An Analysis of the Dispute over Chapters 23 and 24, Constitutional Amendments, and the Bulgarian Veto
Abstract
This paper analyzes the geopolitical dispute surrounding North Macedonia’s Action Plan for minority rights, originally designed as a technical EU accession requirement but transformed into a political instrument. While the plan covers 27 communities equally, Bulgaria’s veto links it to identity and constitutional debates, creating asymmetry in negotiations. The study highlights four structural weaknesses: concentrated political risk, asymmetry between Bulgarian demands and practice, EU rules without safeguards, and weak minority representation. It concludes that separating technical obligations from geopolitical disputes and ensuring minority participation are essential for reducing deadlock and preserving the credibility of European integration.