We are delighted to have the Deputy Prime Minister of the Republic of Serbia, Mr. Bozidar Djelic, here and I welcome him and his team, Mr. Branimir Filipovic, Deputy Head of Mission, Ms Jelena Danilovic, Deputy Chief of Cabinet, and Mr. Mihajlo Papazogli, EU adviser. The purpose of the meeting is to discuss EU-Serbian relations. I understand the Deputy Prime Minister will also address the Institute of European and International Affairs on this visit and that he will also meet the Tánaiste and Minister for Foreign Affairs and Trade, Deputy Eamon Gilmore. We are privileged to have the Deputy Prime Minister here and he will speak for approximately ten minutes. We will then have comments and questions.
EU-Serbia Relations: Discussion
Mr. Bozidar Djelic
Is onóir dom a bheith anseo. I hope members got half of that, at least.
Well done.
Mr. Bozidar Djelic
Go raibh maith agat. It is a pleasure to be in Dublin. My first visit to Ireland was two years ago with my family. We had the great pleasure of spending a week here in the month of August when we visited Sligo, Dublin and many other beautiful places in this great country. I had the opportunity to see at first hand what others and I had read in books and reports, both the achievements and the travails of the crisis.
I am addressing the committee a few weeks after the presentation of the opinion or Avis of the European Commission on Serbia’s progress towards membership of the European Union and also following the ratification by Ireland of the stabilisation and association agreement. I thank you for this as it is important to us and our citizens.
As I understand members would like this meeting to be interactive, I will limit my remarks to a few key points. We will leave a prepared statement with the committee. We have also prepared two presentations, one of which relates more to European related reforms, the economic situation in Serbia and opportunities for Irish firms, while the other is on the knowledge economy, on which we have been drawing a lot of inspiration from what Ireland has been doing in recent decades.
On 9 December the leaders of the European Union will gather to decide whether candidate status will be granted following the Avis of the European Commission. The report of the Commission demonstrates, first, that Serbia is a fully functioning parliamentary democracy. This might seem to be a normal thing to do, but it is only 11 years since the war ended. We have also had our share of challenges in the past decade. There have been changes in the set-up of the country, including the democratic changes in 2000 and the overthrow of the authoritarian regime of Slobodan Milosevic which brought to an end the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia. It changed to being Serbia and Montenegro. However, in 2006 Montenegro decided by referendum to part ways. Therefore, after 88 years the country has again become Serbia.
There have been challenges. I had the pleasure of serving in four Cabinets in the past ten years. I am something of a young dinosaur in Serbian politics. It took time for the democratic changes to get to grips with the so-called deep power structures and, in particular, to have true civilian control of the armed forces and also the services. However, we did not do it in time to save the life of our first democratic Prime Minister, Zoran Dindic, who was killed in 2003. I was a finance Minister in his team. He attempted to get all of those indicted to go before the Hague tribunal, ICTY, and also to break the link between some elements of the state and the Mafia created during the 1990s. The Mafia and the mob are not a Serbian or Balkans tradition. It is a direct product of the violent break-up of Yugoslavia, whereby economic sanctions led to a few benefitting a lot through connections with those at the top of the state. After the tragic assassination, there was the first decisive hit against organised crime which has been followed up in the past two or three years. This has been recognised by the European Commission and our partners alike. The action against organised crime and large-scale corruption has been very important in recent years. Following court decisions, we have frozen and taken away €350 million worth of property that was in the hands of organised crime. That is an important element that has been commended both by the American Drug Enforcement Administration, DEA, and the British Serious Organised Crime Agency, SOCA, with which we have been able to arrest people as far away as Uruguay. We have been fighting against drug cartels which have been using the Balkans as a transit route. That is very important for Ireland also.
I understand a debate will take place in this House on drug use by young people. We believe that by doing such work we are contributing to our common European future. That is something on which we will continue to work. I admit that it took time, but this year through collaboration with the Hague tribunal we had the arrests of Radovan Karadzic, just a few days after we were finally able to put in our man as head of the secret police in 2008. Our man is not a political leader but someone who shares the values of the democratic changes post-2000.
When we arrested Ratko Mladic in May and Goran Hadzic in July we were able to turn over all the 46 indictees to the Hague tribunal. We did not do it because of European or Irish conditions. We did it because that was our domestic, regional and international moral duty. It was a way for us to start the reconciliation process with the Bosniaks who had suffered most in the conflict. That is why my President went twice to Srebrenica and our Parliament last March voted a resolution on Srebrenica which at the same time had provisions guaranteeing the territorial integrity of Bosnia-Herzegovina, which is our policy. We will not support any movement to break up that country. We support the territorial integrity of all our neighbours. We also ask others to respect ours.
