Article 12 of the “Don’t Repeat History” series
Avoiding Balkan Escalation: Lessons from the 1990s Wars for Liberland’s Peace
Disclosure
I want to be fully upfront before I get started with this article. Liberland would not exist if Yugoslavia had not broken up and the border between Croatia and Serbia been resolved fully. I also want to say that while I do not think that any flare up in the Balkans will occur in the future we must respect those that were directly impacted as this only happened around thirty years ago. I want to also say that the Danube project is a great phase 1 I think. Phase 2 should expand to more of the Balkan Region (eg. Montenegro, Bosnia, and Albania), we must find ways to be friendly with our neighbors and I hope this article underscores this point.
The Free Republic of Liberland, founded in 2015 on a 7 km² patch of disputed Danube land between Croatia and Serbia, embodies libertarian ideals: minimal government, voluntary contributions, property rights, and blockchain transparency. By 2025, Liberland has stabilized governance with blockchain elections, launched a $30 million Danube revitalization plan, and has attracted over 700,000 citizenship applicants, poised for global growth from 1,400 citizens. Yet, its unrecognized status and Croatian aggression risk escalating regional tensions, echoing the 1990s Balkan Wars that shattered Yugoslavia through ethnic and territorial strife. To avoid repeating this bloodshed, Liberland must pursue voluntary diplomacy rooted in nonviolent communication (NVC), blockchain treaties, and fostering peace without compromise through economic investment. This approach, emphasizing cohesion and non-aggression, supports 2025’s infrastructure and diaspora goals while preserving the “To Live and Let Live” ethos.
The 1990s Balkan Wars unraveled Yugoslavia, a multi-ethnic federation, into a cauldron of nationalism and border disputes. Slovenia and Croatia’s 1991 independence declarations triggered violence, with Croatia’s war killing 20,000 and displacing 300,000. Bosnia’s 1992 secession escalated atrocities, including the Srebrenica genocide (8,000 Bosniak men and boys killed by Serb forces) and Sarajevo’s 1,425-day siege, claiming 100,000 lives overall. The Kosovo phase (1998–1999) ignited the powder keg: Albanian-majority Kosovo sought autonomy from Serbia, met with repression under Slobodan Milošević, displacing 1.5 million and sparking NATO’s 78-day bombing. The wars, fueled by unresolved grievances, economic collapse, and power vacuums, killed 130,000 and displaced 4 million, leaving the Balkans fractured. Serbia’s refusal to recognize Kosovo’s 2008 independence still festers, mirroring Croatia’s view of Liberland as an illegal provocation. The wars’ lesson warns Liberland: territorial disputes in volatile regions can spiral into bloodshed without voluntary de-escalation, especially amid ethnic sensitivities from the Yugoslav breakup.
Liberland’s 2025 context—blockchain elections, the Danube plan, and e-residency surge—demands proactive peacebuilding to avoid a Balkan flashpoint. Croatian patrols and detentions of Liberland activists echo Serbia’s pre-1999 Kosovo control, where border ambiguities fueled repression. As diaspora villages like ARK in Serbia expand, regional powers (EU, NATO) could intervene if tensions boil, exploiting divisions as in Yugoslavia. Coercive alliances, like NATO’s bombing, contradict Liberland’s ethos; instead, voluntary diplomacy through NVC and blockchain treaties offers a path to peace. NVC, emphasizing empathy and mutual needs, builds understanding without force, while blockchain codifies non-binding agreements, ensuring transparency and sovereignty.
NVC, a framework of empathetic dialogue, resolves conflicts by identifying shared interests, as in Liberland’s 2025 diplomatic push. For example, Croatia’s security concerns (e.g., migration) can be addressed collaboratively—Liberland offers blockchain tracking for border activities—without territorial concessions. Blockchain treaties automate terms (e.g., cultural exchanges, trade access) via smart contracts, like wampum belts in the Iroquois Confederacy (Article 6), but with immutability to prevent exploitation. Citizens can opt into approving treaties via blockchain, something no other country in the world does. Civics modules (Article 9), teaching the Balkan Wars’ escalation, ensure e-residents and citizens prioritize peace, fostering cohesion. Social incentives—prestige or blockchain credits for diplomatic participation—encourage engagement, mirroring DAO trusts (Article 3) and CLTs (Article 5), unifying without coercion.
Diplomacy through economic investment is perhaps the best path forward, showing that Liberland is and can be an excellent neighbor to have good relations with based on the business potential that can be brought in as seen in the Danube Plan. When mutual needs are provided anything is possible but it must be tactfully and strategically done. Economic investment like the Danube Plan helps everyone not just Liberland as the plan focuses growth in Croatia and Serbia primarily not internally in Liberland, using such economic tools for trade and investment is the best diplomatic tool Liberland has. With massive support in the fintech, crypto sector Liberland does have potential sway with these companies to induce these companies to invest in the Danube region and what better way to receive such international recognition than by diplomacy through economic investment.
This approach addresses the wars’ flaws. Yugoslavia’s factions ignored mutual needs, prolonging violence; NVC, trade by economic investment, and blockchain treaties identify common ground, like joint Danube eco-projects. As e-residency scales to hundreds of thousands potentially, civics modules promote a righteous populace, avoiding the uninformed chaos of Athens (Article 7). Croatian disruptions necessitate digital diplomacy; blockchain platforms enable global negotiations, complementing diaspora outposts (Article 5). Sunset clauses on treaty terms—expiring after 5–10 years unless renewed—keep alliances adaptable, preventing fascist-style entanglements. Blockchain automation reduces costs, unlike bureaucratic summits, scaling for a global e-citizenry.
In practice, this supports Liberland’s 2025 goals. The $30 million Danube plan can fund cross-border initiatives with Serbia and Croatia, codified in treaties to de-escalate Croatian concerns, unlike Yugoslavia’s border wars. E-residency growth benefits from NVC in forums (Article 7), ensuring diverse voices unite for peace. Informal outposts, managed by DAO-CLTs (Article 5), can host treaty talks, ensuring community-driven diplomacy. This leverages DAOs’ potential, as my Article 6 appendix stresses, for automated arbitration and fiduciary responsibility, preventing cultural collapse from external strife.
Critics may argue non-binding diplomacy lacks enforcement, but it enhances freedom by prioritizing consent over force. Unlike coercive alliances, it prevents overreach, as in the Balkan proxy wars. Without it, Liberland risks Yugoslavia’s fate: internal unity shattered by external strings. By encouraging NVC, economic investment, blockchain treaties, Liberland builds principled partners, supporting its crypto-economy and diaspora growth.
By learning from the 1990s Balkan Wars’ escalation, Liberland can build a voluntary diplomatic system. Blockchain treaties, economic investment, and NVC, backed by social incentives and transparency, ensure sovereignty, supporting 2025’s elections, Danube plan, and e-residency surge. This makes Liberland a beacon of principled peace, not a cautionary tale of bloodshed.