Mr. Chairman,
Ladies and Gentlemen MPs, members of the Committee on National Defense and Foreign Affairs,
This is the fourth time in the space of a year that I have had the honour and pleasure of addressing this important Parliamentary Committee.
An extremely useful practice is being established of responsible and substantial public discussion between the government and the political parties regarding the questions being addressed by our country’s foreign policy.
These discussions, as well as the parliamentary debates, are supplemented by the meetings that take place every four months or so of the National Council on Foreign Policy. Thus, an informal but substantial mechanism has taken shape for inter-party consultations on our foreign policy.
This mechanism can yield multiple advantages by further strengthening the broad base of consensus among the majority of political forces regarding the major strategic choices and the international orientation of the country.
This strategic consensus is a factor in the country’s power. We would do well to sustain and strengthen it. We will achieve this when the inevitable, imperative criticism and democratic presentation of opposing arguments on these critical issues is substantial and responsible, rather than superficial.
Ladies and Gentlemen MPs,
The accession of Bulgaria and Romania to the European Union is a development of particular importance for the wider region and our country.
For the first time in our 25 years of participation in the European family, Greece has a geographical border – a bridge – linking it directly with the broad, single space of democracy, stability and economic development that is the European Union.
Greece is no longer a geographically isolated member of the Union. This new reality gives us new possibilities. It opens up new horizons of opportunity for the country – particularly the regions of Macedonia and Thrace, which now have a European border and European hinterland.
We are determined to fully exploit this new European reality. Already, Greece has an impressive economic and business presence in Southeast Europe. Some 3,500 Greek businesses are active in the region. There is also a constantly expanding network of 1,200 branches of Greek banks that account for 20% of the banking market in the region, including Turkey. From January to October 2006, Greek exports increased by 30% as compared with the same period in 2005. Greek investments in Southeast Europe over the past decade have exceeded €14 billion. We are still the only country in the region that has and will continue to have the advantage – the added value – of participation in the Eurozone.
Within the framework of our strategy, the government is implementing a comprehensive development policy for the region of Macedonia and Thrace; a region of pivotal importance. Included in this policy is the utilisation of its human resources. The measures announced by the government for the deepening and broadening of the policy for equal rights and equality before the law for the Muslim minority are an intrinsic part of this policy.
Mr. Chairman,
Ladies and Gentlemen MPs,
The accession of Bulgaria and Romania is without a doubt an historic success for our two friendly, neighbouring peoples and their leaders. By the same token, it was a success for the policy that has been implemented consistently by our country – regardless of the government in office at any given time – throughout these years; the policy of active support for the European perspectives and courses of countries in our region.
This is the only policy, the only strategy, that can gradually transform the Balkans as a whole into a region of stability, modern democracy and dynamic economic development.
Obviously, an smooth course towards Europe requires that the interested countries fulfil the criteria and respect – in practice – Europe’s regulations, principles and values. This demand for full adaptation is in fact becoming even stronger today.
The enlargements of recent years have led, in the space of just four years, to an 80% increase in the number of European Union member states; from 15 in 2003, to 27 in 2007. This major change, in combination with stagnation with regard to the critical issue of the institutional reform and strengthening of the EU, has left many in Brussels and in other European capitals cautious – if not negative – on the subject of potential new enlargements in the near future.
For this reason, the efforts that states interested in acceding need to make to adapt and to satisfy criteria must be even more intensive and substantial. They must not diverge or lapse.
At this point I would like to refer to the municipal elections in Albania, which we monitored with particular interest and attention. Like the OSCE and the European Commission, we ascertained that there were once again irregularities and procedural problems in the election process. More specifically, in Heimara these phenomena created intense concern. The process of counting the votes is continuing. I needn’t stress that his process must be carried out with complete respect for democratic rules, as insisted upon by the EU, to which our neighbouring country hopes to accede.
Mr. Chairman,
Ladies and Gentlemen MPs,
Of particular importance to our region – beyond everything else – is the full implementation of the regulations of good neighbourly relations. A fundamental component of good neighbourly relations is respect for international law and international rules. There is also the obligation to refrain from actions that give rise to tension and friction, with corresponding repercussions for bilateral relations and regional cooperation.
The recent decision of the government of the Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia to rename Skopje’s Petrovac airport “Alexander the Great” is not an act of good neighbourly relations. It was a breach of the 1995 Interim Agreement. An historically groundless and politically counterproductive action. It rendered even more difficult – as Mr. Nimetz himself stressed publicly during his visit here – the mission that has been undertaken by the UN mediator.
Greece has shown that it is participating constructively in the process for finding a mutually acceptable solution on the name issue. It respects the spirit and letter of the Interim Agreement.
But it is certain that the absence of a mutually acceptable solution, which is due to the increasing intransigence of the government in Skopje, is in no way helping FYROM to proceed on its Euro-Atlantic course.
