In the complex and ever-evolving geopolitical landscape of Eastern Europe, the Ukrainian war against Russia has brought renewed attention to the Balkans, a region historically known for its strategic significance and intricate political dynamics. The involvement, stance, and implications of the Balkan states—Serbia, Kosovo, Montenegro, Croatia, Albania, Slovenia, Greece and Turkey—are of particular interest. These nations, each with their unique historical and political context, have navigated the turbulent waters of the conflict in Ukraine, reflecting broader regional and international power struggles, especially concerning NATO’s role and influence. This article delves into the political and military relations of these Balkan states, exploring how their connections to NATO and existing regional tensions shape their positions and actions regarding the Ukrainian war.
Serbia: A Balancing Act Between Russia and the West
Serbia’s position in the Ukrainian conflict is deeply influenced by its historical ties with Russia, its aspirations for European Union membership, and its complex relationship with NATO. Historically, Serbia has maintained a close relationship with Russia, rooted in shared Slavic heritage, Orthodox Christianity, and mutual support during various geopolitical crises. This relationship has been further solidified by Russia’s backing of Serbia during the Kosovo conflict, a critical issue for Serbian national identity and sovereignty.
Despite these ties, Serbia has faced increasing pressure from the West to align with European Union policies, including sanctions against Russia. However, Serbia has resisted fully committing to such measures, striving to maintain a delicate balance. The Serbian government, under President Aleksandar Vučić, has often reiterated its neutral stance, emphasizing Serbia’s desire to join the EU while avoiding direct confrontation with Russia. This balancing act reflects Serbia’s broader foreign policy strategy, which seeks to maximize benefits from both East and West without fully committing to either side.
In terms of military relations, Serbia’s cooperation with NATO is limited and cautious. Although Serbia is a member of NATO’s Partnership for Peace (PfP) program, the memory of NATO’s 1999 bombing campaign during the Kosovo war continues to foster deep-seated skepticism and resentment towards the alliance among the Serbian public. As a result, Serbia has pursued military modernization efforts with Russian assistance, including the acquisition of Russian military equipment, while also participating in NATO-led exercises and peacekeeping missions to maintain a degree of engagement with the West.
The ongoing Ukrainian conflict has further complicated Serbia’s position, as it navigates the challenges of maintaining its historical alliance with Russia while seeking closer ties with the EU. Serbia’s refusal to impose sanctions on Russia has strained its relations with Brussels, raising concerns about the country’s EU accession prospects. However, Serbia’s strategic importance in the Balkans and its role in regional stability continue to make it a crucial player in the broader European security architecture.
Kosovo: A Strong Proponent of Western Integration
Kosovo, in stark contrast to Serbia, has firmly aligned itself with the West, particularly the United States and the European Union. Having declared independence from Serbia in 2008, a move strongly supported by the US and many EU countries, Kosovo has consistently sought closer integration with Western institutions. Kosovo’s leadership has condemned Russia’s actions in Ukraine, drawing parallels between the Ukrainian struggle for sovereignty and Kosovo’s own fight for independence.
Kosovo’s political and military relations are closely tied to NATO, which played a pivotal role in its independence by intervening against Serbian forces in 1999. The NATO-led Kosovo Force (KFOR) continues to provide security and stability in the region, and Kosovo has expressed its desire to join NATO, although this is complicated by the fact that several NATO members, including Spain and Greece, do not recognize Kosovo’s independence.
In the context of the Ukrainian conflict, Kosovo has been vocal in its support for Ukraine and has joined Western sanctions against Russia. The Kosovo government has also offered to host NATO troops and other Western military assets, further cementing its strategic alignment with the West. However, this stance has exacerbated tensions with Serbia, which views Kosovo’s actions as a direct challenge to its sovereignty and a provocation supported by the West.
Kosovo’s alignment with the West and its proactive stance on the Ukrainian conflict reflect its broader foreign policy goals of securing international recognition and strengthening its position within the European and transatlantic security frameworks. However, the unresolved status of its independence and the ongoing tensions with Serbia continue to pose significant challenges to Kosovo’s aspirations for full integration into Western institutions.
Montenegro: A NATO Member with Deep Russian Ties
Montenegro’s involvement in the Ukrainian conflict is shaped by its unique position as a NATO member with historical ties to Russia. Montenegro joined NATO in 2017, a move that marked a significant shift in its foreign policy and alignment with the West. However, Montenegro’s relationship with Russia has been complex, characterized by deep economic ties, particularly in the tourism and real estate sectors, as well as a significant Russian expatriate community.
The Montenegrin government, under Prime Minister Dritan Abazović, has taken a clear stance in support of Ukraine, condemning Russia’s actions and joining EU sanctions against Russia. This position has strained Montenegro’s relations with Russia, leading to a sharp decline in Russian investments and tourism, which have been significant contributors to Montenegro’s economy.