There is a difference of opinion between Ireland and Serbia on Kosovo. We propose to solve that difference of opinion by dialogue. We are drawing more than a little inspiration from what Ireland was able to achieve through the Good Friday Agreement: the power sharing agreements and ways through which complicated issues can be taken forward, despite difficulties. That is why, together with Ireland and the 26 other member states of the European Union, we proposed a resolution in the General Assembly of the United Nations to open dialogue between Belgrade and Pristina. We began the dialogue in March. We had to wait seven months before Pristina re-elected institutions, both a government and a President. In March there were some early results, but, unfortunately, Pristina led some unilateral armed action in the north of Kosovo which has approximately 60,000 people, 98% of whom are Serbs who do not want to be separated from central Serbia.
There is a proposal for integrated border management through which we should be able to reopen gates 1 and 31 to defuse tension and get rid of the barricades. Tension in the north of Kosovo leads to violence in the south of Kosovo. I know it is not reaching the media in Dublin, but several Serbian civilians have been killed. That is why the first order of business is to defuse the tension and then to apply, as recommended by the opinion of the European Commission, what has already been agreed on freedom of movement and also Kadastra. We stand ready and hope that as early as next Monday we will have the next round of negotiations with Pristina in Brussels under the aegis of Mr. Robert Cooper to reach agreement on the other elements that one can find in the opinion of the Commission on energy matters, telecoms and many other areas. In fact, that is what we ask for; we want everybody in the western Balkans to have a European future. However, we will not recognise the unilateral declaration of independence of Kosovo in 2008.
As has often been the case - I know that speaking in Dublin people can relate to this - there are claims on the same land. The Serbian state was formed in Kosovo in the Middle Ages. That is where the centre of our church is to be found. That is where the head of the Serbian church has been installed since 1219. It means something to our people because during the Turkish occupation which lasted almost six centuries, Kosovo and its heritage were what kept the nation alive. At the same time we know that we must find a solution to the Kosovo issue before we join the European Union. We know that the Union does not want to import yet another difficulty. We are ready for this. We call for an historical compromise between Serbs and Albanians on the topic in order to stop the cycle of violence. The problem of Kosovo did not start with Slobodan Milosevic and it has not been solved by the unilateral declaration of independence of 2008, whatever some people think. It is an issue of consent. We are being told that Kosovo Albanians do not want to be ruled from Belgrade, but there is another aspect of that reality; non-Albanians do not want to be ruled from Pristina.
We need a compromise. That is why, given the experience here where a compromise has been reached, we would like to have this country's contribution to help us to solve this issue. It cannot be the case that one side wins and one side loses. We wish to preserve the interests of the Serbian people. That is why my President at the General Assembly of the United Nations last September proposed that any settlement on the issue of Kosovo cover at least the four following points: special status for the north of Kosovo; protection for the Serbs south of the River Ibar; protection of the five major holy sites of the Orthodox faith and; the issue of Serbian assets, whereby $19 billion was invested between 1959 and 1980 in Kosovo. The question concerns our desire to reopen dialogue. I hope, with the support of this committee on 9 December, to achieve candidate status for our country. As members will see from the report, this would be well deserved on the basis of our track record on reform. Our goal is to begin negotiations to join the European Union next year and we are absolutely aware of the difficulties in the Union at this point. These difficulties affect us directly, but not through Greece because the Greek banks have a market share of 13% of loans and assets. We are affected mainly because we are linked with northern Italy, southern Germany, Austria and Slovenia. These are the parts of Europe economically relevant to us.
Unfortunately, there is no economic link with Ireland to the extent needed. Only €65 million has been invested by Ireland in Serbia, mostly in the food and construction sectors. Much more can and should be done. I refer to the double taxation avoidance treaty that came into force at the beginning of this year and the fact that Ireland has high prestige in our country. Often we talk about "the Irish model". I am sure it looks more complicated from Dublin, but from our distance the recovery of the Irish economy, its significant increase in education levels and skills and its capacity for attracting top grade companies, particularly in the technology sector, are a very big source of inspiration for us. I remember being in Japan speaking for six hours on this subject. The Irish model was of help to me in crafting our strategy and policies, bearing in mind that for two and a half years I was the science and technology Minister. We are investing €400 million in science and technological infrastructure in different centres. My presentation outlines the details. We took more than one page from the Irish book in this regard.
