Sir Andrew Wood
It’s my pleasure to introduce Mr Mirošic. Many of you know him, not least because he was the Ambassador from 2004 to 2008 and he’s going to be talking to us about the Berlin process. If your phones are still on, please turn them off, or if you can’t bear to do that, please put them at least on silent. That’s probably the most important thing I’m going to say because it’s so disturbing when phones go. The lecture will be on the record, and we will be having a question and answer session afterwards. During that please will you make sure you put the microphone near to your mouth and don’t, in your excitement, wave it around, otherwise the sound will not travel onto the internet, which we intend it to be, and anyone who wishes to go on the internet, you have – somewhere around here there is the – oh yes, #CHEvents will get you there, via Twitter.
So, first, if I can ask you, like, to speak for 20 minutes or so and then we’ll broaden the discussion after that.
Iztok Mirošić
Okay.
Sir Andrew Wood
So, thank you very much.
Iztok Mirošić
Thank you. Thank you very much. Thank you for all of you that you came here. I don’t know whether you know something about the Berlin process. It’s quite a secret thing in Britain, despite Britain will have a summit of Berlin process, which is not so famous as some other summits, but it will be, in the first days, I think, on the 9th of July. It will be the summit in London.
Basically, what we are talking about is the Western Balkans. Western Balkans, you know, is – those who know the place, is a place that produces maybe more history than it can swallow, and despite being far away, it seems to be far away from us right now. Western Balkans was always an important part of the, let’s say European, if not world history. You will remember that one of the great wars started in Sarajevo, which is in the Balkans again, and Balkans, nowadays, is again, not so stable, not – let’s say, so vibrant. It’s again, more reasons – we have reasons for security thoughts about it and economic viability, predominantly, to be put on the way towards the European Union.
Western Balkans is the area, which is consisted out of the Former Yugoslavia, minus Slovenia, where I come from, minus Croatia, because Croatia also, became a member of the European Union, but plus, Albania, who is a candidate country, or supposed to become a candidate country, for the European Union. And an enlargement process of the European Union, it’s a bit strange that we are talking here in London and that London hosts the enlargement, let’s say, summit for the Western Balkan, while, at the same time, it’s exiting European Union, but enlargement process was always meant to bring economic development, political prosperity, democratic institutions and, probably, what is the most needed, but less implemented rule of law in the region.
The region is the shortest transport way between Central Europe and the Southern flank of the European Union and further to the Middle East, which is the region that is, let’s say, again, in focus of the world, but for the Europe for sure. We had first, first notion of Western Balkan being part of the European Union in 2003 in Thessaloniki in Greece, where the European Union Summit between Leaders of the European Union and Western Balkan countries happened and, at that time, in Thessaloniki in 2003, it was passed a clear European perspective for the Western Balkans. That means that Western Balkan countries have the secured place in the European Union, which was not the case for the other Eastern European countries: Ukraine, Moldova, and other countries. So, they do not have a clear European Union perspective, while the Western Balkan countries, were always considered to be part or to become part of the European Union.
Enlargement of the European Union was always in direct interests of EU. I said before, why and it was always a clear sphere of interest of the European Union countries, predominantly for the post-war, post-Balkan War rehabilitation, reconstruction and, at the end, to incorporate this area in the European Union. So, from 2003, when the first conclusions were passed about the European perspective for the Western Balkans where we are basically, nowadays, with this region. From 2003, ‘til nowadays, only Croatia managed to become – Slovenia became, of course, a Member of the European Union as well, but from the countries of Western Balkans, only Croatia managed to become a Member of the European Union.
In the meantime, European Union itself fell into crisis, different crisis. It was the financial, economic crisis, terrorism, migrations, migratory crisis. Brexit happened at the same time. We are faced with the increase of populism, nationalism, Euroscepticism in Britain as well ,and all that opened questions of the future of the European Union itself, but also, on the future enlargement of the European Union. And I would say particularly the withdrawal of the UK from the European Union and UK was always a prominent supporter of the enlargements of the Union, is not a good sign for the further and future enlargement process.
