K. KOUTRAS: Good afternoon.
We thank you very much for responding to the invitation to the Deputy Prime Minister and Foreign Minister’s press conference.
We will start, as always, with a briefing by the Deputy Prime Minister on issues concerning foreign policy, and we will then go on to broader current issues, and I would ask that we structure our discussion in the same way; that is, that we start with questions on diplomatic issues, and then move on to other matters.
Thank you.
E. VENIZELOS: Good afternoon. Yesterday, the basic direction was set, I would say, for European policy following the election of the new European Parliament.
The leaderships of the two largest European political parties – the Party of European Socialists and the European People’s Party – and the European Council met.
I was able to participate in a very critical meeting, in my capacity as Deputy Prime Minister of Greece and President of Pasok, with President Hollande, the Prime Ministers and Deputy Prime Ministers of EU governments whose parties belong to the Party of European Socialists, and we had the opportunity to take initial stock of the message of the European citizens, as sent in the European elections.
We came to two main conclusions. The first is that we must respect the founding treaties and the Lisbon Treaty.
We need to respect the new, enhanced role of the European Parliament. We must honor the citizens, who pointed in specific directions and made choices with their votes.
Thus, irrespective of the letter of the Treaty, we must recognize the increased role of the European Parliament and the balance of power that now exists in its new composition.
As such, we consider it absolutely reasonable and necessary that the first one who will attempt to form a parliamentary majority capable of supporting the new Commission, and its new President, is Mr. Juncker, as head of the Group that won the most seats in the new Parliament, even though this majority is relative and the difference from the Party of European Socialists is very small.
This means that the second one who will have the right to try this process is Mr. Schulz.
We also stressed – and this is the most important thing – that neither the process of choosing the new President of the European Commission, nor the general process of allotment of critical positions in the European institutional structure, can be a discussion of the role and career of individuals or of the allotment of degrees of influence amongst parties and amongst states.
What is needed is something much deeper, much more substantial, with transparency and honesty before the citizens, so what is important is the policy mix.
If the policies don’t change, if we don’t distance ourselves from a very specific model that leads, very often, to mandatory austerity measures, to recession, to increased unemployment; if we cannot convince our peoples again that Europe can function productively, competitively, with justice, equality, with opportunities, with the provision of high-quality services, with a European social state, we have not understood what has happened, and we will not have given the European Union and the Eurozone the perspective it must have.
I am referring in particular to the Eurozone, because the big issue, of course, is the functioning of the euro, of the common currency, the regulations of economic governance, the exercising of a monetary policy that results in growth.
This is extremely important.
We will continue this discussion this Friday, and the Informal General Affairs Council that is convening here, in Athens, at Zappeion, with the participation of the 28 European Affairs Ministers.
I will have the opportunity, in my introductory speech on Friday, to present the framework within which, in the opinion of the Hellenic Presidency, this whole effort and process must move.
We attach particular importance to this informal meeting of the General Affairs Council, and I hope something positive will come out of it for Europe, as Europe’s citizens and peoples see it.
I’ll stop here with regard to the European issues that are within the Ministry’s competencies, and we can come back to any issues you like with your questions.
I would now like to brief you on my visit, this afternoon, to the President of the Republic.
As you will have heard from the thoughts we exchanged at the beginning of my visit, it is my opinion that the main conclusion that arises from the recent triple elections is that, as the Greek people wanted, governmental and general political stability was maintained.
You will allow me to say that it was apparent how important a role our party plays; a party whose sway was increased. As I said to the President, we fully understand the message of society, which is waiting for the speedy – if possible, immediate – manifestation of the results of the gradual emergence from the crisis and the turning of a new page.
We will respond, because we are the expression of progressive stability, as we say, but there is an urgent need for moves that will reunite the nation. A nation divided on an erroneous and outmoded basis.
And because we want a government that expresses the whole nation, and not just the two parties participating in the government, we want an opposition that participates in the collective national responsibility.
A choice has to be made: whether we want to continue under conditions of tension that border on symbolic civil war, or whether we want to take initiatives that lead to consensus and understanding.
There is room for a change of climate on substantial issues. The President of the Republic referred to five such issues.
The first is the cooperation of the forces of the constitutional arch on the political isolation and confrontation of Golden Dawn.
The second is the cooperation of all the political forces, on the level of first and second degree local administration (municipalities and regions), with the aim of safeguarding social cohesion and supporting local growth and employment, through intensive utilization of funding from the NSRF and the European Social fund, as well as Common Agricultural Policy funding.
The measures for fighting unemployment, in which the municipalities play a very important role, through the community and day-labour programmes, come under this heading.
