Changes to Borders in Europe

[Silurian]

Serbia and Kosovo are reported to be in talks about a land swap which would see Serb areas in northern Kosovo exchanged for an area in Serbia on Kosovo's eastern border.

The trouble is this sets a precedent for other claims and border changes.
Albanians form a majority in western Macedonia.
Serbs in Bosnia.
Hungarians in Serbia and Romania.
Albanians in Greece.
Russians in the Baltic States.
etc

Any change in the border is likely to open a whole can of worms.



from The Guardian

The Serbian president, Aleksandar Vučić, is preparing to visit Kosovo next month, amid mounting evidence that Belgrade and Pristina are floating the idea of reaching a deal to divide the disputed territory and institute a land swap along ethnic lines.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2018/aug/22/serbia-kosovo-could-land-swap-between-lead-conflict

 

[innonimatu]

I blame Bill Clinton.

 

[luiz]

Well a mutually agreed border swap is not a bad precedent, if both governments are acting in good faith and in the best interest of their citizens.

Realistically some borders will always change in the Balkans. That's their thing.

 

[Cheetah]

This sounds good. A mutual agreement between Serbia and Kosovo which would distribute land in a mutually more favourable way would be great, and will probably be the first step into a normalisation of their relationship, and of them moving closer to joining the EU.

 

[Silurian]

This sounds good. A mutual agreement between Serbia and Kosovo which would distribute land in a mutually more favourable way would be great, and will probably be the first step into a normalisation of their relationship, and of them moving closer to joining the EU.

It sounds good until you think about the precedent it sets.
As I pointed out in the OP there are numerous ethnic minorities living outside their home countries in Europe.
If borders start being moved then resentment between minorities and the majority, and neighbouring countries will increase.
There is also the problem, that the areas where the border is to be moved nearly always do not contain just the minority.
So you end up with more problems.

The EU should regard this development between Kosovo and Serbia unfavorably, due to the precedent that it sets for other countries in the EU with its security implications, and so should regard this move as a reason to exclude them both from the EU.

 

[Cheetah]

Nah, there's a dampening effect to that entire process: The European Union.

As long as Hungary and Romania stays in the union, there's no reason to move the borders around. Same with Sud-Tirol, the border areas in Scandinavia or Alsace-Lorraine/Grand Est between France and Germany.

For that matter, Norway was considering giving Finland a mountaintop (or a few hundred squaremeters of territory) for their centennial, and Belgium and Netherland literally swapped territory at the beginning of this year!

This is an undivided good, and should be applauded.

 

[Silurian]

We all know that countries can leave the EU.

If the EU approves of countries that want to join the EU moving their borders why shouldn't countries within the EU move their borders.

Not many people live on top of the mountain that Norway is giving to Finland or the river banks that Belgium and Netherlands have swapped.
There are no people so there are few problems.
When you can swap people you create friction.
If say a large number of Swedes started buying property in a border area of Norway how will the local Norwegians react knowing that maybe they could end up living in Sweden.

The road to Hell is paved with good intentions.

 

[AmazonQueen]

We all know that countries can leave the EU.

If the EU approves of countries that want to join the EU moving their borders why shouldn't countries within the EU move their borders.

Not many people live on top of the mountain that Norway is giving to Finland or the river banks that Belgium and Netherlands have swapped.
There are no people so there are few problems.
When you can swap people you create friction.
If say a large number of Swedes started buying property in a border area of Norway how will the local Norwegians react knowing that maybe they could end up living in Sweden.

The road to Hell is paved with good intentions.

There is already friction when you have areas with a majority population that is a minority within the country as a whole.
Keeping borders based on the provinces of an Empire that hasn't existed for a century and treating them as fixed for all time doesn't seem very sensible.
This seems a massive improvement on the usual methods for settling border disputes in the Balkans.

 

[Cheetah]

If say a large number of Swedes started buying property in a border area of Norway how will the local Norwegians react knowing that maybe they could end up living in Sweden.

Large numbers of Norwegians are actually buying property in Sweden. There's few objections, considering how close we are culturally. The Nordic Union guarantees frictionless movement, working and everything between us anyway, with or without the EU.

Regardless, the problem you're focusing on already exists, and any land-swap will actually make it a lesser problem.

 

[ori]

not the first swap in Europe (in recent times), so why is this a bad precedent while this one wasn't?

 

[Farm Boy]

I blame Bill Clinton.

Well sure. But at a certain point, after 1000 years of having 10,000 years of hatreds explained to you in literally painful detail, you're just going to take your friends' word on it, say "@*#&# it" and roll.

Welcome to Europe mother @#*#&^@(@.

 

[Synobun]

They should just go to war for all their land acquisitions. Like the good old days.

 

[warpus]

Serbia and Kosovo are reported to be in talks about a land swap which would see Serb areas in northern Kosovo exchanged for an area in Serbia on Kosovo's eastern border.

The trouble is this sets a precedent for other claims and border changes.
Albanians form a majority in western Macedonia.
Serbs in Bosnia.
Hungarians in Serbia and Romania.
Albanians in Greece.
Russians in the Baltic States.

This is a land swap. In none of the other examples you give would there be any possibility of a land swap.

But sure, if two countries agree to modify their common border, why shouldn't they be able to do so?

 

[rah]

I don't see any issues with it. I think this type of thing reduces tensions. And if both countries 'freely' agree to it, it not really any of my business.

 

[Commodore]

If the EU approves of countries that want to join the EU moving their borders why shouldn't countries within the EU move their borders.

Why should the EU be consulted at all? Member states are still sovereign nations and should be allowed to make such decisions without "approval" from Brussels.

 

[Synobun]

If they don't want overarching insight from the EU they can certainly leave it.

 

[NovaKart]

Would the EU want them to join? And would Serbia want to?

 

[warpus]

Why should the EU be consulted at all? Member states are still sovereign nations and should be allowed to make such decisions without "approval" from Brussels.

EU member states signed a plethora of treaties and agreements when joining the EU. It's possible they don't have to consult the EU at all here, but it's also possible that one of the signed treaties would hold them to such a standard.

 

[Commodore]

If they don't want overarching insight from the EU they can certainly leave it.

Or the EU can stop overstepping their authority.

 

[AmazonQueen]

Or the EU can stop overstepping their authority.

Have they actually overstepped their authority?
Do you know of any EU member states that wanted to adjust their borders and were told they couldn't?