunteer Force which continued its resistance against the peace treaty after the peace treaty was signed seems to back down from violence.

This peace treaty and the general acceptance in the population will at the end even force small radical organisations on the Katholic side, like the Real IRA and the Continuity IRA, to change their policy.

Political stability is established in Northern Ireland and can be maintained if none of the sides is unfair treated because of the recent and future developments in the political process. The disarmement of the still very well armed para-military organisations is essentially irrelevant. If disarmed they can rearm very quickly and the British government might be tempted to harden their position, out of for example electoral reasons, and treat the Katholics less fair then when they would be armed.

In a highly politicised environment as Northern Ireland a perceived fair and equal treatment of all parts of the society is absolutely essential to create political stability.

Spain

The problem in Spain is centred in the Bask province. A minority of the population in the Bask province is demanding an independent great Bask country, this includes not only the Bask province in Spain but also the whole of the province of Navarra and the French regions of Labourd, Basse-Navarre and Soule. In the Bask province the Bask people are the majority, in Navarra and the French regions they are however a minority.

The majority of the Basks is satisfied with the reached autonom position within Spain. The radical part is demanding more and is organized within the political party Herri Batasuna under the leadership of Arnaldo Ortegi. Their political influnece is limited but through an alliance with the largest and moderate nationalist party PNV they can dominate Bask policy.

The real power of the Bask separation movement is with the military arm of the Herri Batasuna, the ETA, Euzkadi Ta Askatasuna or in English the Bask Fatherland Party.

Since decades the ETA has spread terror in Spain to force the central government to take care of the Bask question. Since the start of insurrection the Bask province has been granted many rights, they are now more or less state within the European Union, and any further concessions demand a change in the Spanish constitution. This would most probably mean the dissolution of Spain. Everything more would result in an independent Bask country. And this is not acceptable for Spain. More provinces like for example Catalonia could wish to become independent if a precedence is set.

The Bask population is becoming tired of the often senseless killings of the ETA. A popular uproar started recently when a local politician was killed in the Bask province. The Herri Batasuna have till now weathered out this inpopular actions very well but the limit is nearly reached.

ETA and the Herri Batasuna are now starting with a new policy, they would like to reach, just like the IRA / Sin Fein, a political solution. The Spanish authorities would also like to solve this problem but the demands of the Herri Batasuna, a great Bask country, are unacceptable.          Where as in Northern Ireland a compromise on democratic basis was relativily easy achievable this will prove to be impossible in Spain. The Spanish government is simply not in a position to give away something. All possible rights have already been given to the Bask province. One step further will mean independence.

Political stability will therefore not be reached in the future in the Bask province. Economically the Bask province will continue to belong to the better parts of Spain but socially there will remain a division as politically. But the Bask province will be able to function quite well with this division if the ETA does not step up its terror activities.

The population has grown tired of the terror and this with a further integration of the European Union might be the solution of the Bask conflict.

The other Europe

In the other part of Europe small and larger differences or even conflicts are still part of live. These problems can have a major impact on the stability of the country or the region as such. In the former Warsaw Pact countries the problems are mainly out of economical nature with a small exception. In the former Yugoslavia, Albania, Greece and Cyprus there are political, economical and social problems.

The former Warsaw Pact countries

To this group of countries belong Poland, the Chech Republic, Hungary, Slowakia, Rumania and Bulgaria. The three Baltic countries, Lithauania, Letland and Esland, can be added to this group, they have more or less the same level of political, economical and social development.

They have been changed into democratic societies where ever more western kind of political and legal structures are introduced. These positive political developments are not matched by an equal positive development on the economic and social level.

The lagging economic development, partly due to the recent Asian and Russian economic crises, have its effect on the social structure of the countries. Unemployment and poverty are creating large scale problems in this group of countries.