Just remember, President of the Commission Juncker, at four years ago when he started his term said, “That there will be no enlargement at all during his mandate,” so, it means, and it meant, at that time, that region, Western Balkan region, was slipping back to political instability, security, fragility. Western Balkan states themselves lost the interest to perform. They needed reforms, restructuring of their economies, political restructuring for the membership of the European Union and, basically, the European Union credibility, in the region, was seriously damaged during and after the crisis of the European Union, and that opened the door for geopolitical games of the extra regional players, and these players predominantly are Russia, Turkey and China, who became very active in the region. Not just in economic matters, but also, in the political and security matters.
So, in that light, in 2014, was the only one who understood that because of the enlargement fatigue for the Western Balkan countries and the danger of losing these countries to the third actors, which I named them, only Angela Merkle, Chancellor Merkle at that time understood that this region should be offered, let’s say, a new engagement. New engagement to maintain reform, stabilisation processes and, at the end, stability and security of the region and thus, Germany, in 2014, launched the so-called, The Berlin Process Initiative, and Berlin Process Initiative, basically, is a diplomatic initiative to relaunch regional, political, economic, infrastructure, energetic co-operation and to, let’s say, keep on the enlargement processes in the EU, but also, in the Western Balkans, in the Western Balkan countries, the enlargement ambitions basically, alive. All major EU countries, so Germany, France, Italy, UK, and others, Slovenia is also a part, are part of these diplomatic initiatives. The first gathering was in Berlin 2014, next year, was in Vienna, then in Paris. Then, it was the last year in Italy, and this year, it will happen in London.
The aim of this Berlin Process is basically, to strengthen the needed regional co-operation among and between Western Balkan countries to preserve their EU aspirations, stability, security, boosting regional connectivity, meaning infrastructure projects, energy projects, and liberalisation of trade and services, which means that, at the end of the day, the basic need for the countries in the region is to implement the rule of law, because without rule of law, there is no foreign investments. Without foreign investments, there is no cash and money to realise these projects, so the introduction, the implementation of the rule of law is one of the basic things for the Western Balkan countries to execute.
Berlin Process was, at the same time, also, to preserve the leading role of the European Union in the region and to limit, as I’ve mentioned before, the interference of the extra regional factors, Russia which has strong orthodox ties in the region, Turkey with strong Ottoman legacy, in some countries of the region, and, of course, China who became very aggressive in the economic terms. It’s signed, already, 22 agreements with the countries in the region, with a number of infrastructure, predominantly infrastructure, economic projects and interests.
Let’s say EU, of course, will stay the most important partner and prime market for the Western Balkan countries, but should deal with the Western Balkan countries in a completely different way, not as business as usual, like today, but it should take Western Balkans as a geopolitical priority. If – we would like – and here, I mean, EU and UK, if we would like to preserve influence in the region and at the end of the day, security and stability of the region, which is in our neighbourhood or in our vicinity.
More EU retreated in the past from the Balkans, from the region, more influence got Russia, Turkey and China, which means that abandoning the Western Balkans, it will seriously diminish the influence of all of us, UK and EU, let’s say Europe, in the Western Balkan region. But, of course, European Union should pay much attention on the developments in the region. It should demand on the past towards the European Union, towards the membership of the – to the European Union of these countries. It must demand fulfilment of all the Copenhagen criteria that are needed to enter the European Union but, at the same time, it should offer a really credible aim to these countries and if these countries wish to join the European Union, at the end of the day, the European Union should present a credible – a real credible path of integration to the European Union, which was not the case since the crisis in the EU, financial crisis started in 2008, and that was not the case at that time.
Berlin Process was never meant to replace the enlargement process of the European Union, together and along with the new European Union strategy for the Western Balkan, which was passed in February this year, is basically, the most important regional mechanism for regional engagement, political and economic transformation and consequently, the EU accession of these countries. Let’s say, we need or the countries in the region need to develop a collective regional, political and economic co-operation, and this would strengthen, basically, their path towards the European Union integration, but let’s say it’s not realistic in today’s EU political situation, and situation in some of the European Union Member countries, and you are familiar with them, that EU would enlarge in a very short or a brief time. I don’t think so.
The question of enlargement, of the rights and benefits of the Single Market, so some of the EU Member countries already question the enlargement of the benefits of the Single Market and the risks of the Single Market to the new Mem – the potential new Member countries from the Western Balkans, especially regarding the free-flow of labour force. You are familiar that some countries, some Member countries of the EU are trying to curb the free-flow of labour force, and not just migration, but also, a free-flow of labour force in the European Union.
