(Long thread)
The reasons why and how Balkan countries enter NATO are never discussed in the Western press. Even their membership is not mentioned.
Here are the reasons.
Montenegro has been run for 35y by the same (let's be polite) autocrat.He was first a Serbian nationalist but
in the past 20y has developed great affinity for democracy & the USA. Some people say that the affinity is due to his being involved in the smuggling of cigarettes and perhaps even of some more serious Colombian wares. Good businessman he has became very rich. If he does not do
what the US tells him to, he might end like Noriega or the former president of Honduras who was just arrested, by the USA, on similar charges, two days ago. So MNE president wants to be nice and join NATO. Much better to go to fancy conferences than to be in jail.
Macedonia joined because it faces a split country between Macedonians and Albanians. In the case a greater Albania being created which would include all territories w/an Albanian majority (Albania,Kosovo) it could technically include a half of Macedonia too with the Alb majority.
But if Macedonia is in NATO the change of borders would be very difficult. So the country is unlikely to break up.
Now,
Montenegro joined w/o a popular referendum which would have (polls were saying) gone the wrong way. So, they decided to skip it. People would not mind.
Macedonia joined with a referendum with a bizarre Q: there was no clear pro- or anti-NATO vote, but only a vote in favor *jointly* for 1 NATO, 2 EU, 3 Agreement w/Greece. So, you had to be for or against *all*. Very clever. They could have added:
4 Do you love your parents? NATO would have then gained 100% of the vote.
The turnout was 36% of the eligible voters.
That's how NATO expands in the Balkans.

• • •

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh
 

Keep Current with Branko Milanovic

Branko Milanovic Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!

PDF

Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video
  1. Follow @ThreadReaderApp to mention us!

  2. From a Twitter thread mention us with a keyword "unroll"
@threadreaderapp unroll

Practice here first or read more on our help page!

More from @BrankoMilan

Feb 16
It seems that some people do not like to read what I wrote re. Canadian draconian punishment of protesters, but rather imagine things.
1 Protests whose objective is to make life for majority miserable cannot be allowed. Police normally disperses them and arrests the most violent.
2 But seizing money accounts of protesters imposes collective punishment on their families. It is an entirely unusual and very dangerous punishment. Children are not responsible for actions of parents; spouses for that of their partners.
3 Stating that the protest is illegal and hence that any measures are acceptable is wrong and ignorant. In most countries the protests that one would read about in Canadian newspapers are also "illegal"
Read 4 tweets
Feb 10
Stalin's Russia and Maoist China are often considered "totalitarian". But in one insufficiently researched area they followed entirely different policies.
From the few data that we have, we know that Stalin's USSR (say, around 1935) had a fairly high degree of inequality.
Massive use of Taylorism & piecework rewards led to large wage differences. Stakhanovists were paid highly, so much so that Trotsky thought they might create a "workers' aristocracy". Govt and party top cadres had substantial perks. (Inequality decreased significantly after 1953)
But Maoist China went the other way: equalization of wages, abhorrence of material incentives. This was the very opposite from the practice of "payment according to output" & material incentive which is the essence of Taylorism.
Read 4 tweets
Feb 6
"But the struggle between the first set of billionaires, many of whom Westerners, who enriched themselves under Yeltsin, and were unhappy from being excluded from the next division of the spoils, and the second set of billionaires, the Putin’s “team”,
continues to this day, not only in Russia but across the world. Many of the first group have used millions that they have stolen from Russia to set a number of political think-tanks whose main role is to fight Putin,
under the pretext of transparency and democracy, but in reality in the hope that they would again be able to exploit the mineral resources. Putin’s team in order to stay in power applied the same rules:
Read 4 tweets
Feb 3
Some slides from today's discussion on China at Kiel Institute for the World Economy.
The Chinese elite (top 5%) moved from being associated with the government to being composed mostly of businessmen and professionals.
Educational level of the elite increased substantially: from only 12% with university education in 1988 to 44% in 2013.
The share of CPC members among the top 5% and the top 1% decreased.
Read 5 tweets
Jan 24
The problem is as follows. Since the end of communism, Western envoys in EE have behaved like Roman governors in conquered lands. In normal diplomacy, foreign representatives do not comment on domestic devt's. The French ambassador in the US does not comment on Georgia elections.
The change in behavior is due also to EEuropeans who have accepted this subaltern position of limited sovereignty. In part, because they were used to it, in part b/c they were at loggerhead with others around them, in part b/c they were not sufficiently aware of it.
And many countries have become members of the EU which obviously limits their domestic sovereignty. So the line btw domestic & foreign affairs became blurred.
But this attitude is against the rules of international conduct and formal equality of states.
Read 4 tweets
Jan 21
The topic called "income distribution" is used for very different things.
First, Blinder-type neoclassical models with agents who know their entire future, incl. their wages, discount rates, preferences etc. With zero real data. No social classes, no politics. No nothing.
Second, Staffian and Kaldorian abstract functional distributions which are just a wage/profit ratios in a theoretical model. With no real data, except as illustrations. Very vague relation to reality (as No 1 models).
Third, purely empirical exercises a la Atkinson that have lots of data but no underlying economic or political story (no parties, strikes, wars, technological change).
Read 5 tweets

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!


This site is made by just two indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3/month or $30/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Don't want to be a Premium member but still want to support us?

Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal

Or Donate anonymously using crypto!

Ethereum

0xfe58350B80634f60Fa6Dc149a72b4DFbc17D341E copy

Bitcoin

3ATGMxNzCUFzxpMCHL5sWSt4DVtS8UqXpi copy

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us on Twitter!

:(