The four countries who are admitted first in the European Union are the best preformers of the group. The best economic and social development and less affected by the economic crises are Poland, Chech Republic, Hungary and Estland. There perspectives are the best and beside political stability, economical and social stability is within reach on the short term.

Slowakia, Rumania, Bulgaria, Letland and Lithauania are in a worser position. Where as the change in Letland and Lithauania to market capitalism is more or less successfull and show a bright future. The perspectives of the other three countries are not that good. The economic changes necessary to implement another system are slow and full of problems because of corruption, nepotism, an outdated production capability, inferior products, high debts and a depressed home market. This poor economic record has a disastrous effect on the social stability of the countries.

The only real political problem in Rumania, Slowakia and the Chech Republic is with the large Hungarian minorities who are living in those three countries. There have been problems about them, but this Xenophobism seems to be under control through legislation and pressure out of the European Union. The same kind of problems have the Baltic countries. Lithauania, Estland and Letland have considerable minorities of Russians in their countries. After initial problems about the statehood of those people they are more and more receiving a Baltic nationality. New legislation, with support of the people will solve the problem on the longer term.

The bad side of Europe

The South Eastern part of Europe is traditionally the volatile area. The Balkan is an area full of political, social and religious contradictions. In some times they can live together but if the flame is thrown in, a full blown bush fire is on. All historical and present differences are used against eachother and a compromise is not possible. In all Balkan societies a compromise is admitting that you have lost.

At present another conflict in the Balkan is raging and two others are at the brink of war. But the position of living on the edge is common in this region and may have to mean nothing. There are still the deep rooted mistrust and tensions between Greece and Turkey. These tensions continue on the isle of Cyprus. The civil war in Albabia has subsided for the moment. And finally the conflict about the partition of Yugoslavia still has not ended. The biggest part seems to be over but the end is still not insight.

Greece

As a member of both the European Union and NATO Greece is among the most stabile countries in the region. There are number of internal problems but nothing really destabilising. There is unemployment, inflation, high debts and a lagging economy. And all these factors are not good but they at least can be solved.

The economical and social stability is not the problem but the external political stability. Greece is living in the midst of the Balkan conflict, Albania and former Yugoslavia are their neighbours. And most importantly Greece and Turkey have a number of differences about the exact demarcation of the Aegean Sea and a number of small islands in that sea. Both sides are willing to go to war if one side conceives its national interests are at stake.

Greece has an additional lever to manipulate Turkey. As a member of the EU they can control the relations of the EU with Turkey. And because Turkey wants to become a member of the EU the position of Greece is stronger. The position of Greece is therefore only admittance of Turkey if all problems about the demarcation and Cyprus are solved in their way.

The tensions between Greece and Turkey are very often on the edge of war but international mediation and the knowledge that war will not solve the differences proved to be a strong line against the war. War will therefore be unlikely in the coming year between Greece and Turkey and this improves the political stability of Greece.

Cyprus

The conflict between the Greek and Turkish part of the island is a kind of continuation of the Greece Turkey problem. The Greek majority wanted to dominate the island and reunite with Greece proper. The Turkish reaction was to support / protect the Turkish population against the Greek domination and reunification and invaded the island. Since then both protect their turf. It is a war / conflict of proxies. Both countries support their group on the island and the status quo is stabile since the seventies.

The recent improvements of the Greek-Cypriot national guard have been a worry to the Turkish forces on the island. Till now the Turkish armed forces dominated the national guard and they still hold an edge over the national guard without support of the Greek armed forces. But more importantly, they had an absolute air superiority. This air superiority could change very quickly if the national guard receives its recently ordered S-300 air defence system.

This system is able to control the whole airspace of Cyprus up to mainland Turkey. Turkey conceives this new capability as a threat to its security. Turkey responded immediately to this new capability, if stationed, they would try to destroy it and this would mean war on Cyprus. This conflict would not be limited to Cyprus but would spread to Turkey and Greece.

