Neighbourly Disputes, Voter Migration and the European Future of the Region

The panel “Good Neighbourly Relations and the European Future of the Region,” organized at POINT 14 Conference in partnership with the OSF Western Balkans IGNITA initiative, examined how unresolved disputes, foreign influence, voter migration and political manipulation affect elections and European integration across the region.

Moderated by Srđan Blagovčanin from Transparency International, the panel featured Milica Kovačević from the Center for Democratic Transition, Sanja Despot from Faktograf, Agon Maliqi from the Atlantic Council and Adnan Huskić from the Friedrich Naumann Foundation. Pavle Dimitrijević from CRTA was unable to attend. The discussion showed that elections in Southeast Europe are shaped not only by domestic politics, but also by neighbouring countries, cross-border media networks, diaspora voting and organized voter movements.

Milica Kovačević presented findings from a regional initiative examining bilateral disputes that could delay or block the EU accession of Western Balkan countries. The research was inspired by Montenegro’s unresolved issues with Croatia. Disputes involving the border, war crimes, the ownership of the training ship “Jadran” and the naming of a swimming pool in Kotor have become increasingly politically sensitive.

Sanja Despot said that most of these issues originated in the wars of the 1990s. Some, such as the disagreement over the ship, are largely symbolic, while others concern serious questions of borders and wartime responsibility. She argued that Croatia would ultimately support Montenegro’s EU membership because it is in Croatia’s interest. At present, however, unresolved issues are being used to mobilize voters in both countries.

Kovačević warned that some disputes had been revived or created despite political actors knowing that they could damage Montenegro’s accession process. She pointed to campaigns portraying Croatia as a hostile or “Ustasha state”, making compromise more difficult because any agreement with Zagreb can be framed as betrayal.

Although Serbia and Montenegro have no formally declared border dispute, Kovačević noted that they have not signed a final border agreement. Their relationship is shaped more strongly by identity, political symbolism, and links between political elites. According to Kovačević, Serbia seeks to remain the dominant regional actor. Montenegro’s EU progress can therefore create a political problem for Belgrade by raising questions about why a smaller neighbouring country is advancing more quickly.

She said Serbian influence operates through media ownership, parts of the digital information space, support for political parties and organizations, investment and economic ties. Organized voter migration has also been recorded. While Montenegro is not as dependent on neighbouring countries as Bosnia and Herzegovina, developments in Serbia still strongly affect its political environment.

Agon Maliqi described Kosovo as a deeply polarized society in which elections are closely connected to relations with Serbia and the EU-mediated dialogue. He argued that governments in Belgrade and Pristina try to appear constructive before international partners while presenting themselves domestically as uncompromising defenders of national interests.

Kosovo’s government uses the real threat from Serbia to portray opponents, critics and civil society organizations as traitors or Serbian agents, while the opposition directs similar accusations at the government. This climate creates a permanent crisis in which few political actors are prepared to accept the cost of compromise. It also gives foreign actors space to fuel tensions and obstruct progress in Serbia and Kosovo.

Maliqi described the Kosovo dispute as the “mother of regional disputes” because its consequences spread throughout the Western Balkans. He also highlighted the importance of diaspora voters, noting that both Serbian and Kosovar authorities have organized efforts to bring voters from abroad. He argued that Montenegro’s accession to the EU could send a positive signal to the rest of the region and show that progress can still produce results.

Adnan Huskić described Bosnia and Herzegovina as a country located between Serbia and Croatia not only geographically, but also politically. The country still has unresolved border questions with both neighbours, while its only fully agreed border is with Montenegro. However, Bosnia and Herzegovina’s EU perspective remains so distant that these issues have not yet become central to the accession process.

Huskić said Bosnia and Herzegovina is highly exposed to foreign and regional influence. Political decisions affecting the country can be made through international negotiations in which its institutions and citizens have little influence. Events in Serbia and Croatia are closely followed in Bosnia and Herzegovina and quickly transferred into domestic politics, while people in neighbouring countries often know much less about developments in BiH. Domestic actors use regional and international disputes to mobilize voters, while the country’s institutions have limited capacity to respond.

Cross-border voting adds another layer of complexity. Croatian citizens living in Bosnia and Herzegovina vote in Croatian elections, while voters have also been transported between Bosnia and Herzegovina and Serbia.

Despot also referred to Croatian initiatives concerning diaspora representation. Prime Minister Andrej Plenković has proposed restoring rules that would give the diaspora more parliamentary seats, although the proposal lacks the required two-thirds majority. She also noted that the right-wing Homeland Movement supports creating a third entity for Croats in Bosnia and Herzegovina and may use the issue to strengthen its political profile.

Bosnia and Herzegovina is expected to use new election technologies during the October general elections, including biometric voter identification and ballot scanners. Huskić said biometric identification should reduce identity fraud and manipulation at polling stations. This is particularly relevant in a country estimated to have around 2.7 million residents but approximately 3.2 million registered voters.

Registration is passive, meaning that citizens with valid documents are automatically included in the electoral register. The inflated register also makes official turnout appear lower than actual participation. Ballot scanners should speed up results, while paper ballots will be preserved for verification. This dual system could improve trust in a process long affected by suspicions of manipulation, although technology alone cannot resolve political pressure, disinformation or institutional disputes.

Responding to a question from the audience, Kovačević criticized the way the EU currently assesses Montenegro’s progress. Although she previously believed strongly in a merit-based process, she said the EU often praises the government without adequately addressing its failures. Montenegro has still not completed electoral reform, while campaign rules remain focused largely on traditional media. Digital campaigning and online political advertising remain insufficiently regulated. At the same time, the government is preparing strategies for artificial intelligence in public administration, while institutions increasingly speak about “hybrid warfare” without having built sufficient resilience against coordinated information attacks.

Kovačević expects future elections to be targeted by major disinformation campaigns. Their goal may not be to reduce support for EU membership, which remains high, but to weaken trust in the democratic values associated with the Union. 

The panel showed that good neighbourly relations, electoral integrity and European integration cannot be treated separately. Bilateral disputes are not only diplomatic problems – they can become tools for mobilizing voters, discrediting opponents and maintaining a permanent sense of crisis. Protecting elections therefore requires more than accurate vote counting. It also requires reliable voter registers, transparent political advertising, stronger institutions and political willingness to resolve regional disputes instead of using them as electoral weapons.

Author: Dino Šakanović / Photo: Almin Tabak

(point.zastone.ba)