Serbia has changed significantly and I encourage the members to visit us. For us, more than others, the maxim that applies is "Seeing is believing".
We thank the members for their support for the SAA and look forward to their support in the next steps on Serbia's EU membership path. We would like to think of how we could make a contribution to our common construction, which is under a lot of stress. We do so by having a low ratio of debt to GDP, 44%, and a low budget deficit, 4.3%, this year. The growth rate could be better, but it will still be 2.5% this year. In the past ten years we attracted €17 billion in investment, including two €1 billion investments this year, one by the Belgian retail company Delhaize and a second by Fiat which will be opening the first car factory to be opened in Europe in five years. It will be in the city of Kragujevac and produce 250,000 new models, starting next year.
Not everything is bad in the Balkans. The winds of collaboration are blowing. Members will have seen my President. I was proud to be with him in Vukovar where last November words of apology and sorrow were expressed.
Investment within the region has greatly increased. Slovenian companies, for instance, have invested in the order of €2 billion in my country. Our people are communicating much more because, ultimately, we shared the same state for almost 90 years.
I thank the members for their very kind invitation. If I am not mistaken, I am the first Minister from Serbia to speak here. Perhaps the Foreign Minister was here.
Mr. Branimir Filipovic
In January.
Mr. Bozidar Djelic
Therefore, I am the second. I hope we will soon have an Irish visit to our Parliament.
I thank the Deputy Prime Minister for his remarks. I acknowledge what he has said about the stabilisation and association agreement which we ratified in these Houses last month. It will come before the European Council next month in dealing with the application from Serbia. We hope progress will be made on the opening of negotiations on Serbia becoming a full member of the European Union.
This Parliament has always supported the idea of having a stable Balkans structure, of which we have always regarded Serbia as an integral part. We recognise the difficulties in respect of Bosnia and Kosovo. The Deputy Prime Minister will be aware that we supported Kosovan independence after 2008. We would, therefore, have some difficulties with Serbia in some of these matters. However, they must all be negotiated and teased out in the context of an application for membership to the European Union and the fulfilment of the various conditions that apply.
We expressed concern about the 46 war criminals and were somewhat relieved that the last two, Hadic and Mladic, were arrested. This represents considerable progress in the areas about which we expressed concern.
We support the general thrust of what the Deputy Prime Minister has said and is doing. We are very anxious to maintain as strong a relationship as possible with Serbia and offer whatever support we can on its journey towards EU membership. We recognise there are considerable difficulties to be overcome regarding many matters that the European Union will no doubt discuss. The main condition imposed by the Union is that the relationship with Kosovo must be sorted out. Likewise, the relationship with Bosnia-Herzegovina must be sorted out. This is one of which we are keenly aware. Will the delegation make some reference to progress in these areas in the context of the application for membership of the Euopean Union?
I welcome the delegation and thank it for taking the time to apprise us of the issues in its region. We have repeatedly spoken about this subject at the committee and emphasised the importance of the dialogue taking place. I hope it will be possible to reciprocate the delegates' visit with a visit to Serbia in the not too distant future considering the importance of ongoing dialogue with Members of Parliament in EU member states and other states throughout Europe.
I compliment the Deputy Prime Minister on the progress made to date in the context of negotiations on membership of the European Union. We are particularly conscious of the testing economic circumstances in Europe, including Ireland and Serbia. It is the biggest test of the moral fibre of the peoples of Europe in the past 60 years. If they are capable of passing this test, it will be to the benefit of Europe. It is particularly important that the western Balkans be stable and progressive and move towards European brotherhood, or sisterhood, in a positive fashion.
We are conscious of the difficulties in the Balkans region. That difficulties remain means they must be resolved. This, unfortunately, is part of the circumstances that obtain. We are aware of this and know it applies to Ireland. Resolution does not occur overnight and sometimes takes a long time. It is sometimes important that the most direct route, the quickest possible route, be taken to heal the difficulties, wounds and scars and move forward. However, there will always be those who will say we cannot move forward until we address the issues of the past. There will be those who say that by remaining in the past for long enough, one will never move forward. The issues that are being confronted by several sides in that region require a great degree of concentration at present. The position in Kosovo, to which the Deputy Prime Minister has referred, must be brought up to the front line in discussions that take place with a view to resolving the issues and to ensuring there is no return to the position that obtained some years ago. It should not be revisited because we also know from experience that there is nothing as repressive or as regressive as returning to the issues of past injustices and seeking revenge. At the same time, there is nothing less helpful to progress than those who were aggressors failing to accept or running away from responsibility. The Deputy Prime Minister has correctly alluded to the importance of addressing these issues as a matter of urgency.