At the end of the day, decision to enlarge is a political decision and of course, as such, there are different models of future developments in the European Union, how to enlarge. It should be, where there should be regatta principles, so one-by-one, countries. It should be convoy principles in a group or at the end of the day, whether European Union will develop so-called diversified integration or multi-split Europe, but what is the state of play in the countries of Western Balkans of today? I can say that European Union, including the UK, has, with the region, 43 billion of exchange. It was – from 2007 to 2017, it made nine billion of investments and this will be topped this year by another billion of investments. This region, altogether, ten billion of investments, plus 43 billion of the trade exchange, so it’s not – it’s quite a significant exchange with the region.
Region, despite some better economic signs, the growth, on average, is 3.2% in last year, but it’s still considerably lower than it was pre-crisis, at times when it was up to 7%. So, despite this growth, the region is still very fragile, feels very fragile economic situation. Politicians, in the region, basically, they did not do substantial and needed economic and structural reform, regarding the falling investments, strengthening the economic – strengthening the democratic processes, security processes. Basically, they were focused on short-term objectives.
Also, European Union probably had the wrong policy, betting everything on the strongmen in the region and neglecting the democratic processes, the development of the democratic processes, civil society, free media and, as I said before, also, implementation of the rule of law in the country. A serious problem of the region is a demographic trend. A lot of young people, all of them, practically, who has the possibility to leave the region, they would leave, predominantly to the countries of the Western Europe and not to the Ankara or Moscow. So, the attractiveness of the West is much, much higher or is the highest, in comparison, with other potential regional player.
Western Balkans was and is still lacking behind economically, politically and in security terms. It does desperately need new development and a boost, and since 2003, there were basically – so, since Thessaloniki, promises of the EU perspective, there was practically, no progress, just stagnation in the region. How questionable were the policies of the original leaders can show us the level of development of these countries, of the countries of the Western Balkans? You should know that the countries of the Western Balkans are today, probably, the poorest countries in Europe. They are below 40% of the average – of the developmental average of the GDP of the 28 EU, and they’re even poorer than the countries that are the poorest in the European Union, and the poorest countries in the Europe, meaning in the GDP terms are Romania, Bulgaria and Croatia. They’re about 50 to 60% of the GDP average of the EU 28.
This data show us that practically, for the countries that are outside the European Union, in Europe, but outside the European Union, I’m not talking here of Britain, but the countries that are interested to enter the European Union, for that countries, it’s practically impossible to do the developmental catch-up with the EU countries, if they would not join the European Union. Consequently, because of this poorness of the countries of the Western Balkans, there was more and more growing and strong opinion, in the new Member – in the present Member countries of the European Union that new members can join only when they do, needed developmental steps towards the convergence with the EU. So, it means convergence to the EU economic and social developmental average, otherwise, they would pose a serious threat or they would be a factor of destabilisation for the present Member countries, in term of the social, economic and tax dumping, and the competitiveness of the Single Market is so strong that it could destroy unprepared markets of these new Member countries, thus causing a new migratory flow from the region, predominantly labour flow, to the existing Member countries, with all the political consequences, populism and all that one, in the present Member countries. Which means that the enthusiasm for the further enlargement is not so strong that we might wish.
Political situation, of course, influences the economic risks and economic stability and social environment. As I said, Western Balkans, its situation there is not so stable. It is worsening of the internal political situation in some countries and it is worsening, also, in the terms of bilateral relations between the countries of the Western Balkans. There is the dialogue between them that is not really, let’s say, favourable for the regional co-operation. Nationalism is growing in some countries, with – especially with retreatment of the western countries, during the crisis, EU and US were, let’s say, pulling out from the region. Nationalism grew significantly. A clear – and a clear structural reform path would be demanded from the political leaders in the region, which means that they should make Euro-Atlantic path, a real priority, which means reform priority for the political agenda in the region.