Despite its NATO membership, Montenegro’s internal political landscape has been marked by divisions over its foreign policy orientation. Pro-Russian and pro-Serbian political factions within Montenegro have criticized the government’s stance on the Ukrainian conflict, advocating for a more neutral position. These divisions reflect broader regional tensions and the lingering influence of Russia in the Balkans.
Montenegro’s role in the Ukrainian conflict underscores the challenges faced by small nations in balancing their commitments to international alliances with the realities of historical and economic ties. As a NATO member, Montenegro’s support for Ukraine is aligned with its obligations to the alliance, but the internal political divisions and economic repercussions highlight the complexities of its position in the broader geopolitical context.
Croatia: A Firm NATO Ally and EU Member
Croatia, as a NATO member and EU member state, has been a staunch supporter of Ukraine in the conflict with Russia. Croatia’s political and military relations with NATO and the EU are well-established, and the country has actively participated in NATO missions and operations. Croatia’s support for Ukraine is rooted in its own history of war and the struggle for independence during the 1990s, which has shaped its foreign policy and security priorities.
The Croatian government, led by Prime Minister Andrej Plenković, has condemned Russia’s invasion of Ukraine and supported EU sanctions against Russia. Croatia has also provided humanitarian aid and military assistance to Ukraine, aligning itself closely with the broader EU and NATO strategies.
In addition to its support for Ukraine, Croatia has been actively involved in efforts to enhance regional security in the Balkans, recognizing the potential for the conflict in Ukraine to spill over into neighboring countries. Croatia’s role in the Ukrainian conflict is a reflection of its broader commitment to European security and stability, as well as its desire to prevent any escalation of tensions in the Balkans.
However, Croatia’s relations with Serbia have been strained by its strong support for Ukraine, as Serbia has maintained a more neutral stance in the conflict. These tensions are exacerbated by historical animosities and unresolved issues from the Yugoslav wars, which continue to influence bilateral relations between the two countries.
Croatia’s involvement in the Ukrainian conflict is emblematic of its broader foreign policy goals of strengthening its position within the EU and NATO while promoting stability and security in the Balkans. As a firm NATO ally, Croatia’s actions are aligned with the collective defense and security strategies of the alliance, but they also reflect the enduring legacy of its own experiences with war and conflict.
Albania: A Vocal Supporter of Ukraine
Albania has been one of the most vocal supporters of Ukraine among the Balkan states, reflecting its strong alignment with NATO and the European Union. As a NATO member since 2009 and an EU candidate country, Albania has consistently supported Western policies and initiatives, including sanctions against Russia and military aid to Ukraine.
The Albanian government, led by Prime Minister Edi Rama, has condemned Russia’s actions in Ukraine and called for a unified international response to Russian aggression. Albania has also participated in NATO-led exercises and has offered to host NATO military assets as part of the alliance’s efforts to bolster security in Eastern Europe.
Albania’s support for Ukraine is rooted in its broader foreign policy objectives of strengthening its ties with the West and enhancing its role within NATO. Albania’s participation in NATO missions and its proactive stance on the Ukrainian conflict are seen as key elements of its strategy to solidify its position within the Euro-Atlantic community.
However, Albania’s strong support for Ukraine has also heightened tensions with Serbia, which has taken a more neutral stance in the conflict. These tensions are further complicated by the ongoing dispute over Kosovo, where Albania has been a strong advocate for Kosovo’s independence, while Serbia continues to assert its claim over the territory.
Albania’s involvement in the Ukrainian conflict reflects its commitment to Western integration and its role as a reliable NATO ally. By supporting Ukraine and aligning itself with broader Western strategies, Albania seeks to reinforce its position within the Euro-Atlantic community and contribute to regional stability in the Balkans.
Slovenia: A Committed EU and NATO Member
Slovenia, as a member of both the European Union and NATO, has been a consistent supporter of Ukraine in the conflict with Russia. Slovenia’s foreign policy is strongly aligned with EU and NATO principles, and the country has actively participated in international efforts to support Ukraine, including imposing sanctions on Russia and providing humanitarian aid.
The Slovenian government, led by Prime Minister Robert Golob, has condemned Russia’s invasion of Ukraine and called for a strong and unified international response. Slovenia has also participated in NATO exercises and has supported EU initiatives to enhance security and stability in Eastern Europe.
Slovenia’s involvement in the Ukrainian conflict is shaped by its broader commitment to European security and its role within NATO. Slovenia’s actions are aligned with the
collective defense strategies of the alliance, and the country has sought to play an active role in promoting regional stability in the Balkans.
However, Slovenia’s strong support for Ukraine has also highlighted the challenges of maintaining regional cohesion in the Balkans, where differing views on the conflict have led to tensions between neighboring countries. Slovenia’s relations with Serbia, in particular, have been strained by its support for Ukraine, as Serbia has sought to maintain a more neutral position.