Note is taken of the progress made to date in respect of the issues raised by the European Union in the context of moving towards the acquis communautaire. This leaves further room for improvement and negotiation, which it is hoped will take place. The single thing to be avoided, as everyone is aware, is to move backwards. Everyone must have a clear vision as to the intended destination and desired achievement, whether one refuses or is prepared to talk with those around one and the consequences of both. This is an important meeting that has great influence on what might be done. The Irish experience is an important template for others. It did not happen overnight or come easily but required everyone to work. I will conclude by noting that, in particular, it required each incumbent body to confront itself as well as its opponents. It was difficult to do but it worked.
I welcome Deputy Prime Minister Djelic and his entourage to Dublin and before the joint committee. Unfortunately, a number of Senators are obliged to leave the meeting to vote in the Seanad Chamber. Members have a memory of what took place during the collapse of the former Yugoslavia in the relatively recent past. It is part of recent history and it is great to see the progress that has been made in the Balkans and the move to democracy in all the countries affected. This is very welcome and as Deputy Durkan noted, it is hugely important to embrace the European ideal and learn from the past. While one cannot forget things, one must learn from the past.
As for the problems that arose, there are certain similarities with this country. The Deputy Prime Minister mentioned Kosovo and the issues regarding minorities, the Albanians and so on. The Deputy Prime Minister will be fully aware that in our history, we have had similar issues with Northern Ireland. We also have faced similar challenges in that in the not too distant past, we had campaigns that were organised against our near neighbours. Thankfully, progress has been made, latterly in the Good Friday Agreement and before that in various other agreements going back to the 1970s in which attempts were made to bring together all sides. The parties comprising the current Administration were involved in various attempts, including the Sunningdale agreement and the Anglo-Irish Agreement that preceded the Good Friday Agreement, to recognise the need to acknowledge there is more than one side to a story and that one must include all sectors to try to reach agreement and consensus. These similarities exist between our respective lands.
While it is good that the European Commission is fairly positive regarding Serbia's abilities to meet its requirements under the various protocols for accession, a few issues have arisen. In respect of human rights, I believe a planned gay pride march in September of this year did not go ahead because of far right extremists and because difficulties had arisen the previous year. I invite the Deputy Prime Minister to comment on this issue. What are Serbia's relations like with its nearest neighbours, Romania and Bulgaria, which obviously are part of the Union? They have come from a background of low economic growth, high unemployment and so on. The ambassadors of those countries appeared before the joint committee a number of weeks ago. Does Serbia have concerns regarding its borders with those countries and how would the Deputy Prime Minister describe relations between the countries?
Mr. Bozidar Djelic
Kosovo is the reason it is important for me to be in Dublin in Ireland. Perhaps to a greater extent than other Europeans, Irish people can see there are different sides to a story. We in Belgrade perceive this unilateral declaration of independence, UDI, as an attempt to present only one side of the story. There are two realities in Kosovo. There is an Albanian reality but there also is a Serbian reality. Moreover, trying to push the UDI or trying, as we see it, to break up a democratic, peaceful country that is a full member of the United Nations, sets a dangerous precedent. As members are aware, this also is the reason that five member states of the European Union did not recognise Kosovo. Moreover, many countries throughout the world did not and will not do so, including Russia, China, Brazil, Argentina, South Africa and Vietnam. Countries representing almost the entire African and Latin American continents, comprising some of the fastest growing countries in the world, are worried about the potential Kosovos they might experience.
Our response to this is not to ignore the Albanian reality of Kosovo, which is to be taken into account. What we propose is to work - I have delineated what my President said in his speech to the United Nations - on the elements of what could be an historical compromise, what one might call the Balkan Good Friday Agreement. Is the latter agreement the model? Probably not as no parallel is ever perfect. This is the reason we talk about the two Germanies model when in Germany, as it also contains elements of this. When in discussion with others, we note how the position in the South Tyrol is of some interest. At any rate, there is a need for both communities to feel safe and to perceive that they have a European future. As matters stand, the UDI is not providing those assurances for the Serbian population in Kosovo. What we propose is to find a settlement that will allow us to go forward. However, to be clear, there will not be a formal recognition of Kosovo by Serbia. There are some who think it will come later but no, it will not. We must find a settlement that will suit Serbia as a sovereign state as well.