Four common challenges for the Western Balkan countries are: post-conflict renewal, post-communist transition, economic, social and political reforms for market competitiveness. Deeper integration into Euro-Atlantic institutions and problems the region is facing are ethnic and religious tensions, corruption, organised crime, mass immigration from the Middle East, a very heavy problem, in terms of political stability of the region. Political cronyism, low media freedom, judiciary independence, high unemployment, use brain drain, which I mentioned, but the biggest one is basically, no rule of law implementation and, in some cases, also, state capture and these problems are quite serious and the enlargement process, together with the Berlin Process, is meant to focus the countries of the region on these areas, on the path towards the membership of the European Union.
Let’s be frank, there will be no short cuts, no fast EU accession, probably. The process will be demanding and long, and reasonably long, but it can become, again, the path towards European Union, it can become again, unattractive for Western Balkan political elites and for the public opinion and the set – because the set criterias and reforms that are needed for the membership of the European Union will have to be implemented. The credibility to do all this reform, the credibility and endless possibility is completely on the countries of the Western Balkans.
I mentioned the new European Union enlargement strategy, it was passed in February. Slovenia was very active. We basically managed to put the Western Balkan countries on the European Agenda, again, and this – why I’m mentioning this new strategy because it’s basically, based on the Berlin Process aims. All the countries will got, let’s say, action plans and the focus of this new European Union enlargement, some of them, they wouldn’t – they don’t want to call it enlargement in the European Union, but Western Balkans strategy, the focus is on the regional co-operation, good neighbourisations, by solving the bilateral problems, a very important one. Regional infrastructure, digitalisation of economies, fight against corruption, organised crime and terrorism. Working market economy, social security and preventing nationalisms and popularism. So, all this is in the programme of the new enlargement strategy.
Of course, on the other side, the European Union will have to prepare itself for the next enlargement in the institutional terms, but also, in the financial terms, and post-Brexit debate of the future of the European Union will, for sure, have to embrace also, the debate on the future enlargement. We had Sofia Summit. First Summit European Union Western Balkan countries after 2003 in Sofia last month. It was developed – it was devoted to the things of particular, particularly practical co-operation in the fields of transport – connectivity, transport, energy, youth agenda, employment, but I noticed that in the countries of Western Balkans, a certain disillusion of this summit because a strong political message, from their perspective, was not given from that summit. That means that in June, European Council, where we will have important conclusions on the next enlargement regarding the opening negotiations with Macedonia or Albania, will be very, very important for the credibility of the enlargement process, on the enlargement agenda of the European Union again, and here we come to the London Summit. It comes right after the European Union Council in June.
If European Council in June will not have a strong message about the enlargement, then also, the July Berlin Summit in London will be probably under the impressions of the June European Council. The Berlin Process in London will focus mainly on the economic stability questions, connectivity, bilateral issues and security of the region and the main message will be that despite the exiting of the European Union, UK and EU can collaborate good in the region. It’s strange again, that it’s in London and you want – do you know when the last Prime Minister was in the region? British Prime Minister? It was in 1980, I think, by Margaret Thatcher, who she paid a visit in the region.
Sir Andrew Wood
I think she was leader of the opposition at that time.
Iztok Mirošić
Yes, yeah, well, I don’t know when…
Sir Andrew Wood
And maybe, I think, yeah.
Iztok Mirošić
Yeah, she was. My data is that she was Prime Minister at that time. So, what I’m saying, we have two processes, one is enlargement process, again, with the Western Balkans. The other is Berlin Processes. Berlin Processes, to my experience, from all the paperwork, a lot of declaration, there is less political will, particularly in the region, to fulfil all those things that are agreed in the Berlin Process. So the focus, probably, in the future, will go into the enlargement process of the European Union but, nevertheless, it’s a useful tool, even the Berlin Process.
For the end, I would like to conclude that we are in front of two questions and the questions are credibility or instability. Credibility, from both sides, I mentioned this. From the Balkan countries, more credible reform path towards the European Union, more credible priority, reform priority in the countries of the Western Balkans. On the other side, more credible endgame for the countries of Western Balkans, so when they can join European Union from the part of the European Union. European Union should not pretend anymore that enlargement is going on, but basically, without a credible endgame for the countries that are interested for that.
You know that the big debate in European Union to set or not to set up the date of the enlargement and particularly France, the French President has publicly said that it’s practically impossible to enlarge it before the European Union is reshaping itself. It’s poorly functioning with 27, how it will function with 32, he said. So, these are open questions, but credibility is needed from the Balkan states, predominantly, from the European Union if European Union would like to preserve the influence in competition with the third actors and this is Russia, Turkey and China in the region.