War is however unlikely at this moment. It will most probably remain a war of words. First, war would be to much for the abilities of Turkey. They have already to many problems, the Islamic fundamentalists in their own country, the Kurdish problem and a more than unfriendly Iraq and a revengefull Syria on their border. They do not need another high intensity long lasting conflict with Greece. And second, Cyprus will most probably avoid stationing the S-300 on the island but chooses instead the Greek offered alternative of Crete. An actual deployment would undermine any political relation and possible solution with Turkey and the Turkish part of the island.

The tensions on Cyprus are not benificial for the political, economical and social stability on both sides of Cyprus. The political instability will undermine the economic performance on the Greek part of the island and this will also have a negative effect on the limited inter island trade. The political instability and the worsening economic stability will cerntainly have a negative effect on the social stability of Cyprus.

Albania

The situation in Albania is very bad. The change from a communist to an open market western style society have become a nightmare. There is no political, economical nor social stability. The fall of the communist regime and the following changes destroyed all systems and alliances in the country.

Albania returned to the old clan society where the alliance of the people was with the the clan and not the country. And even between the clans there is a division. The people from the North of Albania who are closed people averse to everything new, strange and foreign. And the people from the South of Albania who always where more open to changes and influences from outside.

The central government is therefore, the division between the South and North and the clan stucture, not very powerfull. Every entity in Albania likes to run their own business according their traditions. The central government is only an option if something can be gained and if it is in accordance with their own, or better clan, interests.

The economic situation is through the money schemes, pyramid funds, bad companies and management, corruption, the civil unrest because of the bankrupty of the pyramid funds and the political clashes nearly at the absolute worst situation.

The social structure and the absence of economic activity has destroyed all economical and social stability. Everything seems to be possible in Albania.

The political stability is also nearly non-existent. The North-South division and the clan structure creates no political foundation. The political elites in the form of the Socialist Party and the Democratic Party are also just struggling for power and very often personal gain. The parties have their base in respectivily the South and the North of Albania which only increases the intensity of the fighting between the two organisations. The Balkan mentality of irreconcilability and only to accept a win or loose makes a turn for the better very difficult.

The political, economical and social instability is reinforced by the problems in Kosovo and possibly Macedonia. Here the local Albanians are fighting against the central governments and a number of them are wanting a great Albania. The problems in the Kosovo and Macedonia might be bad for the stability but the position of the Kosovo-Albanians and Macedonian-Albanians in the Albanian politics is probably the only case of understanding but they also create more problems and enemies.

That Albania is not ripped apart by civil war is because of international pressure and the deployment of foreign forces to withheld the opposition parties from starting a new war. If they would leave the situation would immediately deteriorate, involvement in the Balkan will mean a long term appearance and even after that peace and prosperity are uncertain.

The Yugoslavia Saga

Gone are the days of an united Yugoslavia and most probably they will never return. Officially there are at the moment 4 states within the former Yugoslav territory, Serbia in allianc with Montenegro, Slovenia, Croatia, Bosnia and Macedonia. This number might even rise to 6 or 8 states if every little group would receive its own state.

The only country which has escaped the horrors of the Yugoslav partition is Slovenia. The country who was first to leave Yugoslavia has become a prosperous country which has created political. economical and ocial stability which is equal to its neighbour Italy.

Croatia could only become independent after a long struggle. And even then it had to wait even longer till all Serbian forces could be forced to leave Croatia. But stability is still not attained, Croatia has some influence on the Croatian part of Bosnia and the dream of a great Croatia is still considered as an option.

The internal situation in Croatia is also far from stabile. The governing political party of Franjo Tudjman is running Croatia as an one party country. The government is highly corrupt and the better functions are reserved for people loyal to Tudjman. Any opposition is suppressed by the use of violence and by pushing them out of the political arena. This has its effects on the economical development of Croatia. The war damages cannot be repaired, the economy is still lagging and international support and investments avoid Croatia.

Croatia’s policy is harmfull for the stability in the country and this may remain that way as long as there are no significant changes.

