Presidential elections were held on April 24 and May 8, 2024, in North Macedonia and Law Professor Biljana Vankovska, who represented the leftist party Levica as presidential candidate, was among the seven candidates running for the largely ceremonial position in this Balkan country. The right-wing opposition VMRO-DPMNE won the presidential elections in the second round as Gordana Siljanovska-Davkova, a 70-year-old law professor, won the presidency with approximately 65 percent of the vote taking the chair of the Speaker of the Parliament while the government is headed by party leader Hristijan Mickoski.

“The novelty in my knowledge is how huge is the significance of the political economy of elections. I have an impression that many businesses, small or big, live out of elections. Or elections are infusion for many actors, of course paid by tax-payers money,” Professor Vankovska told Albanian Daily News in an exclusive interview, shedding light on her experience as one of the presidential candidates.  “Sadly, one can hardly talk about “power of the people” or fight for social justice in a clientelistic ‘captured state’. Also, voters are hostages of dominant narratives full of unrealistic expectations and fear mongering. So at the end, they remain loyal to the well-known parties as in the Stockholm syndrome story,” she said. “One could rightly say that I am politically biased now, after my first political experience. But I am back to academia and my professional mind as well as the experience of 30 years back as a voter in Macedonia tells me that everything changed and yet nothing new is in the cards.”

Touching upon the name change of the country the Professor said that the first official act of the president elect was swearing in, and president Siljanovska-Davkova surprised the public and upset Athens and Brussels by saying “only Macedonia”. “But the fact that Mickoski and his government colleagues swore in saying North Macedonia speaks of a premeditated political campaign trick,” Ms. Vankovska pointed out.

Asked about the EU's enlargement process towards the Western Balkans under the new bureaucracy in Brussels, Professor Vankovska noted that the bloc has changed dramatically since the beginning of the Ukraine war (if not before). “The new bureaucracy (led by the same woman) thinks of more war rather than peace and development. The economic and social trends go downwards. The recent turn to the right is nothing strange,” she said, adding that the old EU enlargement policy of reforms, democratization and Europeanization is over and it’s all about geopolitics now!

The Professor is of the opinion that the Western grip is still strong and does not allow many changes in terms of foreign policy shifts and seeking alternatives by WB countries, but the poverty and crisis may influence both the people and elites to start looking to the new world, which is now multipolar. “Western hegemony is in decline, as well as the economic power. I see nothing wrong in countries seeking freedom of choice, of partners and cooperation instead of listening to the commands from the pro-war circles. The Balkans suffered enough, and does not need more military investments. This is an ongoing process in a rapidly changing world. Honestly, I am very much concerned not with the failure to join the EU but rather with the global developments that may lead toward nuclear holocaust,” former candidate in presidential elections in North Macedonia and Law Professor Biljana Vankovska said in the following interview:  

Albanian Daily News: Prof. Vankovska, you have been teaching political science and international relations, in addition to peace studies, almost all your professional life. However, to a great surprise of many in your country, you appeared as one of the official candidates at the presidential elections. From today’s perspective, how do you see electoral democracy as such? Have you learned something new, something that you did not know before despite your theoretical knowledge?

Presidential candidate Prof. Biljana Vankovska: Indeed, I surprised myself, first of all. I had had no plan to get involved into political competition whatsoever (as I am satisfied with my long-term engagement as a public intellectual and opinion maker). But when the invitation came from a left-wing political party, a leftist like me faced a dilemma: should I become a salon intellectual detached from real life or should I try to join the political battle for beliefs and values I cherish my entire adult life. In the end, I am proud to have got respectable public support twice: once during collection of signatures (as a prerequisite for becoming a candidate) and then during Election Day. Thus I got an opportunity to publicly spell out my ideological and political views that are quite uncommon on the scene.

I always teach my students to differentiate between what things should be in democracy and what they really are in real political life. So I was not surprised to confirm many things that take place behind the scene or in the “grey zone”. The system is designed for the so called big political parties and they have ‘occupied’ the media and other public spaces as well as the minds of the people. It is almost a mission impossible to promote ideas that go out of the mainstream. The novelty in my knowledge is on how huge is the significance of the political economy of elections. I have an impression that many businesses, small or big, live out of elections. Or elections are infusion for many actors, of course paid by tax-payers money. I’ll give you just banal examples, such as the rise of the rents in the city center where all parties prefer to open their headquarters and offices. The same applies to PR firms, media, print-houses, designers, etc. And sadly, one can hardly talk about “power of the people” or fight for social justice in a clientelistic ‘captured state’. Also, voters are hostages of dominant narratives full of unrealistic expectations and fear mongering. So at the end, they remain loyal to the well-known parties as in the Stockholm syndrome story.   

- Now when the presidential and parliamentary elections are over and new political constellations are established, how do you see your country’s future? At a first sight it seems as if the opposition won ? great victory, which assumes high legitimacy. The same applies to the new president of the Republic. Do you expect a new form of politics and more positive changes?

