Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2008-02-20-Speech-3-263"

PredicateValue (sorted: default)
rdf:type
dcterms:Date
dcterms:Is Part Of
dcterms:Language
lpv:document identification number
"en.20080220.14.3-263"2
lpv:hasSubsequent
lpv:speaker
lpv:translated text
". Mr President, ladies and gentlemen, if I think about it and overlook some of the detail, I must say that my generation and our younger colleagues have been quite lucky. We have lived the greater part of our lives, perhaps the best part, at a time when the doors and windows of opportunity have been open. That period started in 1975 with the Helsinki Final Act, and its consequences were most influential in eastern and central Europe, where the Berlin wall and the communist system collapsed in 1989. A new vision burst onto the scene over the collapsed wall and through the open doors and windows of the western façade of the Euroatlantic community. We saw the broad, sunny, dynamic landscape of a united and free Europe, beautifully symbolised by this immense European Parliament building. I could never imagine in my youth that one day I would speak in it. The case of Kosovo is truly unique, because the international community had to take it under its protection for humanitarian reasons and then had to govern it for almost nine years. Nevertheless, Monday’s decision by the General Affairs and External Relations Council was not easy. The decision and the declaration of independence in Priština were not unexpected. We were led to it by the following facts. Firstly, it was realised that a return to the previous position was not acceptable and nor was the present ‘ . Neither side found a new formula to resolve the status of Kosovo, and it was obvious that further negotiations would not be fruitful. Since 1999 Kosovo has been administered by the United Nations and, during that time, in accordance with Resolution 1244, Serbia has not been able to exercise any effective authority. For a number of years prior to 1999 the majority of the population of Kosovo had been exposed to systematic repression, including ethnic cleansing and humanitarian disaster. Ladies and gentlemen, all these facts, which were originally recognised by all the members of the contact group, including the Russian Federation, are evidence for the argument that Kosovo presents a really special case ‘ which is why the validity of the principle of the sovereignty and territorial integrity is not in doubt. For some time the Council has been convinced that the European Union must take responsibility for Kosovo. This conviction was confirmed at the February session of GAERC in the decision we already know. Even though everyone had predicted disunity, we nevertheless achieved unity. After lengthy negotiation and harmonisation processes, the decisions were reached unanimously. The European Union is an interesting and unique community. Of course we are linked by common interests and common values. Among them are respect and tolerance for differences. We could say that we are linked through our differences. At the end of the February session of the General Affairs and External Relations Council we adopted a common position. The important conclusion of the session was that, in respect of the recognition of Kosovo, we expected each Member State to act in accordance with its own national practice. Some may have expected the European Union as a whole to recognise Kosovo, but that is not possible because the European Union is not a state. The European Union has adopted the common position on events in Kosovo and the western Balkans. Firstly, the European Union noted that Kosovo had adopted a resolution on independence. Secondly, the European Union took note that the resolution committed Kosovo to democratic principles, including the protection of the Serb minority and cultural heritage. Thirdly, the European Union reiterated its commitment to the international mission there and its readiness to play a leading role in the region. Fourthly, the European Union reaffirmed its commitment to the European perspective for the western Balkans. Fifthly, the European Union would prepare specific economic measures for the wider region. And sixthly, the European Union is well aware of the principles of the international community, but considers that, due to its sui generis character, the case of Kosovo does not call these principles into question. Of course, Kosovo also comprises Serbs and their heritage and culture, and I would like to stress that it is a particularly precious component of European culture. Many European peoples, including the Slovenians whom I represent, have important monuments to their own culture and ethnic heritage which are now outside their own present-day state borders. This is a fact which does not create obstacles in contemporary Europe; on the contrary, it unites us. The same applies to minority ethnic groups. In our opinion, it is essential that, with its reaction to the declaration and recognition of Kosovo’s independence, Serbia does not close the door to the European Union. I repeat that the Kosovo question is separate from the question of Serbia’s integration into Europe. Serbia must not link these two