The situation is Bosnia is even more complicated. After a prolonged battle and several agreements a separate Bosnia has emerged. This is however a country with three countries inside. The Muslems. the Croats and the Serbs with each its own territory. They only have to work together in a weak central body to impose a Bosnian state.

This delicate balance act was the shortest way to attain peace. This has been agreed in the accords of Dayton which could be implemented with the support of SFOR and as long as there is a considerable SFOR force around there will be no party who will try to change the status quo. All will remain peacefull but there will be no more cooperation than absolutel necessary or agreed on at the Dayton accords.

No party in the conflict is looking for possibilities to improve the cooperation and relations, everybody is working for themselves. In their own territories there is some kind of stability if you belong to the own group and if you accept the political line set out by the government. Political stability in Bosnia as a whole is only possible as long as SFOR is around, they are the controlling and pacifying factor.

Economic stability is only there where the international support organisations set up aid programmes or help the local population. The war damage and a passivity of the population are the factors which limit economic activity. The high number of unemployed, the worse conomic forecasts, the many displaced persons without a house and the poverty in general have been the reason for the economical and social instability.

The negative political and economical situation is not likely to change on the short term, the differences and attitude of non-cooperation in the Bosnian population and regional governments will hinder any positive development. Bosnia will remain dependent on international support for even the most basic needs to survive.

Macedonia

This poor and isolated region of former Yugoslavia has been relativily quiet. There have been differences with Greece about the name Macedonia but they have all been solved by diplomacy.

The other problem, beside to slow economic improvement, has been the increasing problem with an ever more loud Albanian minority. Since the start of the independent republic of Macedonia the Albanian minority felt being surpressed in their rights to speak their own language and to express the traditional customs. What started as complaints and wishes has ended in the use of violence and demands. First they wanted an equally treatment of languages and role in the government, they now want autonomy in the region where they pose the majority. The Macedonian-Albanians have not yet demanded secession of Macedonia but certain quarters are starting with proposals about seceding or the creation of a great Albania.

This increasing political instability could become a fuze to the existence of the state Macedonia. The economic poor performance increases the overal instability. People feel insecure about their future which indicates social instability.

A fair government policy towards the legitimate feelings of the Albanians and international support could change the attitude of the Albanians. But if the Albanians in Kosovo get their way the Albanians in Macedonia will feel encouraged to ask for maximum demands in the negotiation with the central government.

The uncertain future perspectives increase the instability and this will continue in the coming years. Every solution will take considerable time to be accepted by all groups in the society.

Serbia

The former strongest political part and inheritor of the name Yugoslavia, Serbia, is still fighting to keep the last remnants of Yugoslavia together. But Montenegro and especially Kosovo are demanding respectivily more freedom within and secession from Yugoslavia. In both cases the domination of Serbia over the affairs in former Yugoslavia and its successor will most probably end.

Since the dissolution started the economic position of Serbia has been deteriorated. The loss of power and revenues because of the dissolution, the high costs of trying to keep Yugoslavia together and the embargo on Yugoslavia and later Serbia has virtually crippled the Serbian economy. This has led to a higher unemployment and poverty in Serbia. The political dominance of the policies of the Serbian leader Slobodan Milosevic suppressed effectivily any opposition in the country.

Serbia is economical and social very instabile and this will increase even more on the short term. This because they are in a negative spiral and the internal and extenal policies of Serbia and especially its leader Slobodan Milosevic will lead to even more political instability.

The position of Milosevic is however not in danger all elements who could pose a danger for him are moved out of their positions and loyal people brought in. The not that loyal Yugoslav army who was kept out of politics by its former Chief of staff, Momcilo Peresic, has been cleaned up by the replacement of the CoS by a Milosevic loyal man, Dragoljub Ojdanic. Ojdanic is a staunch Milosevic supporter, he was the commander of the para-military Serbian Volunteer Guard who is held responsible for etnic cleansing in Bosnia. Ojdanic will not hesitate to use the Yugoslav army in Kosovo or even in Montenegro if Milosevic demands so. The right man on the right place in the vision of Milosevic.