This is about the Berlin Process that you will host here in London, in connection with the London processes.
Sir Andrew Wood
Well, thank you for that profoundly depressing analysis.
Iztok Mirošić
Well, it’s not depressing, it’s realistic.
Sir Andrew Wood
Indeed, no, I’m sure it is realistic. I wouldn’t question that for a moment. I recall, when the President – the then President of Macedonia was here, he gave a fairly similar sort of picture, but his picture was impatience with the European Union, and I suppose you were right to emphasise that the question of when these countries might have a real prospect of joining is critical for the whole idea, because if they don’t think they’re going to join, then – anyway, you said it and not me. That was not meant to be – that’s not a question, it was more of a statement, really.
Iztok Mirošić
Yeah, that’s’ why I mentioned credibility. Of course, the countries in the region are impatient. They would like to have a date when to enter, but it’s not like this, you know. Part of the guilt is on the countries. Basically, I tried to explain that there was not – I can say they were not serious enough. I can understand, from the political point of view, it’s very difficult for a Government that has four years in front of it to do the painful reforms, and not knowing where the endgame will be. But, but if they would like to join, they will have to be aware that they cannot join unprepared. That’s the problem because they will call…
Sir Andrew Wood
And very powerful reasons you explained.
Iztok Mirošić
Yeah. Yeah, because they will cause a lot of problems for them and for those who are already in the European Union, but it’s completely clear that European Union was pretending, for a long time about this enlargement. It was not, let’s say, enlargement was not seriously on the agenda. Now we put it, at least in paper in February again, on the agenda and, in the meantime, the – this area can become a test ground for the future multiple award, you know, this is a clear doorstep of the European Union. A clear geographical area of interest of European Union which, because of lack of activities of the European Union, became an interesting area for the third actors: Russia, China and Turkey, which are challenging the leading role of the European Union in the area.
Sir Andrew Wood
And in that context, can you say how effective that – you can see as a disruptive challenge that would be serious, but Russia and Turkey are perhaps not well placed to produce a more stable and more prosperous Balkans?
Iztok Mirošić
Well, I tried to put a picture through my dispose that a serious alternative, out of the European Union for the countries of Western Balkans, cannot be found. What happened with the countries that remained outside of the European Union, in terms of the GDP growth, it’s very clear. Those who entered the European Union went much strongly, in economic terms, in the GDP terms, in the growth, further than the countries that remained outside, in the region outside of the European Union. I doubt very much that all the actors, foreign actors mentioned can present a substantial alternative for the European Union. European Union is still, let’s say, a factor that – or the Economists that are not so developed than the Western Economists are of vital importance, with the grants that European Union still offers, in terms of neglect and regional disbalances, in the developmental terms.
So, I do not see a significant alternative to the European Union. Many of them in the region, they still think that they can choose between, I don’t know, Russia, China and European Union. I don’t know, I’m not sure that this is a realistic idea.
Sir Andrew Wood
That’s chaos, if anything else. Can I have questions from the floor. Please would you – if, with the questions, would you identify yourself and put your hand up for a microphone. Thank you. It’s always that unnerving moment when no hands go up.
Gabriel Partos
Thanks, cheers. My name is Gabriel Partos and I’m from the Economist Intelligence Unit. State Secretary, I was wondering what sort of advice would you give to countries in the Western Balkans about the importance of resolving their disputes and potential conflicts both, for example, Serbia and Kosovo and others, in the light of Slovenia’s own difficulties with Croatia over the years in disputes not being resolved before they both joined the European Union? And – but a second question I could ask, again, relating to Slovenia and the EU, Slovenia used to present itself as being a kind of bridge between the EU and the Western Balkans because of its previous ex-Yugoslavia experience. To what extent, I mean, the way you’re speaking today, 14 years after Slovenia joined, is very much from an EU perspective. I mean, does Slovenia still have a special role or has it now become very much integrated in the EU, when looking at things from the EU perspective?