In other words, it is not a story of one people fighting for its freedom versus another people trying to prevent that freedom. We have been sharing this territory for centuries. Moreover, at times we acted together to fight against a third people, namely, the Turkish people. Consequently, history is slightly more complex than this and we perceive the UDI as an attempt to have one nationalism win over another, which is no solution for the 21st century for people who wish to join the European Union. Members should be assured that not only are we aware that we cannot enter the European Union before we solve this issue but that our position also is that we do not want to have a frozen conflict. We would rather solve this issue sooner than later. We stand ready using the dialogue that has started or another forum to address even the most sensitive issues at hand.
As members have heard, I did not talk about the partition of Kosovo. We perceive the UDI of Kosovo as a partitioning of Serbia. We do not support the partitioning of Bosnia-Herzegovina or any other country in the world for that matter. This is about Kosovo, an issue on which we need to focus. I hope we will also see the issue being raised here. Given its rich experience in this domain, Ireland would be helping us, rather than, as we see it, the universal declaration of independence which is trying to prejudge the issue and suggest there is only one reality.
In so far as other elements are concerned, on gay rights, as has been recognised in the report of the European Commission, Serbia has made significant progress, both this year and last, in ensuring all human rights are protected, including sexual orientation. This is assured in our anti-discrimination laws. Last year gay movement activists asked to be allowed to organise a first parade. It was organised and used by some small but well-organised fringe groups to try to create havoc, with no actual link with the issue at hand. This year, because of the tension in Kosovo and the day proposed, I met the organisers and asked them to find another date and venue in order that the manifestation could take place safely for everybody involved. Unfortunately, they chose the day of the finals of the European women's volleyball championships. On that day thousands of young people were engaged in a manifestation entitled, Happiness for Europe. We also had information from our services that an action was being prepared that would be even stronger and more violent than that of last year. That is the only reason the march was not organised this year. We are not denying that there is significant prejudice against the gay and lesbian population in our country and it is something we need to address in the years to come. Ours is not the only country in Europe that has gone through a similar process. It is certain, however, that these legal rights will be upheld in our constitution and legal system.
I would like to raise a particular question. I am somewhat concerned about the failure to recognise Kosovo and deal with other associated issues. This may well become a stumbling block to progress as time passes. We had similar aspirations in this country concerning territorial rights over the island of Ireland. It was in the Constitution, but we amended it. Many thought that was an easy thing to do, but it was not. Political parties representing all strata of society had strongly held views, but the matter was eventually passed by the people in a referendum to amend that part of the Constitution. It was an important step in addressing issues seen as fundamental to the conflict that led to the loss of so many lives over a long period, over 700 years, in fact. It was reimposed in the Constitution unnecessarily and I can understand the reasons for its imposition at the time. However, it remained a problem right up to the very end. It was only through discussion among ourselves when we confronted each other on the issue that we began to realise the claim was symbolic more than anything else. Removing it from the Constitution had a certain symbolism for different parties, depending on one's vantage point, but there is no doubt that it was the right thing to do. From our experience, it is unwise to put in place immovable obstacles which can remain in place forever.
It is hugely important for the economic well-being of the region that all bodies previously engaged in conflict recognise that there is more to be gained by crossing boundaries to establish a firm basis for a settlement or an understanding, than by continuing to revert back to what happened in previous times. We all know what happened, but it did not just occur in the most recent war. The region - like our island - had been a hot spot for generations. It will either remain that way and people will continue to fight and kill each other, or they will decide to negotiate to try to eliminate the loss of life and bitterness between them.
Does Mr. Djelic have any comments to make on the situation in Bulgaria and Romania?
Mr. Bozidar Djelic
I am sorry, I forgot to deal with that issue. Northern Ireland is not Kosovo; there is always a limit in making parallels. Several years ago, on the basis of what proved to be false information on three young Albanian children being killed by Serbs - in fact, they had drowned in a river - some 10,000 Serbs were kicked out of their homes. There was a pogrom in which several hundred were killed. Today there are about 210,000 internally displaced persons from Kosovo in central Serbia. That happened only 12 years ago. As members of the committee know, we have in our constitution a preamble that states Kosovo is part of our country. The interesting aspect of the Good Friday Agreement for us is power-sharing; the fact that through discussion one can resolve issues previously only resolved by fighting.