questions. In this sense we find it particularly difficult to understand Serbia’s opposition to the European Union, that is to say to its mission in Kosovo, because this mission is primarily in the interest of Kosovo’s Serbian population. To conclude, the European Union is one of the most successful peacemaking organisations in the world. The peoples and countries of Europe are united and practise solidarity for the benefit of peace and a better life. This attitude also encompasses tolerance and generosity and, above all, understanding and compassion when others are in distress. Ladies and gentlemen, with the decision which I have mentioned, the European Union has opened its doors and windows not only to Serbia, but also to Kosovo. In Slovenia we call the 1980s and early 1990s the Slovenian spring. Sadly, right at the start of the democratic awakening, we were hit by the Yugoslav crisis, which attempted to halt democratic development and caused the peoples of the western Balkans to fall way behind. Most western and central European countries, and here I mean the ten new Members of the European Union, have taken up the historic challenge, but time has stood still in the Balkans. The General Affairs and External Relations Council (GAERC), of which I am President, has, among other difficult tasks, that of putting the European perspective of the western Balkans into effect. This means involving countries such as Croatia, the Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Serbia, Montenegro, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Kosovo and Albania in the system of European memberships, candidatures and agreements. The Yugoslav crisis will have to end. Doors and windows are open. The wall is no more. The European Union announced in the Thessaloniki Agenda that the western Balkan countries would sooner or later become members of the European Union. Now is the time for us to remember our commitments. We must endeavour to start negotiations with Macedonia, that is to say the Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, on membership of the European Union. Serbia must cast off the burdens of her past, namely the horrors and shadows of the Milošević regime. Milošević was the one responsible for the gridlock in the western Balkans. And we must not forget Albania, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Montenegro and Kosovo. The EU-Western Balkans forum which is to take place in Slovenia at the end of March will be very important in this context. In cooperation with the Slovenian Presidency, the Commission is preparing a special communication on the western Balkans. The forum will also consider strengthening regional cooperation in various areas, such as transport, civil protection, research and development, and so on. In accordance with the January decisions of the General Affairs and External Relations Council, the Commission is discussing visa liberalisation with all the countries of the region. We must not underestimate the exceptional importance that the gradual abolition of visas would have for this region. At the same time, Mr President, we would like to point out a peculiar paradox. Before 1990, the citizens of the former Yugoslavia travelled to most European countries without a visa. Now, however, a whole generation of young people who grew up after that year which was a turning point for Europe need a visa to travel. Ladies and gentlemen, at our January meeting of the Council of Foreign Ministers, we unanimously invited Serbia to sign the political agreement constituting a new step towards membership of the European Union. After Mr Tadić, who is pro-European, won the elections, we were hopeful that, after many years of slow development and isolation, Serbia would join us as soon as possible. The European Union has already sent a European security and defence policy mission to Kosovo. However, establishing relationships with Kosovo is a matter for each Member State. We will probably not differ in the fundamental assessments referred to at the December session of the European Council. The most important aspect is to have consideration and respect for Serbia. The European Union needs Serbia and Serbia needs the European Union. In my opinion, intercultural dialogue is not an empty phrase. Even if negotiations grind to a halt, the possibilities for dialogue are not exhausted. Now is the time for practical dialogue between the Serbs and the Albanians in Kosovo, between Serbia and Kosovo, and between Serbia and the European Union. The fate of Kosovo has burdened us for many years. In the past, Kosovo was part of the Yugoslav federal system and in 1974 was given practically the same status as the Yugoslav republics. Towards the end of the 1980s, Slobodan Milošević deprived Kosovo of its autonomy and in 1999 occupied it by military force, thereby causing a tragedy of global proportions."@en1
lpv:unclassifiedMetadata
"status quo’"1
"sui generis’"1

Named graphs describing this resource:

1http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/rdf/English.ttl.gz
2http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/rdf/Events_and_structure.ttl.gz

The resource appears as object in 2 triples

Context graph