With regard to the European Union in particular, the recent statements from the competent Commissioner, Mr. Rehn, confirmed the many problems being faced by Skopje on this course. The support of Greece and other neighbouring member states will be necessary and invaluable.
In contrast, the reaching of a mutually acceptable solution would have multiple positive results: It would strengthen our bilateral relations and regional cooperation, and it would mean substantial and tangible progress for Skopje’s Euro-Atlantic perspective.
This is the future that we want for our region. It is for this European future that Greece is working, with consistency, responsibility, moderation and determination.
This pursuit of regional stability and development also dictates and guides our policy regarding the vital issue of Kosovo’s future status, which is at a decisive stage.
Tomorrow, the critical consultations begin between the interested parties on the proposals submitted by Mr. Ahtisaari.
We express our support for his efforts to bridge differences; to bring about a compromise and to thus ensure the functionality and viability of any result the process has.
Of course, a return to the pre-1999 status of Kosovo is not a solution.
We call on both sides to show – even at this stage – the necessary constructive spirit and avoid unilateral actions aimed at biasing the final result in one direction or the other. And this is what we have constantly stressed to our collocutors in Belgrade and Pristina.
If achieving a viable compromise with balanced benefits requires more patience and persistence, the international community will have to show the will necessary to this end. The negotiation process must not be constricted by tight deadlines.
We note three elements of Mr. Ahtisaari’s plan:
A) We note with satisfaction the broad powers and rights provided for with regard to minorities, including the Kosovo Serb minority. This is a necessary element for the rebuilding of a stable, peaceful, multiethnic and multicultural society.
B) We also observe that these proposals lack those elements that would provide for a gradual, step-by-step implementation that would allow the involved parties to become accustomed to and better assimilate the new state of affairs.
C) We draw the conclusion that given that these proposals are already the subject of negotiations, they are not final, ‘take-it-or-leave-it’ proposals, but are open to any alterations and adaptations agreed upon by Belgrade and Pristina.
The reality of the situation, ladies and gentlemen MPs, is that the two sides are starting from completely different points of departure. “Nothing less than independence,” Pristina demands. “Anything but independence,” says Belgrade.
So these will be extremely difficult negotiations. The next stage, in implementation of the process agreed upon, will take place in about a month: A UN Security Council debate, with the prospect of a relevant resolution being adopted.
Given the current state of affairs and the caution that has been voiced by certain countries – including Russia – the Security Council debate is not expected to be free of difficulties. But the atmosphere will be completely different if the two sides show maturity and realism before the Security Council discussion, accepting that in a compromise solution there are neither 100% winners nor 100% losers.
The situation is further complicated by the fact that Serbia, following its recent elections, has not yet formed a government. We have repeatedly stressed – inside and outside the EU – how important it is for the country’s European perspective to function as a catalyst in the forming of a government that includes the moderate, pro-European Serbian political forces.
Moreover, we have put great emphasis on the promotion of Serbia’s Euro-Atlantic course through specific, tangible steps. We believe that, among other things, this will enable Serbia to better handle the difficult situation it is facing in the Kosovo issue.
Within this framework, it was very positive that, in the wake of intensive efforts in which Greece played a substantial role, NATO decided, at its Riga Summit Meeting, to accept Serbia into the Partnership for Peace programme. Also positive was the clear message sent recently by the EU Council of Foreign Ministers, stressing that in a short time we might see the reopening of the process for concluding an EU-Serbia Stability and Association Agreement.
Of course, what the EU asks of Serbia is that Belgrade show strong will for cooperation with the International Criminal Court in The Hague.
The primary concern of our policy on the Kosovo issue – as well as of our foreign policy in general – is ensuring stability and peace.
Whatever the case, a strong presence on the part of the international community in Kosovo is an will remain necessary, in implementation of the resolutions of the UN Security Council. This need was confirmed and underlined by the recent violent episodes in Pristina.
The European Union is already preparing to take on a substantial role in the political dimension of this international presence. Greece has decided to contribute significantly to this, beyond its participation in KFOR.
Another firm pursuit of Greece is for there to be a single European stance on this issue. The unity of the European Union must be ensured because only this will enable it to have a substantial say and role following the determination of Kosovo’s status. And this is in the interest of the region and our country, which wants stability after Kosovo’s status has been determined.
Ladies and Gentlemen MPs,
What I mentioned earlier regarding the need for countries wishing to accede to the EU to comply fully with the criteria and prerequisites set by the EU – with emphasis on good neighbourly relations – also holds true for Turkey, of course.
We will never tire of reiterating our sincere position in favour of Turkey’s European perspective. We believe that this is a strategy that – with patience and perseverance – can gradually bring the anticipated benefits to everyone; to the Turkish people, our region, Europe and, of course, Greece.
This is a strategy aimed at strengthening peace, improving Greek-Turkish relations, and strengthening economic development in the region.