After a difficult period in the 1990s, we would like Serbia to be a predictable and reliable partner of Ireland's in the European Union. If the underlying assumption is that Serbia will formally recognise Kosovo just before joining the European Union, that is not on the cards. That does not mean, however, one cannot find a solution. In fact, the European Union is not united on that front either. The compromise I hope we will find with Pristina will allow Europe to speak with one voice.
Do we expect Ireland to withdraw recognition? We are realistic. Do we want Ireland's support for dialogue to find a commonly accepted solution? Yes, we do. Because of its difficult history, this country might be in a better position to help us; therefore, please come to Belgrade to talk with the caucuses. The committee should also go to Pristina and engage with us. It would be a good service that Ireland would render to what has been, as Deputy Durkan said, a hot spot on the Continent for so long.
Interestingly, we still have more links with the ex-Yugoslav republics than with Romania and Bulgaria because we were part of the same country for almost 90 years. Having said that, we have good relations with our neighbours in Romania and Bulgaria. We share the Danube which extends for 588 kilometres in Serbia. Members of the committee might not know this, but through a twinning arrangement with the European Union, an Irish company helped us to set up the Serbian strategy for the Danube. It may not be the most direct assumption to make on from where advice would come on a large river, but it came from Ireland. Within the European Union, we are developing a macro-regional Danube strategy, whereby we will work a lot with Bulgaria and Romania.
There are other opportunities to engage in co-operation. These include working together to stem the flow of illegal immigration into the Schengen area and Europe generally. This is significant. The difficulties both countries have in joining the Schengen area are sobering for us and require action. The committee will see in my opening statement that we have reduced by 60% the number of asylum seekers from Serbia to four Schengen area countries, namely, Germany, Sweden, Luxembourg and Belgium. There is also a significant Roma minority which, without wishing to pinpoint that community more than another, statistically has been most to the forefront in seeking asylum.
The important element in being a candidate country is that it would lead to the Shengen area countries recognising ours as a safe country, thus shortening the procedures in assessing asylum claims. For instance, this is what Belgium and Norway have already done. In a matter of a few months the number of requests has gone down. It is important to take a hard-headed approach to this issue. For instance, when Germany cancelled cash payments to persons seeking asylum, the numbers went down. There were people going there for cash, rather than to obtain asylum. The changes to come for the Schengen area, which will ensure that those who have been abusing the system could be barred from re-entering the space for up to five years, are seen by us in Serbia as positive, not negative. In fact, we are changing our legislation to ensure that the small minority who could be endangering the freedom of movement for the vast majority would not be in a position to do so. Today, there are 3.7 million biometric passports with the ECA standard that only Serbia has because we started last. Every passport in Serbia has a digital imprint in the chip so that one can match with our database to see if the person, the alien, is the one who he or she is presenting to be. That is our contribution as well. With Romania and Bulgaria, we will work on the Danube. We will work together ensuring that no illegal immigration goes further.
We also welcome the initiative of our neighbours to ensure that the western Balkans, post-Croatian accession, does not remain like a black hole in the middle of Europe. Nature abhors a vacuum. If the soft part of Europe is too softened, somebody else will come and something else will happen. Maybe others will look to different directions, not necessarily to Brussels. That would definitely not be in the interest of my country, the region, Europe or Ireland. In that sense, although we are aware that after Croatia joins in 2013, there will be several years before anybody else joins. We welcome Croatia's accession. It is important not to leave us in the cold, particularly within this challenged multi-financial perspective of 2014 to 2020 where the one tool proposed by the Commission which is connecting Europe in order to improve the Danube, as I already mentioned, is the highway. The shortest route to the fast-growing markets of Turkey, the Middle East and central Asia is through our countries of Serbia and Bulgaria, and we need to upgrade the railways, in particular, for freight, which is quite expensive. We cannot at the same time be fiscally responsible and build it quickly on our own. We must have some form of blending of this connecting Europe using international financial institutional and domestic funds. We also need to build a highway linking Serbia to Montenegro, Bosnia and Albania, and then Croatia through Dubrovnik, which is another project that we could offer. The prospective is challenging because of the current economic crisis and the remaining issues of which the committee will be aware in the Balkans, but it is by no means a doomed region - far from it.
