President Kucan Summarises Two-Day Debate by Sixteen Central
European Presidents Closing press conference of the 9th Meeting of
Presidents of Central European States
Brdo 01.06.2002
Distinguished Presidents and dear friends, Ladies and Gentlemen of
the press. My colleague have entrusted me with the task of trying to
summarise the results of our discussions these past two days, which is
by no means a simple undertaking.
I ask you for your understanding as you are working out here in the
sun. Let the consolation be that it would have been even worse if you
had to work in the rain, so this is nevertheless the better solution.
Firstly let me inform you that we spoke, as was agreed in advance,
of Central Europe as an integrator of a uniting Europe, about Europe's
transformation and its future, about the achievements of Europe's
transformation and its future.
Of course we could not avoid the issue of the current shape of the
world as we see it and the situation brought about by the global
nature of our world. With all due respect to differences, we
attentively listened to one another and spoke very frankly. We took
account of the fact that our countries are in different situations and
in different positions vis-a-vis European integration structures, that
our experiences with life in these structures differ, that our
historical burdens differ and that these facts also determine the
positions we represent.
We all agreed that the times in which this meeting is taking place
are very important times for Europe. Crucial processes are under way
that will leave a profound mark on our future. Deliberations on these
times require of us to consider the positive achievements of Europe's
development following the end of its block division. However, the
substance and significance of the individual decisions we are now
facing are such that one could also brand our times as
critical. Positive development has already considerably changed
Europe's shape and has to a large extent alleviated its erstwhile
divisions. There are certain issues, however, that require carefully
thought-out answers to prevent these issues from threatening the
positive achievement of our development to date.
The moment of our meeting, which marked our discussions, was
determined primarily by the following:
- Firstly the upcoming decision on EU and NATO enlargement, the
consequences of which will certainly reach beyond erstwhile European
divisions.
- Furthermore, our discussion was influenced considerably by the
recent founding of the NATO-Russia Council at the Rome Summit. This
requires a consideration of the future security architecture in
Europe. This of course was influenced also by some of the recent
meetings between Presidents Bush and Putin, as well as President
Bush's tour around some of Europe's capitals.
- Another influence on our deliberations was the fact that the
Convention on the Future of Europe and on its political model is now
underway. The Convention will have to map out such a future set-up of
a United Europe that would preserve Europe's inner plurality while at
the same time acting as a single, creative and responsible voice of
the entire continent on a global scale. That would enable Europe to
have political influence on a global scale, commensurate with its
economic might and cultural clout. That would also make EU enlargement
the project of a united Europe, and that would make the project of a
United Europe a cultural and ethical undertaking as well.
- Finally, our talks were also influenced by the recognition of the
effects of globalisation and the necessity of facing up to its
negative effects: terrorism organised international crime, illegal
migrations and similar phenomena. We were of the opinion that through
intensive cooperation going beyond state borders, Europe could serve
as a good example of how the negative effects of globalisation can be
alleviated or at least limited.
I would also like to let you know that there were no differences
between us in terms of our fundamental views on the necessity of
enlargement of European integration structures. We are unanimous on
this issue, although the disparities in the distance that the
participating countries still have to travel to the EU and NATO does
give rise to some small differences in the assessment of integration
processes, as do the differences in the interests and expectations,
which, as was the case in Slovenia some time ago, are sometimes nearly
illusions.
We were also unanimous that a United Europe was our common destiny
and that belonging to Central Europe is a unique identification of
commitment to the values that we wish to jointly develop and protect
in a United Europe. We were well aware that the current process of
enlargement is not just any other enlargement. It must also be a
process that strengthens the European Union's capability to adopt
decisions, to act effectively and rationally. These are serious issues
requiring an inner strengthening of integration and an improvement of
its efficiency. We were also aware of the negative consequences of
enlargement not occurring or of it being postponed or of it slowing
down considerably both in the EU and NATO.
We also shared the view that a United Europe should reach to where
its values reach. It should reach to where there is a willingness to
accept and develop its legal order, its democratic political culture
and its willingness to share in the responsibility for the development
of a global world and of the positive dimensions of its
interdependence. All of us believed that the forces of reconciliation
must be strengthened in order to prevent the future of becoming a
history of new wars. Intercultural dialogue must be strengthened to
this end.
We underlined the need for a United Europe - also through internal
institutional changes - to develop as soon as possible such political
influence in the global world that will be commensurate with its true
economic power. In our discussions we found that all the crucial
European values of economic, political and spiritual democracy as well
as social stability apply in Central Europe today. We underlined that
Central Europe's stability is important for the stability of our
entire continent.
