Abstract ▼

The most important part of the economic cooperation between Serbia and the EU, in addition to the inflow of foreign direct investments, loans, remittances (and donations), which predominantly come from the EU countries, is the exchange of goods and services. From 2000 there has been significant growth of trade between Serbia and the EU; merchandise exports and imports increased at double-digit rates over the past 16 and half years. In the same period, the share of EU in Serbian trade has not significantly changed, except for the effects of the three EU enlargement (2004, 2007, 2013), and is almost two-thirds. Having in mind that the countries of CEFTA, excluding Moldova, is likely to join the EU in the next decade, it is clear that the importance of trade with the EU would increase, at least nominally. In the last European Commission staff working document (2016) for Serbia is emphasized that the new government programme included Serbia\'s EU accession as a priority goal. Besides that, Serbia is only moderately prepared in the area of public administration reform. According to this report, Serbia will need to align its foreign and security policy progressively with the European Union\'s common foreign and security policy in the period up to accession. The EU is a key strategic partner of Serbia because of its huge global economic, technological and political significance. The EU is not just a very important partner, it is, in a way, a reference point for Serbia, as the modernization of the country, which is a natural priority for Serbian elites, is virtually inseparable from European integration and full membership in the EU.

Abstract ▼

Accession to the World Trade Organization (WTO), among other things, can be viewed as one of Serbia\'s foreign policy goals. Observed in this way, the successful completion of the accession process will bring easier market access to the all WTO member countries, but also fulfills one of the key conditions in the negotiations for Serbia\'s accession to the European Union (Chapter 30). Serbia is an import-dependent country and therefore has a high foreign trade deficit. Our country trades mostly with those countries with which has been signed some kind of trade agreement (EU, CEFTA, Russia, Turkey). That indicates that its entry into the WTO would be beneficial and would facilitate the establishment of trade flows with new partners. Accession would also be useful for an export-oriented model of economic growth. The World Trade Organization is the only global international organization dealing with trade rules between countries. The WTO is the result of multiannual international negotiations aimed at liberalizing international trade. Multilateral negotiations under the WTO umbrella offer the potential to maintain long-term growth, stimulate trade and investment and sustainable economic development. Serbia with its capacities, as a small country, is not in a position to independently create, develop and maintain economic relations with many countries in the world. Therefore, the WTO membership will enable domestic companies and businessmen to export under much more favorable conditions to countries with which Serbia has not yet concluded trade agreements. Serbia started accession to the WTO in 2005 but has not yet completed this process. Taking into account the results of Serbia so far in this process, as well as defining the remaining open issues and problems, we point to the many obstacles our country has encountered, but also on the ways in which the goal can be successfully achieved.

Abstract ▼

The current relations of the Republic of Serbia with the Peopleʼs Republic of China (hereinafter: Serbia and China) are conditioned by many political, economic, legal and social factors. The mentioned factors point to the existence of asymmetry in many aspects which, however, is not an issue that implies that the two parties can not develop good and friendly relations. In the historical and international legal sense, the relations of the two countries are characterized by the continuity of diplomatic relations established on January 2, 1955, between the then Federal People\'s Republic Yugoslavia and the People\'s Republic of China. Serbia as the successor state of SFR Yugoslavia continues to treat China as one of its most important partners in international relations, which is manifested through the foreign policy course, according to which China is one of the main “pillars” of Serbia\'s foreign policy alongside the European Union, Russia and the United States. The mere reference to the main “pillars” in Serbia\'s foreign policy orientation indicates that China is a key player in world politics and a great power with which Serbia needs to build relations of a “comprehensive strategic partnership”. It is not surprising, therefore, that the deepening of the Serbian-Chinese relations on a bilateral and multilateral level (especially within the UN, regional international organizations and political forums such as the 16 + 1 mechanism between China and the countries of Central and Eastern Europe) contributed to better strategic positioning of Serbia in modern international relations.

Abstract ▼

The concept of power is not a new phenomenon, so the intellectual origin of this concept can also be found among the ancient philosophers. However, the reconsideration of this concept within the International relations and Security studies started 60-70 years ago. The representatives of the realistic theoretical approach were mostly those who dealt with the concept of power of the state, as well as representatives of other theoretical approaches (e.g. liberalism, social constructivism, critical theories, feminist approaches, etc.). But, despite the great interest in this concept, consensus exists only on two key issues related to power of the state. First, in the terms of importance everyone agrees that the power of the state is one of the key concepts, and second, in the terms of complexity. Therefore, no one should be surprised by the pluralism of viewpoints regarding the concept. Those viewpoints could be reduced on three prevailing comprehensions of power of the state: power as control over resources, power as control over actors and power as control over events and outcomes. All these prevailing comprehensions have its own advantages and disadvantages. The aim of this paper was to present the views of relevant scholars (through the theoretical discussion not only by the realists), and to offer an adequate overview of the advantages and disadvantages of each of these comprehensions. Such a review of literature could certainly be useful for researchers in the case of selecting an adequate comprehension of power of the state for their particular specific research. The researcher should make this kind of decision based on a particular school of thought that he/she prefers, his/her personal affinities, but primarily based on the object and purpose of his/her research. The conclusion of the paper could be reduced to the notion that the concept of power of the state is far beyond the scope of realistic theoretical approach, and that it represents a key concept (and according to some scholars it is the most important concept in the IR), as well as that each of these prevailing comprehensions of power of the state has its own place in the theoretical conceptual apparatus of International relations and Security studies.