Deputy Durkan raised interesting questions in terms of the Good Friday Agreement and the manner in which we began to address the 800 year old problem between the two parts of this island, recognising eventually that, essentially, the issue was one not of territory but of hearts and minds, and that that was the key to the solution. That is the basic principle underlying the Good Friday Agreement.
In that context, I wanted to ask Mr. Djelic about the terms of the stabilisation and association process. There is a condition that has been laid down by the Commission in making the proposal to the European Council in terms of opening up the negotiations for accession by Serbia. I might quote from it and he might briefly respond to it. This would be the key priority:
Further steps to normalise relations with Kosovo in line with the conditions of the Stabilisation and Association Process by: fully respecting the principles of inclusive regional cooperation; fully respecting the provisions of the Energy Community Treaty; finding solutions for telecommunications and mutual acceptance of diplomas; by continuing to implement in good faith all agreements reached; and by cooperating actively with EULEX in order for it to exercise its functions in all parts of Kosovo.
The last point refers largely to the northern borders where there are difficulties over different border posts, access and various crimes taking place, such as smuggling. Mr. Djelic might address that briefly because that is the situation Serbia would be facing on 9 December when the decision will be made by the Council.
Mr. Bozidar Djelic
Let me be as specific as I can. As the committee will be aware, in the opinion there were two periods. There is one for granting the candidate status which asks Serbia to continue the dialogue with Pristina and to implement what has been agreed already, namely, the two issues of freedom of movement of goods and the Kadastra issue. This is for 9 December.
Then, for opening negotiations, those are the topics the Chairman has just mentioned, namely, continuing with the two agreed plus energy, telecommuications, diplomas and ensuring that EULEX functions all around Kosovo.
On those promises, we have no problem with those conditions in the sense that they do not go against our constitution or pre-judge what we hope would be a settlement with Pristina. Those are elements which will allow for life to be easier for everybody in Kosovo and Metohija.
Specifically on telecommunications, for example, let me illustrate that, first, we have not waited for the opinion to start discussing this issue in the dialogue. Today, the situation is such that people calling out of Kosovo go through an operator from Monaco, and significant costs are imposed. We have made several proposals. As the committee will be aware, our international code is 381. We made a proposal for Kosovo, to be 3815, and that was refused. Then we proposed that the International Telecommunications Union propose another code for Kosovo that we would propose to them, and that was refused too.
This illustrates that we can approach those issues in two ways. The first is to play cat and mouse, to try to outwit each other in the sense of who is getting more sovereignty through this game and who is trying to get implicit recognition through this. The second route, which we believe is the much better one, is to solve the issue. If we adopt, with support from the European Union, the second approach to solve the issue rather than to try to affirm sovereignty one way or another, we have a good chance of reaching an agreement on telecommunications, energy and diplomas.
Serbia welcomed EULEX through the presidential declaration of the United Nations Security Council of November 2008 - this was one of the points. The basis of the mandate of EULEX is for EULEX to be status neutral. If one thinks about it, it cannot be any other way because 22 countries of the EU recognised Kosovo and five did not, and it is a European mission. It must be neutral on the issue of status.
The problem that we have seen this summer is that at times EULEX went beyond that mandate and has been seen carrying Kosovar border officials without those matters being settled, either with the local community of Serbs in the north or, even less, with Belgrade. We have it from them, it is even being discussed and agreed with a very large number of European countries. Our proposal on this border crossing is on the table for almost a month. What we have proposed is for everybody to be there on the same line, to be together and to share the responsibility. In that way we hope that we will be able to reopen trade together, with EULEX being present to do the job of manning the customs operations. I hope the committee will agree that what has been originally meant as a trade facilitation has led to tensions, barricades, barbed wire and even loss of life.
It has been proven that also those topics one needs to come back to the table. On Monday next, we are to have a meeting in Brussels. We hope that the agreement on this integrated management will be reached and then it will be up to us, from Belgrade, to ensure that everybody sticks to that agreement. It is not easy. The members of the committee are politicians. Representatives of Serbs in the north are in caucuses which are in opposition to my Government. We have elections in the spring. Not everybody sees eye to eye on those topics. The people who are the local representatives of the Serbs in the north have been elected and they are legitimate. Even though we do not always agree with them, we have to recognise their legitimacy. Trying to paint them as a parallel structure, as some are trying to do, is strangely undemocratic. These are the people who have the confidence and the backing of the people locally and we need to work with them, no matter how difficult it is.
Is the presence of EU forces in the region accepted? Strong views on both sides were intimated to the committee previously about the role to be played by EUFOR there, how acceptable this was and whether it was likely to be acceptable in the future to everybody.