Where as the demand of Montenegro for more freedom within Yugoslavia can be eventual solved by political means. The problem and the kind of contradiction in Kosovo can only lead to a new civil war. All the international mediation, pressure and support can not stop the coming conflict in Kosovo.

The problem in Kosovo is about the demand, of the Kosovo-Albanian majority of 90 % in Kosovo, initially for more rights and equal treatment for their people. Later for the independence of Kosovo from Yugoslavia or the creation of great Albania.

The demands of the Kosovo-Albanians were at first very moderate as were their actions. Only after the policy of the LDK, Democratic Liga of Kosovo under the leadership of Ibrahim Rugova, of peacefull resistance and the creation of a shadow society beside the Serbian one failed to deliver more rights and freedom for the Kosovo-Albanians more radical elements received more support from the people. Especially the ever harder and more cruel Serbian suppression pushed the Albanians towards the radical parties.

Several small and radical organisations came forward but the UCK, Ushtria Clirimatare e Kosoves, or the Kosovo Liberation Army was the strongest which could deliver some protection to the Kosovo-Albanians. The policy of the UCK to demand independence or the creation of a great Albania was very attractive for the Kosovo-Albanians, finally they could live and talk without fear and how they would like it.

The UCK seemed in the beginning stronger then they really were as they controlled large tracts of Kosovo. The illusion of strength and a quick victory over Serbia evaporated after a combined operation of the security forces with the support of the Yugoslav army defeated all UCK units within a couple of weeks. The UCK was pushed back in the hills and the margin.

The military capabilities were hit very hard as their logistic support from Albania was closed down as the security forces and the Yugoslav army closed the border and destroyed many villages in the border region and where the main strongpoints of the UCK are situated. The capabilities and the image of the strong and invincible UCK were destroyed. A return will take long and will be more difficult. A military victory over Serbia / Yugoslavia will prove to be impossible on the short term. The successfull Serbian policy of destruction will thereby make it impossible to build a local support base. The rural population is terrorised and forced into refugeeship.

After negotiations and pressure from the international community Milosevic ordered the Yugoslav army and the security forces from outside Kosovo to withdraw from Kosovo. This delivered some space to the Kosovo-Albanians and the UCK who could retake some territory they lost in the operation against them.

None of the participants is willing to negotiate, the Serbians do not want to give up this historical important region, the LDK of Rugova does not possess the authority nor the support to close a deal and the UCK who lost a lot of actual and negotiating power in the recent fighting still demands independency on the long term.

The Balkan aversion against compromises will make that the groups will not come together. The Kosovo-Albanians are not strong enough to beat the Serbian and Yugoslav forces if they do not receive support from the international community, read NATO or the U.S.A.

The international community is against the fighting or the massacres which happened in Kosovo but they will not deliver the support the Kosovo-Albanians / UCK like to see. They will only use force if there are massacres of the population. The international community will try to force the parties to the negotiation table to find a mutual acceptable diplomatic solution.

The Kosovo conflict will therefore continue as a low-intensity warfare in 1999. None of the parties will be able to force the other to a decision or the win or even start the famous decisive battle. The conflict will be centred at Kosovo and with now and than excursions into Albania. There is a slight chance that Macedonia will get involved but if the situation in Kosovo is unclear the Macedonian-Albanians involvement is very unlikely. Only if the UCK would be winning Macedonia could become part of the battlefield. This is however dependent on the policy in Macedonia,

The much discussed war on the Balkan over Kosovo is an illusion. Albania is to weak and chaotic to become seriously involved, Bulgaria is militarily and economically to weak and to dependent on international, European, goodwill to take a part of Macedonia and Greece is to much in the international camp to get involved.