The third point is the opposition’s participation in the long-term fiscal and macroeconomic planning. My proposal still stands, even now, for the setting up of a national negotiating team on our relationship with our partners. After all, we still have to confirm the sustainability of the public debt.
And mainly, it is the responsibility of all the country’s political forces to ensure the continuity of the state before third parties, before foreigners, whether they be investors or have other transactions with us.
So there has to be legal certainty. No one can call into question the commitments of the Greek state.
The fourth point concerns the institutional framework. We have talked about a lot of things that concern the election law, the necessary changes to the Parliamentary Regulations, and there needs to be a clear understanding amongst the political forces – which I do not believe exists right now – regarding whether or not there is room for constitutional consensus. We cannot start any institutional discussion if we do not ensure that the conditions exist for the necessary constitutional consolidation.
Not abstractly, but in specific terms. So in no case can such a process be started in a haphazard manner, particularly with a supermajority.
To put such procedures in motion, one must first have changed the climate politically and ensured the conditions for dialogue and understanding. Otherwise, the outcome may be worse than the starting point.
The fifth point concerns foreign policy and security and defence policy. We have to make the utmost use of the National Council on Foreign Policy. We have to ensure the cooperation and collectivity of the Greek MEPs and the members of the Greek delegation to the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe on all national issues.
We have to move in the same spirit on issues of Greeks Abroad, on issues that concern the German reparations and the occupation loan – through the special interparty Committee – and, I add here, the issues that concern the exploitation of, mainly, offshore wealth through the delimitation of maritime zones.
I’ll stop here. We can look at the rest through our discussion.
FYROM – NAME ISSUE
D. KATSIMENTE: I would like to ask you, a new visit from Mr. Nimetz was recently announced, for early July, to Athens and Skopje. Does Mr. Nimetz have anything new to convey to us? And what are Athens’ expectations from this new round of negotiations in the two capitals?
E. VENIZELOS: As you remember, when I visited Skopje in the context of my Balkan tour, and met with Mr. Gruevski, we both stressed that we must attach great importance to the Nimetz initiative, because, in accordance with the UN Security Council resolutions in effect, this is the appropriate process for the resolution of the dispute over the name.
Thus, we are consistent before the UN and with regard to what we have said to our collocutors. Since then, there have been two meetings between Mr. Nimetz and the representatives of the two states, the two sides, and Mr. Nimetz is willing, at any time, within the framework of his mandate and within the framework of the relevant Security Council resolutions, to come to the region, and to come here, naturally, to talk. He is always a very interesting collocutor.
M. POPOVIC: Mr. Minister, one more question on the name issue. I wanted to ask whether, at this time, the Greek government is planning to make any moves to impart fresh momentum to the talks, and whether there is optimism that we can achieve some solution or some progress by the Summit Meeting in September.
E. VENIZELOS: Our position is very, very clear. I believe that it is very, very creative, that a new dynamic could be created. But for this to happen, there needs to be a response. That is the Greek government’s stance. On the part of the Hellenic Presidency of the Council of the European Union, I want to stress that the December 2013 Conclusions are in effect.
So we are waiting for the Skopje side – the new government, following the elections – to lend importance, as the Council has said, with tangible steps that concern both the implementation of the Ohrid Agreement, and the full implementation of the Agreement of 31 March 2013 on the relations between the governing majority and the opposition.
THRACE
G. VLAVIANOS: How concerned are you at the phenomenon of the Party of Equality, Peace and Friendship in Thrace, and how are you thinking of dealing with it.
E. VENIZELOS: All Greek citizens, regardless of the region where they reside – and this concerns all the Greek citizens of the Region of Eastern Macedonia and Thrace – have the same political and social rights, are equal citizens, regardless of their religion.
We respect international law, we fully respect the terms and articles of the Treaty of Lausanne.
All individuals can exercise their political rights and make the political and electoral choices they want. Of course, a Region must be expressed, if possible, in a way that coheres with the common good, for local development, for competitiveness, for employment.
This concerns all the citizens of the region, regardless of religion, and a country must participate in the European Parliament with criteria that are first and foremost European. Thus, when we are choosing our MEPs, we use criteria that are European – and also national, as well, but always within the framework of a member state of the European Union.
For someone to be a Greek citizen and a European, regardless of faith – and this concerns our Muslim fellow citizens – it is important, it is a privilege that one must make the best possible use of.
Now, with regard to the analysis of the election result, I don’t want to go into detail, because this is not a subject that I would say is germane to the discussion we are having here, at the Foreign Ministry, but I can say that, in general, I do not agree with the analysis that is being carried out.
Were I to make an analysis, it would be very different, not to say reversed, with regard to the result – the political result, the wider result – that is being produced.
What is important to us, in any case, is a better common fate for all Greeks, a better common fate for all the residents of the Region of Eastern Macedonia and Thrace.
