. But at the same time, it continued to build the North Stream and the EU did not even try to prevent it. [Proroković, 2018. P. 702].

Similar is the case with NATO, which is a key instrument in securing the US position in the Balkans. The US aggressive policy is based on the securitization of the Russian issue as well as the new attitude of the Donald Trump administration towards acute crises in the Middle East. In this context, the Balkan NATO members are forced to following the US, establishing a restrictive policy towards Russia and supporting Washington’s initiatives in the Middle East, which is not usually in their national interest. [Proroković, 2018a. P. 86–87].

2. Conclusion: Perspectives and Challenges

In contrast to the Western powers, which show a deficit of “optimistic initiatives” or constantly make political demands, the Chinese approach is different. China presents itself as an ambitious and constructive partner. And more importantly for “Balkan Stabilitocracies”, it does not require any political concessions11. This is probably the reason for China’s great success. China is firmly committed to realizing the geo-economic goals of the BRI and is taking a number of initiatives in the Balkans. To some extent, it is even noticeable that „the number and intensity of China’s economic and political initiatives in the Balkans since 2013 are utterly disproportionate to the size of the markets and the foreign trade importance of these countries to China.” [Proroković, 2016. P. 54–55]. Therefore, it can be concluded that China is projecting the pace and scope of its presence in the region. China has become a serious challenger to the US and EU in the Balkans. Therefore, China is an actor who will become more involved in regional political and security issues in the future.

However, the West’s advantage in the Balkans is characterized by its deep institutional presence (EU and/or NATO membership) and widespread economic ties (which are completely disproportionate, so that the export of the Balkan countries is predominantly EU oriented). Given that the EU and NATO have recognized China as a geopolitical challenger and Chinfluence as a threat, it is undoubted that they will use institutional mechanisms and economic leverage to attempt to limit or squeeze China out of the Balkans.

From the perspective of the ten-year development of relations between China and the Balkan countries, this format has a perspective. At the same time, looking at the long-term interests of the EU and NATO, there are many challenges ahead.

References

Bastian J. The potential for growth through Chinese infrastructure investments in Central and South-Eastern Europe along the ʼBalkan Silk Roadʼ. Athens // London: Report prepared by Dr Jens Bastian for the European Bank for Reconstruction and Development (with funding from the Central European Initiative), July 2017. P. 62. (in English)

Blanchard Jean-Marc F. and Colin F. The Geopolitics of China’s Maritime Silk RoadInitiative // Geopolitics, 2017. 22 (2), 2017. Р. 223–245. (in English)

Dimitrijevíc D. and Huang Ping (Eds.). Initiatives of the ‘New Silk Road’ – Achievements and Challenges. Belgrade: Institute of International Politics and Economics, 2017. P. 529. (in English)

Ghiasy R. and Fei Su, Saalman L. The 21 st Century Maritime Silk Road: Security implications and ways forward for the European Union. Stockholm: Stockholm International Peace Research Institute – Friedrich Ebert Stiftung, 2018. P. 63. (in English)