I hope and believe that Turkey will not close its eyes to or turn its back on this prospect for a better, a European, future. I would like to think that, despite the nationalist fervour we see in certain circles, Turkey’s political leadership will remain firm in its dedication to the European path; a path that is difficult, but lined with great opportunities and possibilities.
We can see that an intense pre-election period, such as the one currently under way in Turkey, may not be the best counsel for public statements that are sober and moderate. But this cannot serve as an alibi for unprovoked cultivation – even if only indirect – of a climate of tension in a region as sensitive as the Eastern Mediterranean.
We have stressed that this region of the world in particular, much more than other regions, needs stability and peace. It needs good neighbourly relations and mutual respect among countries. This is what Egypt, Cyprus and Lebanon are doing through the agreements they recently signed.
The implementation by independent sovereign states of the self-evident, fundamental rules and principles of international law and the day-to-day practice of international relations cannot and must not be called into question.
The delineation of seazones such as the Exclusive Economic Zone facilitates inter-state cooperation. It opens up prospects for economic development. We are monitoring these issues very closely, with the necessary seriousness, attention and composure.
We continue to believe in and contribute actively to the efforts towards the normalization and continued improvement of Greek-Turkish relations; efforts that need to be reciprocated.
Ladies and Gentlemen MPs,
I am sure that I am stating the obvious when I say that full normalization of Greek-Turkish relations requires the reaching of a just, viable and functional solution on the Cyprus issue. The ending of foreign occupation and the reunification of the island – based on UN Security Council resolutions, international law, EU principles and values and the European acquis – can ensure that everyone on the island, Greek Cypriots and Turkish Cypriots, will enjoy the benefits of participation in the European Union.
At this time, a substantial effort is under way to utilise and implement the agreement reached by President Papadopoulos, former UN Under-Secretary-General Mr. Gambari and Turkish Cypriot leader Mr. Talat last July.
But this effort is running into difficulties due to the stance of the Turkish Cypriot side. We hope that this stagnancy will end and that in the coming period inter-community talks will begin, as provided for by the Agreement of 8 July 2006.
Greece remains committed to firmly supporting a well-prepared solution process that provides guarantees for success.
The visit to Athens of the President of the Republic of Cyprus will give us the opportunity, within the framework of constant communication and cooperation between the two governments, for an in-depth discussion of all issues of mutual interest.
Ladies and Gentlemen MPs,
In closing, I would like to refer briefly to issues concerning the wider region of the Middle East.
Despite the positive development we had with the formation of a Palestinian government of national unity – following the Mecca agreement between Hamas and Fatah, which was aided significantly by Saudi Arabia and Jordan – the situation in the Middle East remains extremely complex and alarmingly unstable. At the recent Rice-Olmert-Abbas three-day meeting, no new, significant progress seems to have been made – there were no immediate positive results – in the effort to find a way out of the current situation.
The security situation in Iraq remains problematic, as the bloody conflict between Shiites and Sunnis shows no signs of letting up. The relative calm and stability in the Kurdish regions of Northern Iraq remain a point of reference in this regard.
Lebanon is now living in a climate of increased tension, following Jemayel’s recent assassination. The Siniora government, despite having the support of the international community, is confronting many pending issues and is at the same time trying to take decisive steps toward reconstruction, for which Greece has committed a total of €7,500,000.
The problem of Iran’s nuclear programme and its multiple ramifications is still pending, as no decisive progress is being made.
In Afghanistan, progress with the ISAF mission, in implementation of the relevant UN Security Council resolution, is also not showing the desired pace. There are clear indications that extremist fanatical forces are once again active there.
In general, we are following the rise in extremist voices across the whole region with great concern.
In this region of the world, ladies and gentlemen MPs, there is no way of definitely resolving an issue if we ignore all the other issues. Everything is linked and interconnected, in ways that are sometimes obvious, sometimes obscure.
For this reason, the international community must adopt an integrated strategy – which, in our view, must have the Palestinian issue at its core – with a view to addressing the Middle East as a whole.
Such a strategy must include all the players in the region, obviously including Syria and Iran.
The role that the EU is called upon to play in the region is of paramount importance. The conclusion I drew from my recent visit to the United Arab Emirates is that the Arab world looks forward to a more intensive and more substantial European involvement in this effort, without further delay.
Greece has been and will continue to be present, by contributing actively to efforts to bring stability and peace to this region that could be called our “next-door neighbour”.
This was dictated by the fact that we have excellent relations with Israel, the Arab countries and also Iran.
Ladies and Gentlemen MPs,
In these difficult times, the government’s foreign policy is being implemented in a responsible and carefully planned manner; with prudence and determination. It is active without taking unnecessary action aimed at producing superficial results. It safeguards the country’s interests, paving the way for stability and peace in our wider region.
Thank you.
February 20, 2007