Transition Studies Review

, Volume 18, Issue 3, pp 570–585 | Cite as

Picking Winners? Evidence on NATO’s Enlargement Strategy

  • Rainer SchweickertEmail author
  • Inna Melnykovska
  • Hanno Heitmann
International Order, Security and Strategic Studies


The effectiveness of NATO conditionality for institutional reforms is highly controversial. Some papers argue that any effect this conditionality might have had may be due to endogeneity effects, i.e. NATO may have picked the winners. We argue that this is not the case. First, NATO-Mazedonia relations provide a case in point. Macedonia was granted entry into the Membership Action Plan (MAP) in 1999 due to country’s strategic importance. Only after the Ohrid agreement, effective conditionality set in and marked a switch in NATO strategy from security only towards institution building. Second, this is supported by econometric evidence based on panel data. An event study reveals that entry into NATO’s accession process was mainly driven by neighbourhood and good relations with the West. We conclude that empirical evidence clearly supports a stronger role of NATO’s political agenda, i.e., low entry barriers but strict accession conditionality.


International organization European integration Institutional development Accession incentives Regional security 

JEL Classifications

F52 F53 F59 


  1. Angelov A (2004) The policy of NATO conditionality: the cases of Bulgaria and Romania.—Journal of Foreign Policy of Moldova (4)Google Scholar
  2. Atanasov P (2006a) Macedonia and EU Integration: Common Problems and Common Goals. In: Denisa Kostovicova and Vesna Bojicic-Dzelilovic. Austrian Presidency of the EU: Regional Approaches to the Balkans.: Center for the Study of Global Governance ViennaGoogle Scholar
  3. Atanasov P (2006b) The Progress of the “Ohrid process” in Macedonia. In: Jean-Jacque de Dardel, Gustav Gustenau, Plamen Pantev (eds) Post-Conflict Rehabilitation. Lessons from South East Europe and Strategic Consequences for the Euro-Atlantic Community. National Defence Academy and Bureau for Security Policy at the Austrian Ministry of Defence in co-operation with PfP Consortium of Defence Academies and Security Studies Institutes, Vienna and Sofia, pp 83–91Google Scholar
  4. Boonstra J (2005) Macedonia’ y ‘Serbia and Montenegro. In: David Greenwood The Western Balkans Candidates for NATO Membership and Partnership. CESS Harmonie Paper No. 18:61–76Google Scholar
  5. Box-Steffensmeier JM, Bradford JS (2004) Event history modeling: a guide for social scientists. University Press, CambridgeCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Chivvis CS (2008) The making of Macedonia. Survival 50(2):141–162CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Clément S (1997) Conflict prevention in the Balkans: case studies of Kosovo and the FYR of Macedonia. EU-ISS Chaillot Paper (30)Google Scholar
  8. Cox D (1972) Regression models and life tables. J R Stat Soc B 34:187–220Google Scholar
  9. Dimitrov N (2006) Macedonia and NATO: evolving partnership. CROSSROADS Macedonian Foreign Policy J (1):113–120Google Scholar
  10. Drent M, Greenwood D, Huisman S, Volten P (2001) Organising National Defence for NATO Membership. The Unexamined Dimension of Aspirants’ Readiness for Entry. Harmonie Paper 15. The Centre for European Security Studies, Groningen, The NetherlandsGoogle Scholar
  11. Eiff H (2007) On NATO and Macedonia—a Mission in Skopje 1999–2001. Crossroads Macedonian J Foreign Policy 1(3):82–90Google Scholar
  12. Epstein R (2005) NATO enlargement and the spread of democracy: evidence and expectations. Secur Stud 14(1):63–105CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Gawrich A, Melnykovska I, Schweickert R (2010) Neighbourhood Europeanisation through ENP—the case of Ukraine. J Common Mark Stud 48(5):1209–1235CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. NATO Parliamentary Assembly (2005) Visit to the FYR OF Macedonia and to Kosovo by the Sub-Committee on Future Security and Defence Capabilities, 18–22 April 2005.
  15. Gibler DM, Sewell JA (2006) External threat and democracy: the role of NATO revisited. J Peace Res 43(4):413–431CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Gligorov K (2006) 15 Years of Independent Republic of Macedonia Reflections and Prospects. CROSSROADS Macedonian Foreign Policy J 1:7–10Google Scholar
  17. Grambsch PM, Therneau TM (1994) Proportional hazards tests and diagnostics based on weighted residuals. Biometrika 81:515–526CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Hislope R (2002) Organized crime in a disorganized state - How corruption contributed to Macedonia’s mini-war. Problems of Post-Communism 49(3):33–41Google Scholar
  19. ICG (1999) Macedonia:Towards Destabilisation? The Kosovo crisis takes its toll on Macedonia. ICG (International Crisis Group) Report 67Google Scholar
  20. ICG (2002) Moving Macedonia towards self-sufficiency: a new approach for NATO and the EU. Balkans Report No. 135: International Crisis Group. Skopje/BrusselsGoogle Scholar
  21. Jureković P, Malek M, Reiter E, Sandrisser W (1999) The effects of NATO and EU-Enlargement. Informationen zur Sicherheitspolitik. Landesverteidigungsakademie (LVAk) und Büro für SicherheitspolitikGoogle Scholar
  22. Melnykovska I, Schweickert R (2009) Europäisierungsmotor—die NATO und die Ukraine. Osteuropa 59(9):49–64Google Scholar
  23. Melnykovska I, Schweickert R (2011) NATO as an External Driver of Institutional Change in Post Communist Countries. Def Peace Econ 22(3):279–297CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Muhic F (2001) Comment: the devil of perversity. balkan crisis report 246, Institute for War and Peace ReportingGoogle Scholar
  25. NATO (1998) Luxemburg Declaration; available at:
  26. Reiter D (2001) Why NATO Enlargement Does Not Spread Democracy. Int Secur 25(4):41–67CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Rupnik J (2000) Eastern Europe: the international context. J Democr 11(2):115–129Google Scholar
  28. Schweickert R, Melnykovska I, Belke A, Bordon I (2011) Prospective NATO or EU Membership and Institutional Change in Transition Countries. Economics of transition.
  29. UK Parliament (2005) Council joint action appointing the European Union Special Representative in the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Committee on European Scrutiny Fifth Report; available at:
  30. Vankovska B (2001) Civil-Military Relations in Macedonia. In: Plamen Pantev: Civil-Military relations in South-East Europe A Survey of the National Perspectives and of the Adaptation Process to the Partnership for Peace Standards. Vienna: Institut für Internationale Friedenssicherung, Vienna Institute for Security and International Studies, Sofia in Co-operation with the PfP-Consortium. National Defence Academy ViennaGoogle Scholar
  31. Waterman H, Zagorcheva D, Reiter D (2001) NATO and Democracy. Intern Secur 26(3):221–235CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Yusufi I (2000) Partnership for peace and the republic of Macedonia. NATO Fellowship Report. NATO Defence College, RomeGoogle Scholar
  33. Yusufi I (2004) Security Governance. Security sector reform in Southeast Europe. International Policy Fellowship Policy Paper: Center for Policy Studies. BudapestGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  • Rainer Schweickert
    • 1
    Email author
  • Inna Melnykovska
    • 2
  • Hanno Heitmann
    • 1
  1. 1.Kiel Institute for the World EconomyKielGermany
  2. 2.Institute for Social SciencesChristian-Albrechts-University, Kiel and Institute for East-European Studies, Free UniversityBerlinGermany

Personalised recommendations