Iztok Mirošić
Well, you mentioned bilateral issues and problems in the region. We strongly advised that the countries try to resolve the bilateral questions, there are now in the new European Union strategy, also, on the basis of the Slovenian/Croatian dispute. I’m not – I don’t know whether you’re all familiar of this relatively – for the world, relatively minor dispute, but we had a border dispute, we had arbitration and, you know, arbitration is a valid one between Slovenia and Croatia and we want to put it aside. So, we accept the results and we want to put – we are very – we feel very sorry that Croatia does not accept it. Why? Because, you remember then, we setup the resolution mechanism for the border dispute between Slovenia and Croatia, at the same time, both Slovenia and Croatia established so-called border [inaudible – 36:47] process for the reconciliation in the region. We wanted to demonstrate that the two countries, from the region, can resolve the bilateral issues in a normal, civilised way and thus, setting up the path of resolution of bilateral problems also, for the other countries in the region.
Now, of course, this is under the constraints because Croatia does not want to implement the arbitration agreement. Again, we are very sorry. We think that this is very bad for Croatia and Slovenia because together, we could do, as a Member of the European Union, much more for the countries in the region and vice versa for the European Union role in the region. That was the idea of the resolution of the dispute between Slovenia and Croatia, which is not resolved, unfortunately, yet, but the idea is to do much more together with Croatia for the stabilisation processes, and the European parts of the countries of the European Union. Now, because of the stuck arbitration, we are prevented, unfortunately, for that thing.
Slovenia, you remember, in history, in the first years of independence, wanted to get out from the region and simply because the label of the region was not very – the trademark of the region was not very, let’s say, very good and that’s why we wanted to. We had very clear aims, when we got the independence, this is to join the European Union and NATO where we always belong. We were always part, let’s say, of the western civilisation. We’ve got that. We are much more self-confident. The economic situation, let’s touch the wood, in Slovenia is very good and we think that we have to do much more for the countries, for the region and for the countries of the region.
Do not forget, Slovenia is one of the most – of the leading investors in the Western Balkans, very strongly present. That we have very close political ties with all the countries, practically, and we see our role, yes, you mentioned that we are in-between the countries of South East Europe or Western Balkans and the European Union, yeah, we see our role as meaning we are small countries. If we can do somewhere is there, that we are sincerely see our role in boosting, speeding up the stability in the region, yeah, for sure. So, we are not afraid anymore of being, let’s say, more active in the region.
Joanna Hanson
Thank you. Joanna Hanson, I am the Executive Director of an NGO based in Kosovo called New Prospectiva and we deal with issues related to intercommunity and interstate normalisation of relations. Perhaps I could just correct you about British Prime Ministers. Theresa May was in Macedonia last month and of course, when Tony Blair went in 1999, it was his remarks on the necessity of enlargement of the EU, which brought Bulgaria and Romania in a bit quicker than they would’ve done.
Iztok Mirošić
Yes, you are right about it.
Joanna Hanson
I have two questions. In both the strategy for the Western Balkans and generally, in the EU now, especially in the normalisation talks, the word ‘reconciliation’ is continually used, the need for reconciliation between the Balkan states. You haven’t mentioned this. Does Slovenia talk to its Balkan neighbours about the need to deal with the past, and I don’t like the word ‘reconciliation’, but reconciliation because, you know, we believe that’s paramount to being able to move forward and, secondly, I don’t think you’ve really mentioned the United States. I know they’re not part of the EU. What do you think the role of the US is in the Balkans now and especially its leverage? Thank you very much.
Iztok Mirošić
Yes, and reconciliation, I mentioned that we tried to setup with Croatia so-called Berlin, [inaudible – 41:12] Process, [inaudible – 41:14] are places in Slovenia and Croatia and we made the arbitration agreement for resolution of our border problems. At the same time, Slovenia and Croatia decided to play a much more active role in the Balkans, especially designed by the [inaudible – 41:32] Process for the reconciliations for bringing all the Presidents of the Former Yugoslav countries, plus Albania, around the same table, to talk openly about the problems in the region, and this process is still going on. The last was in Macedonia, in Skopje, I think, in May. So, it’s true that it’s not a non-executive process because there are no Prime Ministers, but there are Presidents, but it serves as a, let’s say, reconciliation dialogue or open dialogue about the problems that are still very alive between the countries in the region.
You were right about the British Prime Ministers, especially about Kosovo in 1999 – Prime Minister Blair. The second question was, just remind me.
