E. VENIZELOS: At today’s Foreign Affairs Council, we began with a discussion of the EU-Russia Summit Meeting and the current developments in Bosnia-Herzegovina. We then dedicated a lot of time during a long working luncheon to the situation in Ukraine and Eastern Neighbourhood issues in general. And this was worked up into a Text of Conclusions on Ukraine that sets out the Council’s positions.
In my intervention on Ukraine, I noted five basic points:
That, given that our basic stance is a stance of principles, we need to send very clear and strong messages, not just with regard to Democracy and human rights, but also with regard to the unity and territorial integrity of Ukraine.
Second, given that our stance derives from solidarity with and respect for the Ukrainian people, we cannot talk about sanctions or make threats regarding sanctions. We need to strengthen the EU’s diplomatic credibility and effectiveness, so that we can overcome the crisis and truly help the citizens and society.
Third, in any case, we must draw up and offer a comprehensive economic assistance package for Ukraine. We cannot say that our assistance is limited and that the solution is recourse to the IMF, because this would be accompanied by measures, by a conditionality, by repercussions for Ukrainian society. The question is, Since we are in a period of crisis, who will take the decision and who has the legitimacy to take the decision for such a relationship?
The fourth point concerns Ukraine’s European perspective, which many stress. We stress it too, but the European perspective is a geopolitical approach. It is a complete strategy. Ukraine, like other Eastern Neighbourhood countries, is part of the European continent. At some point, we really would like to see all of these countries in a large community. But this is not something short term; we cannot transform this Eastern Neighbourhood Policy into a short-term tool.
And the fifth and last point, we must not let Ukraine become the theater for a strange new type of ‘cold war’ between the East and the West. This would be show an ignorance of history and have no strategic perspective.
I think that this more or less summarizes the central current of views. I, of course, am not competent to express that current, because that competency belongs to Baroness Ashton, but my impression from the discussion is that this is a balanced and comprehensive approach to the issue of Ukraine.
We then carried out an in-depth discussion of all the Southern Neighbourhood issues: that is, issues concerning Egypt, Syria, Iraq, Libya, Tunisia and Yemen. Because these issues are developing. In the end, conclusions were set down that more or less follow the course set by the EU so far. You know the main points. These are what we have said so far with regard to Egypt. What we said in Montreux regarding Syria. We especially praise the developments in Tunisia. We express our concern regarding the situation in Iraq and the threat that exists to stability in the country.
Now the discussion is completed with the Central African Republic, on which there is the well-known CSDP mission with staff deployed to Larissa, in accordance with the arrangement we have made with the French government.
That is the description of what has happened so far with the Foreign Affairs Council.
At 19:00 we have a dinner for the 28 EU Ministers and the Ministers of candidate countries. Mr. Davutoglu will be among those at the dinner, and thus I will have the opportunity, on the margins of the dinner, for a meeting with him, in light of the latest developments on the Cyprus issue, about which you can ask me, and I will respond.
This morning, before the Council opened, we had three important bilateral meetings. One was a meeting with the previous, Lithuanian Presidency, with whom we are in very close contact so as to continue the issues they set in motion.
With the Netherlands, who express very great interest in issues of the principle of conditionality, and we will handle this issue. In the context of the Presidency, we had a very interesting discussion with my counterpart Mr. Timmermans.
Moreover, as you will have seen from the written announcement that was issued, I met with the Foreign Minister of Kosovo, at his request, so that we could prepare my visit to the region, which will be carried out, if all goes well, next week, to the five capitals of the region. Initially to the five capitals, and we will see what the situation is in Sarajevo, so that we can decide if there is any point in my going there in the midst of the crisis, or we can leave it for a little later, and I can go to the capitals where there is a political environment that allows for a substantial discussion with the governments, on behalf of the Presidency of the Council.
Tomorrow we have the General Affairs Council, and we have a number of issues to talk about. One of the issue is the impact of the Swiss referendum. Ahead of this debate, I asked the head of the Council’s Legal Service to prepare a presentation on the legal framework shaped by the referendum, which is of a constitutional nature, but domestic Swiss law. We now have to see, on the level of international law and on the level of European community law, precisely how the issue is raised, but, of course, the political issue that is undoubtedly raised is always important; an issue that we commented on yesterday in the announcement we released.
JOURNALIST: Mr. President, could you perhaps make a general comment on the developments in Cyprus, on the occasion of tomorrow’s meeting between Mr. Anastasiades and Mr. Eroglu?
E. VENIZELOS: For months now, President Anastasiades has presented a comprehensive proposal for the Cyprus issue. The central idea of this proposal is the implementation of substantial confidence-building measures that change the climate, not through words, but through actions. The confidence-building measures concern in reality the implementation of the Addition Protocol to the Ankara Agreement, the return of the fenced off city of Famagusta, the opening of the Port of Famagusta, the potential for Cypriot ships and aircraft to dock and land at Turkish ports and airports. This is a very important and substantial proposal.
Moreover, we always have to remember that recent years have seen a substantial change in the discussions on the Cyprus issue. The international community, the UN, accepts that only through a negotiator can the final decision be taken on the future of Cyprus and the co-existence of two communities, within the framework of a federal, bizonal, bicommunal solution that is viable, that is just, that is functional, that is based on the resolutions of the UN Security Council, the European acquis, and a single international legal personality, a single citizenship, and a single sovereignty.
The Joint Communiqué that was agreed must always be interpreted from this perspective. And, of course, we must always bear in mind historical experience with regard to the Cyprus issue. Both the more distant experience – that is, of 1960 – and the more recent experience of 2003-2004.
What is fundamental is for there to be the conditions for a real and lasting national unity and consensus on the broader level. Because if this consensus does not exist, if this broad support does not exist, if this universal acceptance does not exist, we can see that the fundamental condition will not be met, which is approval through a referendum. Thus, any outcome on the Cyprus issue belongs in the hands and to the final decision of the Cypriot people; in the hands of the Greek Cypriot and Turkish Cypriot communities.
This is a process, a potentiality, that I am certain President Anastasiades, the Cypriot government, the Greek Cypriot community will utilize in the best manner, but within the environment and the criteria that I just set out for you.
February 11, 2014