SAE U.S.A - World Council of Hellenes Abroad (SAE)

Greek foreign policy – particularly the ongoing negotiations under the UN Secretary General’s Personal Envoy for the Greece-Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia talks, Mr. Nimetz, aimed at finding a mutually acceptable solution on the FYROM name issue – was the focus of statements made by Prime Minister Costas Karamanlis and Foreign Minister Dora Bakoyannis to the governing party’s Parliamentary Group on March 27, 2008.

Their statements highlighted Greece’s efforts to reach a settlement on the FYROM name issue, which has been pending for 17 years, as well as its willingness to find “a mutually acceptable solution on the basis of a truly compound name, with a clear qualification and valid for everyone.” The Prime Minister stressed that “there has been nothing from the other side but messages of a persisting intransigence that is alien to the European mindset,” pointing out that the result of this intransigence was the loss of precious time through no fault of Greece.

The Foreign Minister stressed that Greece wants a solution because “such a solution is needed for the region’s long-term stability. We want to resolve this issue once and for all, not settle it any old way. We do not want a solution in order to save face; we do not want a solution for its own sake.” The Prime Minister stressed that “without a mutually acceptable solution, there cannot be a membership invitation. Allied relations – relations of solidarity, stability and cooperation – cannot be built on pending issues that have a negative impact on neighbourly relations.”

        Ladies and Gentlemen, Members of Parliament,

Today, intensive efforts are being made to resolve an issue that has been pending for 17 years regarding FYROM’s name. We have taken timely, courageous, sincere, and constructive decisions. We clearly spoke of a mutually acceptable solution on the basis of a truly compound name, with a clear qualification and valid for everyone. We took a huge step towards meeting the other side. There has been nothing from Skopje but messages of a persisting intransigence that is alien to the European mindset.  Precious time was thus lost. Not because of Greece. These past few months, we have responsibly made it clear that without a mutually acceptable solution the road to NATO cannot be opened for our neighboring country. It cannot be invited to join. Allied relations cannot be built on pending issues with a negative impact on neighborly relations. Relations of solidarity cannot be built. Stability and cooperation cannot be founded.  ·   The conclusion from the latest meeting between the Personal Envoy of the UN Secretary-General for the Greece-FYROM talks and the representatives of the two countries is that we are some distance from reaching a mutually acceptable solution. The conclusion is that efforts within the framework of the United Nations must continue. We have addressed – and are still addressing – the issue in a responsible and determined manner, which no one can call into question. ·   We stated clearly and responsibly that we are pursuing a solution that cannot serve as a means of support for unacceptable and historically groundless policies; that cannot be used as a vehicle for nationalist and irredentist mindsets; that cannot serve mindsets of instability, mindsets dating back to the Balkans’ worst days, mindsets that do not comply with the European future. ·  

We clearly and unequivocally said that we need a solution on the basis of a substantially compound name. We explained that such a solution cannot be restricted to a description of the neighboring country’s system of government. That is of no concern to us. Nor can we have a solution that is just on paper. There cannot be a false solution. We need a solution that is clear, practical, thorough, and feasible in all aspects. A solution that is valid for everyone; A solution for every use. At the same time, we have made it clear that simple statements of agreement do not suffice. A solution is needed that will not permit any violations or retractions. A solution ratified by the UN Security Council; A solution with the “final seal” of the United Nations. The state of affairs and any domestic developments in the neighboring country cannot serve as an alibi or an excuse. Manoeuvres and political expediencies are not acceptable. A false solution is no solution at all.  Our positions are clear and firm. Our positions are responsible and constructive. Greeks want to have their neighbors as partners and allies. But allied and partner relations cannot be built on serious pending issues. The objectives of stability and progress are not served in this way. This is clear, self-evident, and unequivocal.   Statement by Foreign Minister Dora Bakoyannis to the governing party’s Parliamentary GroupAthens, 27 March 2008  Ladies and gentlemen, colleagues, The Greek people believe that changes are needed if this country is to move ahead. Reforms and solutions are needed; practical and feasible solutions for problems that have been plaguing Greek society for years now. They see that this is essentially the progressive policy – the policy of the future. That is why they are looking to our government to promote this policy. They are looking to New Democracy as the only responsible, consistent and visionary party on the country’s political scene today. Our party, after all, has always been a force of responsibility and moderation, particularly as regards the country’s foreign policy. The liberal democratic party is the one that has made all major national choices, leaving its mark on the country’s progress. And it has done so with realism, fighting for and defending our national interests, resisting the sirens of populism and short-lived party gains. 