Mr. Bozidar Djelic
It is difficult for us to say we want to join the Union and not to welcome the Union's presence as long as it is the result of discussion and a negotiated presence. This is why we welcomed EULEX and we want its success but when it starts to diverge from its mandate and starts to take sides, that is when things start to look bad. KFOR, for instance, has a UN mandate but it also has a status neutral mandate. It is important for international forces to remain neutral and to play their role, which is to maintain peace and stability. The political process should then lead to a sustainable solution.
We also had a particularly non-palatable episode. We asked for an investigation to be conducted into a serious allegation by a Swiss Senator, Dick Marty, in his report in February of this year to the Council of Europe. We regret that it took almost a year for EULEX to form a team and it started its investigation only two weeks ago. We still say that by being limited to the mandate of EULEX, which is only in Kosovo, they do not have a wide enough mandate to look at places where, as the committee probably knows, very serious allegations of human organ harvesting and trafficking by some Kosovar Albanians are being put forward because there are users in countries such as Morocco, Egypt, Turkey and Israel. We wanted the UN to have a say, as was the case in all suspected crimes in former Yugoslavia. We support and look forward to EULEX cracking that issue.
We captured all 46 people involved because, as the Deputy said, we also wanted people to face their responsibility. We think that responsibility should not be collective. Guilt has a name. That is how we can also move to peace. In the Second World War, hundreds of thousands of Serbs were killed by the people with whom we were together in the former Yugoslavia and we can go through this cycle again and again. If they are criminals, they should have a name and they should go through a normal judicial procedure. EULEX can help on that account. We look forward to the presence of the EU and we look to the opportunity for the dialogue under the auspices of Lady Ashton and Robert Cooper to be successful.
If there is anyone who has a stake in making sure that Kosovo goes the right way, believe me, it is us. I was in Kosovo seven times over the last three years. Today in Kosovo, the unemployment rate among young people is 81% while exports were worth €300 million last year with imports of €3 billion on a GDP estimate of €5 billion. The agreement they had with the IMF was denounced in the spring. I am not saying that as a Serb who is happy about the problems; this is not in our interest. It is in our interest to make sure everybody is making progress in the Balkans.
I refer to an issue that might have a bearing on the negotiations. Serbia's last elections were in 2008 and the President had a narrow majority. Is it correct that the next elections are due next summer?
Mr. Bozidar Djelic
Ireland and the EU can help keep Serbia on the European path. I am not asking the committee to meddle in our internal politics. God forbid but it is difficult to have a pro-European government in Serbia without a credible European path. I had the pleasure of signing the SAA on behalf of Serbia in April 2008. At that time, the Netherlands had strong reservations because of, as it saw it, insufficient collaboration with the Hague tribunal but, nevertheless, there was an agreement to sign. By the way, it was suspended immediately afterwards which was a legal innovation. Half of our adult population watched the live broadcast from Luxembourg that day. We also had the vice chairman of the European Commission come to visit us and to say, "This is the set of reforms. If you conduct them, you will be able to travel visa free through the Schengen area." The chairman of FIAT came and said, "We might all invest in a European Serbia." We carried the day. It is up to us to do what is written in the Avis of the Commission and to listen to Ireland and other member states to not only have candidate status granted on 9 December but also, hopefully, to have a date to start negotiations to join the Union after a few years.
If one wants to keep Serbia on the European path one should have a date as early as the March Council meeting. It is written in the opinion that if sufficient progress is made in the dialogue, to recommend that member states set a date later in 2012, we can turn to the people and say, "We have the date, give us a mandate". I am not saying my party will be in power but at least there would be an increased probability that people who truly support European values will be in power. That is for sure.
Short of that, there is no doubt that not getting candidate status will be a rebuff to European forces in our country. There is no doubt that failure to achieve candidate status will favour the more nationalistic strands of our politics.
As politicians, we appreciate the point. I thank Mr. Djelic. His entire presentation and the manner in which he has responded to the questions openly and frankly has been valuable and interesting. We appreciate it very much. We wish him all the best for the rest of his stay in Ireland and on the rest of his travels.
Mr. Bozidar Djelic
I thank the Chairman. I congratulate Ireland on achieving what we were unable to achieve, which is a trip to the European football championships.
We might travel through Serbia on the way.
The joint committee went into private session at 12.40 p.m. and resumed in public session at 12.45 p.m.