Slovenia’s role in the Ukrainian conflict reflects its broader foreign policy goals of strengthening its position within the EU and NATO while contributing to regional security and stability. As a committed member of both organizations, Slovenia’s actions are aligned with the collective strategies of the West, but they also underscore the complexities of regional dynamics in the Balkans.
Greece: Navigating Complex Relations with Russia and NATO
Greece’s position in the Ukrainian conflict is shaped by its complex relationship with Russia and its role as a NATO member. Greece has historically maintained close ties with Russia, based on shared Orthodox Christian heritage and economic relations, particularly in the energy sector. However, as a NATO member and EU country, Greece has also aligned itself with Western policies and initiatives.
The Greek government, led by Prime Minister Kyriakos Mitsotakis, has condemned Russia’s invasion of Ukraine and supported EU sanctions against Russia. Greece has also provided humanitarian aid to Ukraine and participated in NATO-led exercises and operations in Eastern Europe.
However, Greece’s relationship with Russia remains multifaceted, particularly in the context of energy security. Greece relies on Russian gas imports, and the ongoing conflict in Ukraine has raised concerns about energy supply and prices. This has led Greece to seek alternative energy sources and strengthen its ties with other NATO and EU members to enhance its energy security.
Greece’s involvement in the Ukrainian conflict is further complicated by its own regional tensions with Turkey, another NATO member. The longstanding disputes between Greece and Turkey over territorial waters, airspace, and Cyprus have been exacerbated by the broader geopolitical dynamics of the Ukrainian conflict. Greece’s strong support for Ukraine and its alignment with Western policies have heightened tensions with Turkey, which has pursued a more independent and at times contradictory approach to the conflict.
Greece’s role in the Ukrainian conflict underscores the challenges of balancing its commitments to NATO and the EU with its historical ties to Russia and its own regional security concerns. As a key player in the Eastern Mediterranean, Greece’s actions are closely watched by both its Western allies and regional neighbors, reflecting the broader complexities of the Ukrainian conflict’s impact on regional stability.
Turkey: A Key Regional Power with a Unique Approach
Turkey’s involvement in the Ukrainian conflict is shaped by its unique position as a key regional power with complex relations with both Russia and NATO. As a NATO member, Turkey has been involved in alliance activities related to the conflict, but it has also pursued an independent foreign policy that reflects its broader regional ambitions.
The Turkish government, led by President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan, has condemned Russia’s invasion of Ukraine and supported Ukraine’s sovereignty, but it has also sought to maintain a balanced relationship with Russia. Turkey has provided military aid to Ukraine, including the supply of Bayraktar TB2 drones, which have been used effectively by Ukrainian forces. At the same time, Turkey has refrained from joining Western sanctions against Russia, citing its economic and energy ties with Moscow.
Turkey’s role in the Ukrainian conflict is further complicated by its regional ambitions, particularly in the Eastern Mediterranean and the Middle East. Turkey has sought to position itself as a mediator in the conflict, hosting negotiations between Russia and Ukraine and advocating for a diplomatic solution. This approach reflects Turkey’s broader foreign policy strategy of balancing its relationships with both the West and Russia while pursuing its own regional interests.
Turkey’s involvement in the Ukrainian conflict has also exacerbated tensions with Greece, as both countries vie for influence in the Eastern Mediterranean. The longstanding disputes between Turkey and Greece have been further complicated by the broader geopolitical dynamics of the Ukrainian conflict, with both countries seeking to leverage their positions within NATO and the EU to advance their interests.
Turkey’s role in the Ukrainian conflict highlights the complexities of its foreign policy and its unique position as a regional power with ties to both the West and Russia. As a key player in the Eastern Mediterranean and the broader Middle East, Turkey’s actions in the Ukrainian conflict are closely watched by both its allies and rivals, reflecting the broader challenges of regional stability and security.
Conclusion: The Balkans and the Ukrainian Conflict
The involvement of the Balkan states in the Ukrainian conflict reflects the broader complexities of regional and international geopolitics. Each of these countries—Serbia, Kosovo, Montenegro, Croatia, Albania, Slovenia, Greece, and Turkey—has navigated the conflict in Ukraine in ways that reflect their unique historical, political, and military relationships. Their actions are influenced by their ties to NATO, their historical relationships with Russia, and their broader regional ambitions.
The Ukrainian conflict has highlighted the challenges of maintaining regional cohesion in the Balkans, where differing views on the conflict have led to tensions between neighboring countries. It has also underscored the importance of NATO and the EU in shaping the foreign policies of these states, as they seek to balance their commitments to international alliances with their own regional interests.
As the conflict in Ukraine continues to evolve, the role of the Balkan states will remain a critical factor in the broader dynamics of European security and stability. Their actions and positions will continue to be shaped by the complex interplay of historical ties, regional ambitions, and international alliances, reflecting the broader challenges of navigating a rapidly changing geopolitical landscape.
