As part of the Prespa Forum Dialogue today was organised a panel discussion titled “In Search for Agents of Change: Lessons from the Long-Standing Disputes in Southeast Europe”.
Speakers of the panel were Andi Dobrushi, Fani Karanfilova-Panovska, Leonidas Makris, Klodjan Seferaj and the president of Institute for Democracy Marko Trosanovski. The debate was moderate by Ioannis Armakolas.
The panelist discussed the factors that make certain leaders in the region follow unpopular path of reconciliation and dispute resolution and whether if there is bold and transformative leadership that is willing to confront public opinion and strike unpopular compromises.
The panel also tackled the questions on how to address the attitudes of the public opinion and the wider society that often present themselves as key obstacles to difficult policy compromises and who are the possible agents that could drive the positive change in the region.
Speaking about the Prespa Agreement, Dobrushi said that this agreement was unfortunately an exception given that the region is still dominated by nationalist and populist political elites who have a strong control over the societal narratives. According to him, the region is stuck with the EU membership fatigue, where its perspectives are for a very long time in a standstill, despite the fact that the strongmen in the region support the Euro-Atlantic integration and so do the citizens.
Karanfilova-Panovska said that the courageous leadership is the number one driving force for the successes of the Ohrid Framework Agreement and the Prespa Agreement. According to her, in the case of the Prespa Agreement it was that there were two likeminded and progressive leaders, ready to change the status quo.
Makris was talking about the former very progressive mayor of Thessaloniki, Yannis Boutaris – an ardent supporter of the Prespa Agreement in a very conservative environment. Makris highlighted that Boutaris wanted to revive Thessaloniki’s positive image in the region, by highlighting the city’s connection with the Balkans and Greece’s neighbors.
Seferaj spoke about the results of the public opinion poll on the bilateral relations between Albania and Greece, adding that Albanians have a generally positive opinion toward the bilateral relations with Greece (57%), while Greeks are rather neutral toward the same issue (48%). Seferaj added that despite the improvements in the perception on the bilateral relations, Albania and Greece still have to work to improve the relations and improve the major challenges through intensified cooperation, such as in the fields of education.
Talking about the study on the public opinion poll on the Prespa Agreement, Troshanovski said that the main challenge is how to direct politics and policy-making beyond public opinion support (or the lack thereof) for the solution of the complex issues in the bilateral relations, often burdened by preconceived attitudes, historical determinism and political mythology in order to make bold changes to the status quo. He singled-out triggers, leadership, media and civil society sector, and enhanced endorsement as key factors of social change. In the case of the Prespa Agreement, he mentioned that triggers such as the wire-tapping scandal in North Macedonia and subsequent government change made an environment open to changes, including the name change. In case of media and pluralism, however, he mentioned the open issues with Bulgaria, saying that the media environment there lacks pluralism but so as the civil society cooperation between North Macedonia and Bulgaria, which hinders the solution-finding process. Coming back to the Prespa Agreement, Troshanovski said that the notwithstanding it made a social change and was endorsed by the international community, there are concerns in both North Macedonia and Greece regarding its level of acceptance and implementation, joined by conflicts of interpretation.