PANEL DISCUSSION 2025

Boris BRATINA:
THE CONCEPT OF SOVEREIGNTY IS RETURNING AS A KEY THEME OF OUR TIME

Thank you very much. 

First, I have to say that I am very happy to be in this city in which, let us say, 171 years ago, the great anthem 'Hey, Slavs' was played for the first time. I am very honoured by this. It is both an honour and a responsibility to address this gathering, dedicated to the questions that shape not only institutions, but the very meaning of our coexistence in the modern world, in the age of accelerating digital transformation, communications, and interdependence. The concept of sovereignty has re-emerged on the defining issues of our time.

For centuries, sovereignty has been understood as a cornerstone of international order, the right and the duty of each state to make decisions within its own borders, guided by the will of its citizens and the values of their community. Yet today, under the growing weight of globalism, this concept is being redefined, sometimes even diminished, in the name of integration and efficiency, or universal governance. We are told that sovereignty is outdated, that individuality among nations is an obstacle to progress. But can there be genuine cooperation without genuine independence? Can we speak of equality among nations if the distinct voice of each is replaced by a single tone dictated by supranational centres of power? Let us be clear: integration should not mean assimilation. The idea of a united world must not be confused with a world stripped of diversity.

The very essence of international cooperation lies in unity in diversity, in recognising that nations, like people, are different, and that these differences enrich, not endanger, our collective future. The Charter of the United Nations, adopted in 1945, provides enduring guidance in this regard. It affirms, among its founding principles, the sovereign equality of all its members, the obligation to refrain from interference in the internal affairs of any state, and the commitment to resolve disputes by peaceful means. These are not abstract ideals. They are the foundation of a truly pluralistic and balanced international system, one where dialogue replaces domination and respect replaces pressure. But we have a lot of pressure. When these principles are respected, global governance can coexist with national freedom. When they are ignored, the result is not harmony, but hierarchy – a world where decisions are made by the few and imposed upon the many.

The digital era adds another layer to this challenge. Information today transcends borders faster than any law or institution can follow. The control of data, digital infrastructure, and communications platforms has become a new dimension of sovereignty – a digital sovereignty, if you will. It is not only idealism; it is the responsible exercise of self-determination in the information age. The question before us is not whether nations should cooperate. They must. The question is how they should cooperate, and on what terms, for partnership can only exist between equals.

The erosion of sovereignty under the banner of globalism risks transforming cooperation into dependence and participation into obedience. At the same time, we must also ask ourselves: what kind of sovereignty do we defend? Is it a sovereignty that upholds human dignity and learns from the lessons of history, or one that selectively recalls the past to justify new divisions? The integrity of our principles depends on this distinction. In recent years, we have witnessed growing voices across the world calling for a return to authenticity, for societies to reclaim their right to define themselves according to their own traditions, values, and aspirations. This awakening reflects not isolation, but a search for balance, a recognition that progress cannot be built on the erasure of identity.

Even within the Western world, there is a visible cultural reflection, a recognition that the strength of nations once lay in the richness of their philosophies, their literature, and their moral foundations. This renewed introspection gives hope that a global conversation about sovereignty and identity is not one of regression, but of renaissance, a rediscovery of meaning in the age of abstraction. Distinguished colleagues, our task, therefore, is not to reject cooperation, but to redefine it; not to turn away from the world, but to build a multipolar world where every nation stands upright, not as a subject, but as a partner.

A world where decisions affecting all are not made by a few, and where respect for the particular is understood as the basis of universal peace. In defending sovereignty, we defend diversity. In defending diversity, we defend humanity itself. The path forward must be one of equilibrium between integration and interdependence, between universality and uniqueness, between the global and the national. Let us remember that the legitimacy of every international order depends on its ability to reflect the will and identity of those who compose it. Supranational institutions have value only insofar as they respect the sovereignty from which they derive their authority.

As we stand at the crossroads of technological revolution and geopolitical realignment, we must reaffirm that the future belongs not to uniformity, but to harmony – to a world where nations cooperate without losing themselves, and communicate without surrendering their voice. Ladies and gentlemen, sovereignty is not a relic of the past. It is the guarantor of the future. It is the condition under which true freedom, dialogue, and peace can exist. Let us therefore renew our commitment to a pluralistic, balanced, and respectful international order, one that honours the dignity of every nation and the right of every people to shape their destiny in accordance with their values. And one more thing: find your souls and find your sovereignty. Thank you.