Croatia began its EU membership campaign with discussions in 2005, and hopes to gain full status as a member by 2011. These efforts were stymied in 2008 when Slovenia blocked the opening of further accession chapters to Croatia on regional policy and the co-ordination of structural instruments; the free movement of capital; the environment; and justice. Slovenia used her power of veto as a conduit to resolving the 18-year disputes with Croatia which include fishing rights, land and sea borders. Croatia has ignited Slovenia’s fury by submitting maps to Brussels which the latter has stated prejudge the two countries’ borders. These disagreements began after both countries declared their independence from the former Republic of Yugoslavia in 1991.

An area of contention is the Bay of Piran which Slovenia asserts is preventing its people from gaining direct access to international waters, a claim which Croatia’s chief accession negotiator, Vladimir Drobnjak has described as “without merit”.

Croatia’s decision in 2008 to suspend the implementation of the Protected Ecological Fishery Zone to EU members, following a request from the European Commission, was viewed as an initiative to maintain cordial relations with existing EU members Slovenia and Italy.

The Commission has taken the view that this conflict is a bilateral matter and cannot form part of Croatia’s membership negotiations. Although the Commission aims to uphold its position of neutrality (by stating that this border disagreement should not delay Croatia’s membership bid) it is inadvertently accusing Slovenia of unfairly obstructing Croatia’s EU ambitions.

Croatia believes that this dispute should be resolved by referring it to the International Court of Justice, however, Slovenia has stated that it is not prepared to follow this route. Both Croatia and Slovenia have now accepted the proposal by the European Union for a mediation group, tasked with the aim of resolving the existing dispute. The mediation group will be led by Finland’s former President Martti Ahtisaari. Croatia was initially apprehensive about this proposal but agreed to it on the 9thMarch 2009, on a proviso that the disagreement would be eventually settled in the International Court of Justice. Slovenia has maintained her reluctance at taking the dispute to The Hague.

This decision by the EU to intervene in bilateral conflicts between Member States and aspiring members, places the Union in a compromising position as the degree to which mediation progresses – and the decisions reached – will invariably set a precedent in future negotiations between candidates and Member States. Although relations between Croatia and Slovenia have been amicable, there is a plausible risk that this could change irrespective of the denouement.

The Commission must now decide on the extent to which they will intervene in territorial disputes between EU Member States and countries with EU aspirations in the future. The Croat-Slovene disagreement is matched by friction between Greece and Macedonia, and Cyprus and Turkey – where Member States are deciding the fate of candidate countries with whom they have outstanding grievances.

It can be argued that EU overtures to Croatia and Slovenia may be due to the fact that these two countries have the potential to solve the Lisbon Treaty dilemma. With four Member States yet to sign the Treaty, namely Poland, Germany, the Czech Republic and Ireland, there is a chance that Lisbon will not be ratified in 2009 thus paving the way for the Treaty to be integrated into Croatia’s accession treaty. In order to ensure that this scenario remains a viable option, Slovenia must lift her veto so that Croatia can complete all accession negotiations by the end of 2009.