APPENDIX 1 – Balkan states’ involvement in the conflict
| State | Involvement | Aid to Ukraine | Aid to Russia | Technologies/Capabilities | Analysis |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Serbia | Neutral with pro-Russia leanings | Officially neutral, but reports suggest covert arms sales to Russian-aligned groups through intermediaries. | Suspected of indirect support via arms sales and intelligence sharing with Russian allies. | Limited direct technological involvement; focus on small arms production that may be diverted to Russian-aligned entities. | Serbia’s historical ties to Russia create a complex dynamic. While officially neutral, the possibility of covert support for Russia cannot be ruled out. |
| Kosovo | Strongly Pro-Ukraine | Provided significant political support and humanitarian aid; no direct military aid reported, due to limited capabilities. | None. | None; relies heavily on NATO support for its defense needs. | Kosovo’s strong pro-Ukraine stance is aligned with its geopolitical strategy to strengthen ties with Western allies, particularly NATO, amidst its ongoing disputes. |
| Montenegro | Pro-Ukraine | Small arms, ammunition, and intelligence support provided to Ukraine. | None. | Military aid includes NATO-standard small arms and ammunition, leveraging its NATO membership to contribute to Ukraine. | Montenegro’s contribution, though limited, is consistent with its NATO obligations and support for Western policies. |
| Croatia | Actively Pro-Ukraine | Delivered anti-tank missiles (M79 Osa), infantry weapons, and extensive humanitarian aid. | None. | Advanced training for Ukrainian forces in Croatia; provision of surplus military equipment. | Croatia’s significant contributions underscore its commitment to NATO and EU policies, providing Ukraine with vital anti-tank capabilities. |
| Albania | Pro-Ukraine | Sent small arms, medical supplies, and non-lethal military equipment; provided logistical support via NATO channels. | None. | Utilizes NATO’s logistic frameworks to provide continuous, albeit modest, military support to Ukraine. | Albania’s alignment with NATO enables it to support Ukraine within its capabilities, focusing on humanitarian and logistical assistance. |
| Slovenia | Actively Pro-Ukraine | Donated artillery (155mm rounds), M-84 tanks, and infantry weapons; involved in humanitarian efforts and intelligence sharing. | None. | Slovenia has provided decommissioned but operational M-84 tanks, enhancing Ukraine’s armored capabilities. | Slovenia’s robust support is crucial, particularly in heavy artillery and tank provisions, directly aiding Ukraine’s defensive efforts against Russian advances. |
| Greece | Pro-Ukraine, Energy-Dependent | Sent ammunition, small arms, and humanitarian aid; balance between support and maintaining energy ties with Russia. | None. | Greek-made military hardware, including artillery shells and firearms, has been provided; some energy dependencies limit actions. | Greece’s support, while substantial, is tempered by its reliance on Russian energy, reflecting a careful diplomatic balancing act. |
| Turkey | Dual Strategy | Supplied Bayraktar TB2 drones, which have been instrumental in Ukraine’s defense; economic cooperation with Russia continues. | Provided non-lethal military goods, maintaining economic ties with Russia, particularly in energy and trade. | Bayraktar TB2 drones have provided Ukraine with significant tactical advantages; Turkey’s balancing act involves complex economic and military relationships. | Turkey’s dual role, supplying advanced drones to Ukraine while maintaining economic ties with Russia, highlights its strategic autonomy and regional influence. |
Enhanced Analysis Summary:
- Serbia: While Serbia officially maintains neutrality, its covert arms sales and historic alliance with Russia suggest a more complex role in the conflict. Serbia’s small arms industry may indirectly support Russian efforts.
- Kosovo: Kosovo aligns strongly with Ukraine, leveraging its position to gain favor with Western powers, especially NATO, amid ongoing regional tensions.
- Montenegro: Montenegro’s contributions, though modest, are significant within the context of its NATO membership, emphasizing solidarity with Western policies.
- Croatia: Croatia’s active role, particularly in supplying anti-tank weapons and training Ukrainian forces, underscores its commitment to NATO and its strategic interests in countering Russian aggression.
- Albania: Albania’s logistical support through NATO channels reflects its strategic positioning within the alliance, focusing on humanitarian and logistical aid.
- Slovenia: Slovenia’s provision of heavy artillery and tanks marks a significant contribution to Ukraine’s military capabilities, reinforcing its position as a key NATO member in the region.
- Greece: Greece’s support is critical yet cautious, balancing its military aid to Ukraine with the need to maintain energy security through its relationship with Russia.
- Turkey: Turkey’s complex role as both a supplier of crucial military technology to Ukraine and a key economic partner to Russia reflects its strategic ambition to influence both sides of the conflict.
