Sofia Rejected Constitutional Changes With Delayed Effect, and Mickoski Is Glad "the Dialogue Has Begun"

"In conversation, in dialogue, that is the beauty of democracy." That was Prime Minister Hristijan Mickoski's answer when asked where he sees the way out of the blockade with Bulgaria. Except that while Skopje is celebrating the dialogue, Sofia has already said publicly what it will not discuss.

The meeting of foreign ministers Timčo Mucunski and Velislava Petrova-Čamova was held in Sofia on Macedonia's initiative, following an idea from European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen. Mucunski described it as constructive and positive in spirit, but admitted that not one of the essential issues was resolved and that the positions remain far apart.

A day later, in front of Bulgarian MPs, Petrova-Čamova closed the room for interpretation. Bulgaria, she said, is not taking part in consultations on renegotiating the obligations Macedonia has taken on, and constitutional changes with delayed effect are not acceptable. Putting Bulgarians into the Constitution is, according to Sofia, the first necessary step. She also asked for a timeframe for fulfilling the obligations, and, in her words, was told that trust between the two countries must be built first.

The government in Skopje wants guarantees that fulfilling one condition will not open a new round of bilateral demands on history, identity or language. That is why Mickoski welcomed the European Commission's proposal in the document "Preparing for a Wider Union", which considers letting interim steps in negotiations, such as opening clusters, be decided by qualified majority, with unanimity kept only for final accession. The government sees a similarity with its own delayed-effect proposal. Sofia is cautious about qualified majority too.

So both ideas Skopje brought into the conversation were either rejected by Sofia or met with reservations. Asked whether there will be another meeting before the EU's December summit, Mickoski replied: "Let's let the process move along its natural path. Everything the public needs to know, it will know in time."

Dialogue beats silence, nobody disputes that. But when one side repeats its conditions from the podium of its own parliament the day after the meeting, the dialogue looks more like waiting. If the "natural path" of the process is measured in summits, the public has the right to ask: what exactly will we know in December that we don't know today?