Joanna Hanson
The United States.
Iztok Mirošić
The United States, yeah. United States, basically, you know that any kind of resolution of problems, despite the leading role of the European Union at least should have it, the new External Action Service, and Mogherini should have it, but without a close collaboration with Americans, because some countries in the region sees importance of the Americans being present in the region more than the Europeans, so the role of the States is, I think, important there. I mentioned that United States were pulling out from – together with the European Union. Now, I am much more optimistic because according, at least to our knowledge, United States is again, see this region as an interesting area, which should not be, let’s say, neglected anymore and they are step-by-step, they are returning to the region. The interests of the United States is returning, despite the world big problems and summits, but the States, according to my knowledge, they became much more attentive to the region than they used to be, let’s say, five years ago.
Member
And thank you, State Secretary, and [inaudible – 44:03] from the Croatian Embassy. Just a short remark on arbitration, for the other side to be heard. It is known why Croatia has withdrawn from the arbitration process, due to contamination of the process that prompted the Croatian Parliament to unanimously adopt the decision to withdraw from the process. At the same time, the Croatian Government has declared its commitment to seek – to engage with the Slovenian side and to seek a bilateral solution to the problem and is committed to work with the new Slovenian Government to that aim. At the same time, I would like to also stress that we share most of your viewpoints and your concerns regarding the Western Balkan region, and I would like to take an opportunity to ask you a question on how do you see the impact of yesterday’s good news from Macedonia on the outcome of the forthcoming summits and the willingness of those in the EU, who are reluctant about closer integration of Western Balkan countries? Thank you.
Iztok Mirošić
Our Croatian colleague did their homework and reminded us about everything, but I was not talking who was right in the arbitration. I wanted to point out that because of precisely what you said, we are now – we have constraints to work together in the Balkans, which is a pity. I feel very sorry. I’d negotiated the arbitration agreement and I know what we were doing, and we were trying, together with Croatia, to do much more work in the Balkans that we are pre – unfortunately, we are prevented now. You are right, more positive news, optimistic news not just to have, like you said, a very negative experience about the region. Let’s hope that this good news will last. There are good news still. We have some political, let’s say, mechanisms to pass through, referendums, acceptance in both countries, a not easy part of the process, but I would like to be optimistic. In that case, I would say that European Union should take this into serious consideration and act accordingly with the opening of the negotiations, let’s say, in the June European Council because otherwise, it would be very strange that a country like Macedonia did everything to negotiate a positive solution and there wouldn’t be a reply from the other side, from the EU side.
I hope that the EU will take this into serious consideration. Slovenia, for sure, we will support the opening of the negotiations with Macedonia, yeah.
Sir Andrew Wood
I didn’t wish to be too depressing, because I think there is actually a great well of affection in this country for the Western Balkans in general, and very longstanding, but there’s another question over there.
Member
[Inaudible – 47:26] as well as being a member of Chatham House, I’m an election observer. Just following on from the last point you made, from Slovenia’s point of view, when would you like to see the next round of accession actually happen? When would you like to see the target date happen – and, do you believe that this will be a multi-culturally accession or do you believe that the – it should be open for single countries or pairs of countries to join? Do you believe that the process could be frustrated by one or more countries not moving as quickly as perhaps others would like?
Iztok Mirošić
Well, the countries in the region, when the Berlin Process was launched, they were very afraid, you know, that this will be a group – creating a group of countries, so-called a convoy principle, that they will be forced in a group to enter the European Union and that would, let’s say, mean that the most advanced should wait for the last one. They were very afraid of that one. Now, since the European Union Balkan strategy in February, passed in February, in strategy is a clear mechanism that says that everybody who fulfils all the criteria should progress towards the European, which means that this is individual principle.
Slovenia supports individual principles. Everybody should be judged by its own merit, but let’s say, politically, realistically, we should know that, at least in some countries, every enlargement process has to take the referenda decision and now, you have some big countries and one should always question whether we should put on the referenda agenda six times for six, let’s say, countries or not, whether this is realistic or not. I really and sincerely wish that everybody who fulfils the criteria, who is capable and who wish, who wish, with the support of the public opinion, to enter the European Union, should be put into the political process. But I said, in my presentation, that basically, today it’s difficult to say what kind of principles will be used. We have formal principles that are very clear individual principles. We have political judgements connected with the referendas for the enlargement and at the end of the day, this is a political decision when and up.
