Die inkomptende EU Mafia und ihre Hirnlosen Ideen der „Dezentralisierung“ für kleine Staaten, was nur Mafiöse Kommunen schuf

Posted on Februar 22, 2018 von


Korrupt und dumm, macht die EU Mafia, ohne jede Berufs Erfahrung so weiter wie bisher auf allen Gebieten. Schon die Dezentralisierung schuf in Spanien, Italien korrupte Kommunen, wo man mit Geld Alles kaufen konnte. Das Organisierte Verbrechen, ohne jeden Verstand übernahm in Albanien und dem Kosovo die Administration, kennt keine Gesetze, noch Moral oder Bildung. So schuf man reine Verbrecher Regionen des Chaos, wo die Bevölkerung auswandert, weil man keine Perspektiv sieht.

22 Feb 18

Centralised or Decentralised, Balkan States Get it Wrong

Some Balkan countries have centralised political systems while others are decentralised – but both approaches have been taken to their extreme in the region and do not properly serve their purpose.

Ljubomir Filipovic
People walk down the street during snowfall in Belgrade, January 2017. Photo: EPA/SRDJAN SUKI

Serbia’s ruling Progressive Party, led by Aleksandar Vucic, is doing all it can to make sure it maintains its reign in the place where their generally weak opposition has the strongest base – Belgrade.

If the Progressive Party wins the local elections in the capital in March, they will cement their almost full control over the country, at both state and local level.

Vucic even has an archaic Serbian word for this process, “upodobljavanje”, which loosely translates as “retrofitting” political control over key systems in society.

Whether he manages to take over Belgrade or not, he has already “retrofitted” much of Serbian society, however, by creating a tightly centralised system.

Vucic’s approach to politics, while normal in Balkan terms, stands in a stark contrast to trends in the EU, which lean towards political and administrative decentralisation.

The EU has a name for this approach, “subsidiarity”. This prescribes that political, economic and social issues should be dealt with at the most immediate or most local level that is consistent with their resolution.

The EU has concluded that lack of subsidiarity leads to depopulation of rural and small urban areas as well as to overpopulation in industrial centres and capital cities, which is a blueprint for serious economic and social troubles and for the creation of a dysfunctional society.

To centralise or decentralise, that is the question

Macedonian capital of Skopje. Photo: Pixabay

Most capital cities in the Western Balkans are already becoming disproportionately populated.

Belgrade, Podgorica and Skopje are already home to one-third of their countries’ populations, while the situation with other capitals in the region is only slightly different.

Tirana is right in-between the regional average, hosting about 20 per cent of the population of Albania.

Sarajevo and Pristina at first sight are more proportionally populated.

But when one takes account of the complexity of the political situation in Bosnia and Kosovo, this relatively low percentage does not seem so relevant.

Montenegro recently started something that almost became a political counter-centralisation process.

After the 2016 local elections and the victory of the united opposition in the coastal towns of Budva, Herceg Novi and Kotor, it looked like the new local leaders might press for the establishment of a more decentralised system.

Instead, in traditional Balkan political style, they tried to use their victories to beef up their party headquarters in Podgorica, to feed their ambitions for control over the national level, too.

In doing so, they only demonstrated that they do not understand the need for proper decentralisation – but only tried to replace the current centralised system with one of their own making.

This move proved a big mistake. Their advances stalled, leading to a humiliating defeat in the next local elections in 2017 at the hands of the ruling Democratic Party of Socialists, DPS.

In Albania, reform of the system is following European trends, institutionalised in calls to reduce the number of local government units.

However, a year later, the ruling Socialist Party came to power in the majority of cities in local elections.

A report by the OSCE on the 2015 local elections mentioned “serious abuses including media bias, voter intimidation and the misuse of public resources by the ruling party”.

Mixed picture in Bosnia and Kosovo

Bosnian capital of Sarajevo. Photo: Pixabay

In Bosnia and Herzegovina, one of its two administrative units, the Federation entity, has gone too far in terms of decentralisation.

This has resulted in a complicated, expensive and mostly dysfunctional system in which governmental bodies in each of its ten cantons and more than 70 municipalities are used far more for personal or party gains than for public interest.

This system has been often gridlocked, leading to public frustration, which resulted in violent riots in 2014.

Bosnia’s other entity, Republika Srpska, has meanwhile gone much to far in the other extreme.

Its leadership has created a heavily centralised system that has become their main tool in keeping tight control over the entity and all its institutions and systems.

In Kosovo, there is also a mixed picture.

In the majority-Albanian areas, there is no monopoly on political power at a national level, because political competition is strong, creating an environment in which opposition parties can win local mayoral positions, even in the capital, Pristina.

In mainly Serbian-populated part of Kosovo, however, Srpska Lista, the alliance sponsored and endorsed by the Serbian government, has won almost all seats at the local level.

The election campaign of this political alliance in those municipalities has relied on nationalistic rhetoric, which marks out all rival independent Serbian politicians as “traitors” to the Serbian cause.

Many believe this rhetoric contributed to the assassination of the Kosovo Serb politician Oliver Ivanovic in January.

And so, looking at Balkan countries from the perspective of either centralised or decentralised political systems, it can be seen that neither approach has enjoyed much success.

All the governments in the region have signed agreements committing themselves to establishing stronger local self-government, and they all regularly debate these issues with key international and EU institutions.

Most of them declaratively support the process of decentralisation, advocating subsidiarity in the decision-making process.

But their actions prove that building strong local governments is not their priority.

The electoral systems of the countries create most of the flaws. With few exceptions, there are almost no internal elections in the political parties.

Equal regional and local representation among the members of national parliament is not a concern for these parties, and party leaderships decide who will be on the local candidates’ lists.

The system does not encourage individual initiatives or individual candidatures.

When there is no individual initiative, there is no individual accountability for the results of the local government.

For things to change, we must start another process of “upodobljavanje” or “restrofitting”, adapting our electoral systems to encourage real decentralisation.

We must individualise politics, and we should start now, bottom-up, beginning at the local level, if we truly wish to democratise our societies.

With more personalised politics, with politics “with a human face” in the municipalities, we will have the individual accountability that is pivotal in the evaluation of the results of local governments.

We should always keep in mind that the wealth of the entire continent has only grown when European cities were freer and more independent.

Ljubomir Filipovic is a Montenegrin consultant and activist, former vice-mayor of Budva.

 The opinions expressed in the comment section are those of the authors only and do not necessarily reflect the views of BIRN.


Die korrupte EU und USA und das Kosovo Desaster mit dem installierten Verbrecher Staat


Posted in: Balkan