EUROPEAN UNION – MARITIME POLICY
M. KOURBELA: Mr. Deputy Prime Minister, do you see it as a success that one of the priorities of the Greek Presidency, maritime policy, was made a horizontal priority? That is, for every other policy of the European Union to have the dimension of this policy?
And the other question: Does the fact that we already have the regulation on maritime spatial planning facilitate the creation of the Zones? Thank you.
E. VENIZELOS: We have worked a great deal, as the Presidency, on maritime spatial planning. It is a success of the Hellenic Presidency and of the competent Commissioner, Ms. Damanaki. You will see that the long list of achievements of the Greek Presidency includes this regulation, underscored.
I remind you that, within the framework of this horizontal priority, many meeting were held, of the Adriatic-Ionian Initiative; the Med Group – the group of the seven EU Mediterranean countries – came together again after many years, and we have already met once, at Alicante, and we will continue our collaboration.
We took many joint initiatives on issues of management of migration flows, and it is very important that these initiatives will be continued by the Italian Presidency, which is also a Mediterranean Presidency.
The wider framework is the importance we attach to the Southern Neighbourhood, to the European Union’s Mediterranean dimension, and it is also important that we – the seven Ministers of the Mediterranean EU countries – had the opportunity to talk with the Secretary General of the Union for the Mediterranean about important political initiatives, one of which is starting up the ministerial meetings of the Union for the Mediterranean once again.
Now, Maritime Zones are, of course, the responsibility of the member states, because this has to do with national sovereign rights; national sovereignty, when it has to do with national waters, and national sovereign rights, when it has to do with the exclusive economic zone (EEZ), with other zones, such as archaeological, contiguous, and so on.
But the stance of the European Union, and particularly of the European Commission – which underscores and documents, through studies, that the exercising of rights provided for by the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea has economic benefits and growth-related benefits for the countries of the Union – is something very important.
EUROPEAN UNION – ASSESSMENT OF EUROPEAN ELECTIONS
G. IGNATIOU: I would like to ask whether, in the context of Europe, you were concerned at the results, which, beyond the cases of Le Pen, in France, and Farage, in Britain, are a show of disdain from some countries: for example, Slovakia saw only a 13% turnout, the Czech Republic 19%, and a little over 43% here.
Whether you are planning, in the context of Europe, certain actions aimed at a mobilization of pro-European forces, including door-to-door. I remind you of what you presented in Gazi, in Pasok, with the crisis team, and how Hollande won. Whether you are planning similar actions, as the Foreign Minister.
E. VENIZELOS: The rise of the extreme right is a problem for all of Europe. I have said many times that whoever links the rise of the extreme right exclusively with the economic crisis is making a mistake.
There are countries in deep economic crisis that do not have such phenomena, and there are countries performing well economically that have such phenomena.
Naturally, the economic situation functions as a critical parameter, but a more critical parameter is the political climate, the perception of institutions, the level of political discourse; that is, harsh disdain for political figures, political parties and the political system fuels the phenomena of fascism, of neo-Nazism, and of violence much more than the economic crisis itself.
Because otherwise there is no explanation for our having Golden Dawn, here, at 9% in the European elections, while there is no corresponding phenomenon in Cyprus, in Portugal, in Ireland, though we see corresponding phenomena in France, in Holland and in Austria.
The phenomenon of Euroscepticism is much broader, and, in reality, it is linked either with economic nationalism, which, unfortunately, is always present, or with the inability of the idea of European integration to convince peoples that it offers something important. That is what concerns us.
In my opinion, this is the main issue in the discussion we had earlier regarding the choice of the new President of the European Commission.
STATEMENTS OF THE TURKISH PRIME MINISTER
K. FRYSSA: My question is whether you want to comment on the recent statements from Mr. Erdogan: that we have terrorist camps in our country.
E. VENIZELOS: I think that Mr. Erdogan, in the context of a pre-election, broader political speech, perhaps misconstrued something. Perhaps he was referring to data that concern another country, because we have often received the official congratulations of the Turkish side, including on the level of the Foreign Ministry, for the close and effective cooperation we have on issues of combatting terrorism and organized crime.
Our services collaborate, within the framework of international law, and, politically, the climate is one of shared perceptions, I would say, on these issues.
UKRAINE
G. MELNIK: Mr. Minister, can you comment on Greece’s position on the presidential elections in Ukraine? Will Greece recognize the results of the elections? And what do you expect from the new government? And what do you think of the use of the military against the people?
And one more question regarding visas for Greeks who live in Crimea. Have you decided how you will issue them? And I would like a clarification regarding your statement of 13 May: the Russian government had not recognized the government in Kiev, I mean the so-called president.
