Will clashes in the historical commission trigger a new veto? Experts call for clear guarantees

Disagreements inside the bilateral historical commission with Bulgaria must be clarified in talks so it is clear whether such differences could trigger a fresh veto in North Macedonia’s EU accession process, argued Dimitar Nikolovski, executive director of Eurothink, during a debate on the MRT1 programme "360 Degrees".

Experts propose clearer guarantees and parallel tracks

Speaking on the show, Nikolovski underlined that Skopje should define the precise guarantees it expects and put forward a draft text to be negotiated at upcoming meetings: "And one of the main and painful and difficult points is the work of the historical commission, the expectations from that commission during the negotiations, to be able somehow to define what would bring a veto and whether the work of the historical commission, their disagreement, automatically means a veto or not. That would be, I think, very important for us and very constructive to know whether there is a consensus between the two states on this issue," he said.

He added that the issue remains underspecified and that North Macedonia could take the initiative by proposing concrete draft guarantees: "We speak about guarantees, however we have not defined what those guarantees are. And I think it would be very constructive for us to appear with draft-guarantees that would later be discussed at those meetings and would be negotiated," he added.

Ana Krstinovska, president of ESTIMA, warned that the historical commission is both an expert body and an object of political expectations and pressure, which complicates its ability to deliver results. She argued that the process must be handled on multiple levels — formal teams operating with an agreed agenda — and that outside examples show the commission should not be given decisive power over the accession process.

Krstinovska also stressed that fulfilling existing commitments alone will not automatically repair bilateral trust and pointed to practical compromises as precedents: "We definitely have to implement that. However, that will not fix bilateral relations, to restore trust, and I think that is something we should say a little more often. Because our only guarantee, I really don't like that word, but our guarantee is good-neighbourly relations with Bulgaria and building trust even when we reach the end of the accession process and that requires work from both sides," she said. She cited the FRONTEX agreement as an example where a creative compromise preserved cooperation: "Look, language is exactly an example that a creative compromise can be made. We cannot expect that Bulgaria tomorrow will change that decades-long stance that there exists a Macedonian language different from Bulgarian, however in the case of the FRONTEX agreement some compromise was reached that allowed the work to continue," she said.

Former minister Toni Popovski urged that bilateral relations should not be left solely to the historical commission and called for broader participation by universities, chambers of commerce and cultural exchange. He recommended adopting European practices for managing divergent historical narratives so disputes do not always become blockages: "But what they have found out, cleverly, civilisationally, European is an agreement, to agree or to find a way how they will manage disagreements. So, where we will not agree, it does not necessarily have to immediately turn into a blockade. I think that should be a European approach that we have on the table," he said. Popovski added that if necessary, mediation or third-party involvement could be considered to help implement these practices.

Photo: press material from the event