Skopje, 30 June 2021 (MIA) - The Bulgarian veto is unjustified and unfortunately the nationalist abuse of the power of an EU member state, says Luxembourgian professor and political scientist Florian Bieber commenting on the latest Bulgarian veto to the opening of EU negotiations with North Macedonia at last week’s summit of EU leaders. In many ways, it is even more outrageous than the Greek veto because it vetoes Macedonia after having supported it for years, not having objected to earlier policies and having signed a friendship agreement, he tells MIA in an interview. Bieber, who is a professor of Southeast European History and Politics and Director of the Centre for Southeast European Studies at the University of Graz, Austria, will take part in the first international conference as part of the Prespa Forum Dialogue “Western Balkans: The missing puzzle for completing Europe”, due on July 1-2 in Ohrid and Oteshevo. The event is organized by the Foreign Ministry. Bieber believes the Skopje and Sofia could settle the dispute after Bulgaria’s July 11 elections and until the Slovenian summit with the Western Balkans in October, stressing it will depend on the outcome of the Bulgaria elections. In the interview, professor Bieber comments on the prospect of the US intensifying its engagement in order a solution to be found regarding Sofia’s EU veto and the threat of Euroscepticism and destabilization of the region as a result of the enlargement process being blocked. What is your opinion on Bulgaria vetoing again the opening of EU negotiations with North Macedonia? The Bulgarian veto is of course unjustified and unfortunately the nationalist abuse of the power of an EU member state. In many ways, it is even more outrageous than the Greek veto because it vetoes Macedonia after having supported it for years, not having objected to earlier policies and having signed a friendship agreement. What could be the consequences of the veto on bilateral ties and the relations between North Macedonia and the EU? I don't think that the Bulgarian position has much sympathy in the EU and it looks rather ridiculous. Some member state might be happily hiding behind it as it allows them to postpone enlargement. The countries who are engaged in the region as frustrated by Bulgaria’s position. The problem is that the EU is blocked and that a single member can hold it up, unless the rest make the price for such a position too high. Several members have tried to negotiate and find solution including Germany and Portugal as outgoing presidency, but were not successful. How real is the threat from Euroscepticism and destabilization of the region and is it possible third powers (Russia and China) to interfere? I fear that Euroscepticism in North Macedonia is real and understable. I am not a Eurosceptic, but I am also deeply frustrated with the EUs behavior. I think the message has to be that one can be critical of the EU as it works right now, without being against the EU. It is important to remember that there are many different voices in the EU, including those who support North Macedonia and enlargement. Russia might be happy about the incoherence of Europe, although there is a difference to China, which sees the region as part of Europe and while certainly wants to find countries which it can influence through its economic engagement, it does not want to stop EU integration, unlike Russia. Neither have much too offer except for some political engagement for Russia and “cheap” loans for China, so I don’t think they offer an alternative, but they can complicate matters by providing the illusion of alternatives. Is there way out from the veto and should the parties wait for a stable government in Sofia to be formed? After the elections and until the Slovenian summit with the Western Balkans in October is an opportunity to resolve the issue. Of course, it will depend on the election outcome in Bulgaria. Could the Skopje-Sofia issue turn into frozen dispute having in mind that all political parties in Bulgaria, at least for now, ahead of the election, have strong positions regarding North Macedonia’s EU integration efforts? Before elections is always different from after elections and I think that the parties might behave differently, if the price of intransigence is clear, which depends on other EU states. If the parties stick to their positions after the elections, either because the pressure of other EU members is not enough or because of domestic reasons, such as unstable and unclear election results, it might result in a longer stalemate. The problem is that the longer it takes to resolve it, the harder it becomes. Pressure exerted from European capitals, including Berlin and Paris, on Sofia produced no results. Is breakthrough possible with US engagement? I am not sure Paris was ever that serious about changing Sofia’s mind, after all France has been a skeptic about enlargement and while it might have pushed not, it does so with less credibility and conviction that others. The US could be crucial here, but it depends on how far it is willing to go on the matter. Statements from State Department officials have been encouraging. President Pendarovski has said that North Macedonia should focus its efforts to strengthen its cooperation with the US after the EU veto? What is your comment? It makes sense to build good ties with the US and it can help to break the deadlock. However, the US is focused elsewhere and will not able to replace the EU. In this sense, I take his comment to suggest the US as a way to put pressure on the EU and create more pluralist foreign policy, but at the end of the day, it is about getting allies within the EU to move on. After all, strong good bilateral relations with EU member states cannot be stopped by Bulgaria and will have a strong positive effect, economically and politically. Violeta Gerov