Brussels, 14/03/2012 (Agence Europe) - On Wednesday 14 March, MEPs repeated their appeal to the Council to set a date for negotiations with the Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia (FYROM) “as soon as possible”. In a resolution put forward by Richard Howitt (S&D, United Kingdom) on the 2011 follow-up report for FYROM, adopted by an overwhelming majority (582 votes in favour, 70 against, with 34 abstentions), the Parliament underlines the need for “continued respect for the political criteria” by the country and deplores the fact that the Council has not decided to open accession negotiations. The MEPs regret that the difference regarding the name of the country is blocking the latter's progress to join the EU and the MEPs call on FYROM and Greece to step up their dialogue in an attempt to find a solution.
MEPs underline the importance of “the election of a new parliament and the swift formation of the coalition government” and demand greater political dialogue. They also call on FYROM to continue its reforms to “guarantee an efficient, transparent and independent judicial system” and a “professional, impartial and competent administration”. The MEPs also call for efforts to be stepped up in the fight against corruption. The resolution calls on Skopje to “pursue its efforts to strengthen policies for tackling discrimination” and demonstrate “a clear commitment in favour of pluralism and media freedom”.
The debate was dominated by the question of a name. The day before the beginning of the high-level dialogue on the accession of FYROM, in Skopje, Danish Minister for Foreign Affairs Nicolai Wammen underlined the progress made with regard to the country's administration, legal sector, election process, regional cooperation and the treatment of minorities. Integration of the Roma, however, remains insufficient (and their economic situation difficult), free expression is coming up against limitations (the closure of a TV channel that was critical of the government) and the fight against corruption needs to be stepped up through institutional measures. Finally, there is still the question of the name, which needs to be settled with a solution that is accessible to everyone.
High-level dialogue is no substitute for accession negotiations, pointed out Stefan Füle, on behalf of the European Commission, and negotiations can only begin once all the criteria have been fulfilled and the question of the name, which has pitted FYROM against Greece, is settled. The commissioner explained that the UN had a mandate in this area and that the European Commission could not intervene unless the two parties clearly demanded it to do so. Elmar Brok (EPP, Germany) wanted to know how the question of the name could be allowed to block negotiations which would consolidate the stability of the whole eastern Balkans area. This name had never presented a problem when this country was part of Yugoslavia and why should it be allowed to prolong a quarrel that has discredited the whole enlargement process, exclaimed George Schöpflin (EPP, Hungary). Speaking on behalf of the Greens/EFA, Marije Cornelissen from the Netherlands called for a solution based on a geographical definition of the name. She said that perhaps one day they would be able to say its name instead of talking about “this country” as they had in this debate, and that they would be able to talk about “Macedonia of the North”, “a country where the inhabitants will be able to speak Macedonian freely”. As expected, the majority of Greek MEPs were not as open as this on the question of the name, particularly the spokesperson for the GUE/ Nordic Left Group, Nikolaus Chountis, who said that the country should be allowed to join the EU if its population wanted to but that the problem of the name remained a major obstacle. The same sentiments were expressed by Nikolai Salavrakos, speaking on behalf of the EFD. Irish Socialist, Alan Kelly, said that the name of FYROM was rather unfortunate and pointed out that he would not like it very much if they described his country as the Former Republic of Great Britain.
Speaking in a personal capacity on this issue, Stefan Füle, confirmed that one of the lessons that they might be able to draw from Europe's history is that for a country, the best way to serve its citizens is to think of its neighbours and to attempt to understand these neighbours and achieve mutual understanding, whilst respecting the existence of identity and each country's different roots.
The Parliament rapporteur, Richard Howitt from the United Kingdom, also spoke on behalf of the S&D Group and defended FYROM's European vocation. He argued that it had been able to normalise its relations with its neighbours and should be able to accept “robust but friendly” criticism from the EU. With regard to the name, there is no alternative to a negotiated settlement that was acceptable to all. Howitt regretted that they wanted to withdraw the congratulations addressed to FYROM for its success in the basketball championship. Eduard Kukan (EPP, Slovakia) said that the country should concentrate on improving the freedom of expression and tackling corruption. According to Norica Nicolai, from Romania, reform of the penal code and independence of the judicial system were the areas where they had to take priority action. He demonstrated a certain frustration with regard to the sluggishness of progress made in relations with FYROM and asked whether this reflected misgivings about the enlargement process in general. (CG/LG/transl.fl)