Greece’s foreign policy is a policy of externalization and self-confidence. It strengthens and broadens our national interests, capitalizing on our country’s power factors on the international stage, strengthening our country’s footing internationally. Greece’s foreign policy is not a policy of entrenchment, a policy of trepidation. Our policy is founded on clear positions and strong arguments. That is why it gets results. In the case of the name of the state of Skopje, when we began this effort, conditions were anything but favorable for Greece’s positions and our country’s objectives with regard to this issue. For years now, the question had essentially been in a deadlock. International interest in a solution being reached had waned significantly, giving way – unfortunately – to waves of recognitions of our neighboring state under its so-called constitutional name. The provisional name “Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia” seemed to have outgrown its usefulness. The prospect of its being used only by our country and within the framework of international organizations was now visible. We even saw it in the UN General Assembly, with the Kerim incident.   This state of affairs called for a new approach. What was needed was a renewed effort to revive international interest in the finding of a mutually acceptable solution. This is what we endeavored to do. And in the end we achieved this. From the outset, our government took an important, substantial step.

In Parliament, during the presentation of our platform, the New Democracy government spoke for the first time of seeking a solution based on a compound name with a geographical qualifier; a name that would be used by everyone. So we set out our position, proving that we have the realism needed – the political courage and fortitude – to really pursue a mutually acceptable solution. And I cannot resist mentioning, my dear colleagues, that when we took this bold step forward, the opposition was silent. It was – and still is – looking for a clear stance. So, on this basis we initiated a systematic effort to promote Greece’s positions throughout the world, to all the friends, partners, and allies of Greece. The campaign’s scope wasn’t its only vital aspect. Also of great importance was the content of this international awareness campaign. We brought Greece’s arguments up to date. We addressed ourselves to our international collocutors with an eye to the future – not the past. We talked to them in terms of stability, in terms of regional cooperation. We used arguments based on current international policy. We put our positions into context with the major issues being addressed by the international community. We spoke a language that could be understood by a broad, global audience. Through this policy, we convinced everyone of Greece’s constructive stance and sincere will to find a solution. We were not afraid of dialogue – we pursued it and promoted it. We seized every opportunity to contribute to finding a solution within the framework of the UN negotiations. But our efforts always ran up against the intransigence and temporizing policy of the other side.  

Through this concerted effort, we managed to forge alliances; we ensured support for Greece’s positions. We succeeded in making the justness of Greece’s positions understood by all our partners and allies. We succeeded in making it clear that the name issue is an international problem that affects regional cooperation, concerns the very substance of good neighborly relations, and impacts the region’s stability.  In this way, our government gradually built – step by step, in a methodical and well-organized manner – the option of exercising its inalienable right of veto as a NATO member state. We thus succeeded in making clear the position we presented on March 6 at the Informal Meeting of NATO Foreign Ministers in Brussels: essentially, the first veto on sending an invitation to Skopje, at the Bucharest Summit.  The day before yesterday, Mr. Nimetz continued his efforts by putting forward a new proposal. Naturally, we are evaluating every parameter of this proposal, but it is some distance from what might be regarded as a mutually acceptable solution.  We have already given Mr. Nimetz our answer on the aspects of the proposal that we find unacceptable as they stand, and on those that we believe need clarification. In any event, it is obvious that we are continuing our efforts unabated within the framework of the negotiations.

We are still working on a substantially viable solution. That is, a solution that will be cohesive, functional, and feasible.   I want to make myself absolutely clear. We want such a solution because such a solution is needed for the region’s long-term stability. We want to resolve this issue once and for all, not settle it any old way. We do not want a solution in order to save face; we do not want a solution for its own sake. We have no need of this. Greece is the region’s oldest European Union and NATO member state, its most mature democracy, its strongest economy; it is the most reliable regional pole of security and development. It is clear that from the position that we are in, we want a solution, but there is no cause for anxiety on our part. We have no need of fig leaves.  We are being frank: We want this solution in order to contribute once again to the region’s stability; in order to secure the enormous prospects that regional cooperation holds for all of the region’s countries, including our own of course.  Greece is implementing a responsible policy. Our leading role in the region brings with it great responsibility for its future, which is directly linked with our own future. We are fully aware of this responsibility. We cannot invest in the region’s instability – in founded or unfounded scenarios of a potential future destabilization – under the illusion that in this way we might reap short-lived gains. Such a policy would be short-sighted and to no purpose.  Greece continues to take part in negotiations with the same conviction, with the same clear positions, keeping all its options open. The strong, positive message that we have repeatedly sent to Skopje still stands. We want to find a solution on the name issue that will allow us to continue supporting our neighboring state on its course towards Euro-Atlantic institutions.  This is what we want and what we aim for. There is still some time before the Bucharest Summit. Greece will continue to make every possible effort with a view to finding a mutually acceptable solution up until the Bucharest Summit, but also after it. Until such a solution is reached, however, we cannot, of course, consent to addressing an invitation to our neighboring state to join NATO.  No solution – no invitation.