E. VENIZELOS: Regarding the consular services for the Greeks in Crimea, we will take all the necessary measures, because everyone must get the best possible consular services.
Regarding the recognition or the more general acceptance of the results of the recent presidential election in Ukraine, Greece will follow the common position of the European Union, having taken into account – on the European level, as well – the report of the OSCE observers.
But we have noted with very great satisfaction the latest statements from Mr. Putin, that the Russian Federation is prepared to work with the President of Ukraine who is elected, so that solutions can be found – if possible, through direct dialogue – that fully normalize the situation, because this to the benefit of all the involved countries, to the benefit of the European continent in general.
As for the incidents in Donetsk and the use of armed violence, we are expressed by the relevant statements made by Mrs. Ashton, and foremost, however, by the stance taken by the UN Secretary General, Mr. Ki-moon.
CYPRUS
A. PELONI: Mr. President, I would like your assessment of Mr. Biden’s visit to Cyprus. Whether, that is, you see as positive this reactivation of the Americans on the Cyprus issue, or whether there is concern in the government that this might create certain pressures, given that, as Mr. Kerry said to Mr. Kasoulides, he expects to be coming to Nicosia and Athens in the coming time, possibly in September.
E. VENIZELOS: Mr. Kerry is always welcome to come to the region, as are the Foreign Ministers of all countries, particularly the countries that play a key role in international politics.
Second, as you know, I am in ongoing contact with the Cypriot government, and especially with my counterpart, Mr. Kasoulides, with whom we talked in depth, by telephone, before and after Vice President Biden’s visit, and I am waiting to meet with him on Friday, on the margins of the Informal General Affairs Council, so that we look at where the talks on the Cyprus issue stand at this time.
Mr. Kasoulides and the government of the Republic of Cyprus have repeatedly expressed, in a categorical manner, their very great satisfaction at the Biden visit, which they characterize as historic. And they attach particular importance to the fact that Vice President Biden underscored and stressed that there is only one sovereign independent state, a member of the UN and the European Union, that is recognized internationally on the island, and this is the Republic of Cyprus, as it exists and as it is represented by President Anastasiades and the government of the Republic of Cyprus. This is very, very important.
We are monitoring and analyzing all of the developments very carefully. The government of Cyprus, the Greek Cypriot side that is talking with the Turkish Cypriot community, has taken the initiative. We have clear criteria and clear imperatives, which the Cypriot government is very well aware of.
C. MICHAELIDES: Mr. President, following up from what was said regarding the Cyprus issue, I would like to ask you – following the recent statement from your counterpart Mr. Davutoglu, that Turkey sees no obligation to pay the ECHR-ordered compensation to a country that it does not formally recognize – has anything changed, or will anything change, in the Greek government’s stance on the manner in which it transacts and talks, in the European framework, with a country that does not recognized the existence of a member state of the European Community?
E. VENIZELOS: Unfortunately, as you know, this phenomenon, the phenomenon, that is, of the non-recognition of the Republic of Cyprus by Turkey, is very old. But the Republic of Cyprus is a member state of the European Union, and Turkey is a candidate for accession to the EU and attaches importance to its European perspective.
It also attaches very great importance to its cooperation with the European Defence Agency and with the processes and the institutions of the Common Security and Defence Policy. However, all of this presupposes cooperation with a European Union of the 28. Beyond that, the Council of Europe and the European Court of Human Rights are institutions that have their own substance and their own rigor.
When a country does not comply with a ruling of the European Court, there are mechanisms that go into action, through the Committee of Ministers, there are sanctions, there is a problem. You will allow me to say, here, that the main matter of discussion regarding the situation in Bosnia-Herzegovina revolves around non-compliance with an ECHR ruling that is of smaller importance – because it is the result of an individual’s application – than the ruling issued in the case of Cyprus. In this case we have an inter-state application, which is something very rare and very important.
That is why this case is of historic importance, because it orders compensation in interstate applications.
GREEKS ABROAD
C. MALASPINAS: Mr. President, I would like to ask this: In one of the five points you mentioned regarding national understanding, you referred to Greeks Abroad. I would like a little more on this, and whether you mean that this framework includes the votes of Greeks Abroad, as well as the reorganization of the World Council of Hellenes Abroad. Thank you.
E. VENIZELOS: Regarding Hellenism Abroad, we cannot appear fragmented on the party level, grudging, lacking a sense of the national character of our policy on Greeks abroad. For Greeks Abroad, there is one homeland. It cannot be a party homeland. And naturally this concerns all the issues you referred to and generally our package of interventions in the community of Greek Abroad, wherever that may be. These are also the initiatives that we have decided Mr. Gerontopoulos, the competent Deputy Minister, will move ahead with.
May 28, 2014