- One could rightly say that I am politically biased now, after my first political experience. But I am back to academia and my professional mind as well as the experience of 30 years back as a voter in Macedonia tells me that everything changed and yet nothing new is in the cards. Politically speaking, the major change is the dethronement of DUI after two decades of being not only a part of the ruling coalitions but also a king-maker. It’s good to see that Ahmeti and his party colleagues accepted the reality and defeat in a rather peaceful manner (despite the rhetoric at the beginning). The second big change is the unbelievable defeat of the Social Democrats. The voters indeed punished not only the government led by Dimitar Kovacevski but also his predecessor (Zoran Zaev). VMRO-DPMNE won big! Yet according to the political practice, Hristijan Mickoski invited the Albanian opposition (the conglomerate of a few parties from the Albanian block under the name VLEN), and even another social-democratic center-left party ZNAM in order to make a stronger and more stable government. What worries me at the very beginning of this newly formed governing coalition (of coalitions) is the triumphalist attitude (especially of VMRO-DPMNE), and the not very changed way of governing. For instance, this is one of the biggest governments in our history – like some African countries. Then the urge to prove very quick and successful makes them rush into a new wave of deepening the country’s debt and selling out natural resources to foreign companies (with no real economic benefit for the citizens).

- The question of the change of the name of North Macedonia played a significant role during the election campaign of VMRO-DPMNE. How important is that issue for the Macedonian public? Do you foresee any changes in the regional dynamics especially with Athens and Sofia?

- Undoubtedly, the name change is still a highly emotionally charged issue. VMRO-DPMNE did everything to be seen as a patriotic force. The regular chanting “Never North, only Macedonia” was understood by many voters as a promise that once in power they will revise or terminate the Prespa Agreement. The first official act of the president elect was swearing in, and president Siljanovska-Davkova surprised the public and upset Athens and Brussels by saying “only Macedonia”. But the fact that Mickoski and his government colleagues swore in saying North Macedonia speaks of a premeditated political campaign trick. The old sentence of the Bulgarian analyst Ivan Krastev still rings true: our governments make love to the people but are loyal to the international community. Personally I see a politics of continuity when it comes to regional and foreign relations because there is no Macedonian national (and foreign) policy, while the politicians do not keep their promises. Many voters feel betrayed and disappointed but VMRO-DPMNE is now singing the same refrain like SDSM before: the name is not going to pay your bills and feed your family, we have to be realistic. But there is nothing realistic about sticking to the same narrative that EU membership will soon resolve all existential problems.

- What do you think of the EU's enlargement process towards WB under the new bureaucracy in Brussels when it is known that even in the past that process was disliked by some countries?

- The EU has changed dramatically since the beginning of the Ukraine war (if not before). The new bureaucracy (led by the same woman) thinks of more war rather than peace and development. The economic and social trends go downwards. The recent turn to the right is nothing strange. The right-wing leaning is due to rising xenophobia, lack of social consensus, wrong policies and investments in the military-industrial complex. See, for instance, what’s going on with agriculture in the EU. Denmark is to introduce a tax on livestock carbon dioxide emissions from 2030. This is going to be followed by other EU member-states. The allegedly green policy is a class-based policy because it discriminates against the small producers, and hardworking people who have been protesting for years now. Under such circumstances, another silly thing is the decision to start negotiations with Ukraine – a country involved in an endless war, led by a politician who does not want to go on elections and a country with deepening corruption and immigration. How should Macedonia and Albania feel now? Especially Albania that suffers collateral damage due to Macedonia’s problems with the neighbors which have nothing to do with Copenhagen criteria. Let me be blunt: the old EU enlargement policy of reforms, democratization and Europeanization is over. It’s all about geopolitics now!

- Will the WB countries wait and see or will they follow the example of Serbia which in any way is staying on two chairs and the Belgrade-Moscow-Beijing and why not North Korea is more vivid...

- The Western grip is still strong and does not allow many changes in terms of foreign policy shifts and seeking alternatives, but the poverty and crisis may influence both the people and elites to start looking to the new world, which is now multipolar. Western hegemony is in decline, as well as economic power. I see nothing wrong in countries seeking freedom of choice, of partners and cooperation instead of listening to the commands from the pro-war circles. The Balkans suffered enough, and does not need more military investments. This is an ongoing process in a rapidly changing world. Honestly, I am very much concerned not with the failure to join the EU but rather with the global developments that may lead toward nuclear holocaust.  

- Do you see any way that WB countries make up their minds and think as a region regarding cooperation leaving behind the bitter past?

- The answer is already clear in your question. The only way ahead is leaving the bitter past behind (which does not assume oblivion and leaving behind the lessons learned from the bloody wars), and going in the future together. The Balkans is actually a small region, our countries would be much better off with regional perspectives with no borders and obstacles, revanchist attitudes and nationalism. As a leftist, of course, I believe in internationalism, solidarity and class unity across the frontiers imposed by elites and colonial powers.