Nobody would like to speak about the dates. This is one of the problems, in the European Union, you’ll remember that President of the Commission, when he said four years ago, “No enlargement,” then last year he said 2025 and then, there was a lot of misunderstanding in the European Union. So, I would put that – and I said credibility for the process is on the part of those who would like to enter, and if they sincerely wish to enter they will do utmost and they will do as soon as possible to enter and to say about what year – we would like to see as soon as possible, I can tell you, very freely but, to say what year, it depends how the reform possibly will go on in the countries because they have a lot of work to do still.
We are now on the beginning of the process, in the opening of the negotiations for Macedonia and Albania. Montenegro and Serbia, they are already opening, but from opening to the closing is a quite demandable process, basically, of transformation of the whole society and we experienced that during our process. From the part of Slovenia, as soon as they do transformation, we are ready for that, yes.
Sir Andrew Wood
Can I ask a particular question about the one country in the Balkans we’ve not – the Western Balkans, not mentioned so far and that is Serbia? You rightly began your presentation by saying there were too many histories in the Western Balkans and this was an obstacle. Serbia is also the country most liable to fall for mendacious songs from Russia. Do you – are you – do you have a sense of the way things within Serbia are developing towards an actual commitment to place itself?
Iztok Mirošić
Maybe I said twice.
Sir Andrew Wood
Maybe that’s not a fair question.
Iztok Mirošić
Yeah, no. No, it’s okay, I said twice, in my exposé, that basically, candidate countries they should express clearly the wish where they would like to go. If the European Union is the aim of these countries, then we do expect that everything should be done in that aim. I know what you were trying to say.
Sir Andrew Wood
Well, it’s a necessary step obviously, but I just wondered…
Iztok Mirošić
Probably, at some point, it will become the decision. This does not mean that – meaning the countries are the members of the European Union and not entering the current situation between EU, NATO and into Russia, not entering the current situation, there are countries in the European Union that are also developing the ties, economic ties with Russia and nobody prevents that one. That should be very, very clear, but in political terms, I said, specifically, that the leaders of the countries in the region, they will have to do – if they sincerely would like to join the EU, some of them also NATO, the Transatlantic Agenda as a number one priority.
Sir Andrew Wood
Yes, and that is in our interests.
Iztok Mirošić
With all consequences in their policies.
Sir Andrew Wood
Yes, but sometimes, people need persuading.
Iztok Mirošić
Absolutely, but this is from the leaders of the countries of the region. We cannot tell someone what he has to do.
Sir Andrew Wood
No, no, I understand that. This, I think, will be your final question.
Charlie Austin
Hi, my name’s Charlie Austin. As well as being a Chatham House Member, I’m in the military. You mentioned corruption as one of the major issues in the region. How would you see corruption as a region being tackled, in order to progress economically and politically?
Iztok Mirošić
Well, corruption is not problem of the region. Probably, it’s a problem, even in the Western part of the European Union, you know, every part, but depends how you tackle the corruption and, obviously, one of the main aims of the Berlin Process, in connection with the enlargement strategy, is to how to fulfil bigger investments and projects in the region, this is infrastructure projects, and if you would like to bring foreign capital, foreign private investments, combined with the public investments, obviously, it was defined that corruption in the region is a major obstacle of that. But to put in a broader term, this is a rule of law from the independent judiciary system to the functioning of the public administration. So that’s why, basically, the aim number one of the Berlin Process is the rule of law, the implementation of rule of law. This tackles also, the corruption in the region.
That’s why I said there was a lot of goodwill in the paperwork, but then, when you come to the very specific implementation, there is less goodwill to implement, but one of those processes, enlargement process of the European Union and the Berlin Process, demand number one, is starting implementation of the rule of law in that countries, including corruption, yeah.
Sir Andrew Wood
State Secretary, thank you very much for giving us such a clear exposition. I think that’s an ideal preparation for the meeting here in London and an illustration of not just the problems, but also, I think that there is – it’s wrong to say there is no hope. It’s just very complicated and – but it’s necessary that there should be progress, in all our interests, it seems to me, anyway. So, thank you very much. Could we altogether thank you for [applause]…