Furthermore we found that Central Europe is no longer just a bridge
between Europe's erstwhile political east and its erstwhile political
west. Instead it is increasingly becoming an active factor of
integration of its broader eastern and south-eastern region with
Euro-Atlantic structures.
We came to the conclusion that the political and spiritual
situation in Central Europe and around the whole continent is not just
positive. It is also reviving national populisms, xenophobia, even
anti-Semitism, a European provincial pretentiousness towards other
civilisations and continents, as well as political
radicalism. Fundamentalisms do not acknowledge dialogue, which is now
becoming and must become Europe's way of life. Quite the opposite,
fundamentalisms force confrontation through dialogue. That is why
these phenomena are dangerous. We were of the opinion that it is not
possible to accept the patterns of political behaviour that endanger
the achievements of Europe's positive development following the fall
of the Berlin Wall, of behaviour that poses a threat to security,
solidarity and reconciliation and that opposes EU and NATO
enlargement.
The need was also underscored - and this is the crucial emphasis of
our meeting - for an open and well-argued dialogue with the citizens
of all European states, both in the EU Member States and in the
Candidate Countries, as well as others. This dialogue should explain
the purpose of European integration and the meaning of institutional
changes, as well as the effect of these changes on the lives of our
citizens. People need information in order to understand the necessity
and justification of these changes. If left uninformed, they will be
prone to uncertainty, anxiety about the loss of social security, fear
of a lower quality of life, of the loss of their cultural and
spiritual identity, of the loss of their own culture and, in
particular, the loss of any possibility of influencing decisions. All
of this also leads to a resistance towards enlargement both in the
Member States and in the Candidates, creating an atmosphere exploited
by the opponents of enlargement, by advocates of national populism and
xenophobia. All this also created fertile ground for national egotism,
which narrows the sphere of solidarity as a fundamental value that we
also spoke of extensively. Central Europe is most familiar with all of
these issues. It also has the greatest need for dialogue with its
citizens as this is a small part of Europe combining a lot of
diversity, combining also all these contradictions, differences and
misunderstandings. That is perhaps why it would be easiest as well as
most necessary for such dialogue to pursue the golden rule of life in
an organised society: do not do to others what you would not want done
to you.
We also touched on the situation in Southeast Europe and the future
of this region in the immediate vicinity of Central Europe. In the
opinion of the participants of this meeting these are European issues
as well as issues of European responsibility since they are issues of
European security. The joint discussion with the Presidents from this
region demonstrated visible progress in the stabilisation and
implementation of European values. It also demonstrated the need for
European solidarity in economic and social development, thus also the
full application of European democratic values in the region. New
institutional arrangements of the EU with these countries could
accelerate their internal reform and reduce their distance from the
EU. We were particularly encouraged by and welcomed the decision by
the Presidents of the FRY and Croatia to sign a joint statement at our
meeting on new steps towards a rapprochement between the two
countries. We are glad to see signs of improved confidence between
these two countries and we hope that this gesture will be matched with
deed.
I hope that I am expressing all the participants' assessment in
saying as host of this meeting that these past two days have been a
success. The debate demonstrated a high level of solidarity,
friendship and trust among ourselves, among the Presidents of the
states we represent. In our shared opinion this is a solid foundation
of future cooperation among us, among our countries, a foundation for
the successful clearing of paths for concrete action and confidence on
the part of our governments and parliaments, who have the
responsibility and the competence to do so. Also very useful were the
numerous bilateral meetings we held and to which we consecrated a lot
of our time.
This meeting will be followed by the 10th meeting next year in
Salzburg, on the tenth anniversary of the idea of these meetings. The
host next year will be President Klestil of the Republic of Austria.
Our past meetings are also the subject of a special statement
prepared by President Havel and myself on his initiative. That
statement has been made available to you. We thanked the distinguished
President and dear friend Vaclav Havel for his intellectual
justification of our meeting and for his great involvement in making
these meetings a success. They shall bear the mark of his visionary
ideas in the future. The purpose of this statement was to present our
view of the significance of these meetings, their achievements, of the
times we are living, and of the future, including the future of these
meetings from this perspective. We were glad to note that most of the
deliberations and their substance coincided with our statement and
that other Presidents also seconded the statement in their
interventions.
A strong resolve was voiced to continue with these meetings in the
future, for as long as the Presidents participating at the meetings
will see them as meaningful and as a space for strengthening mutual
trust and the conviction that all of us are part of the same area,
sharing the same spiritual inclinations and the same past, therefore
also sharing similar expectations for the future.
In conclusion let me wish every success to future Central European
meetings. On behalf of all of us I would also like to thank you,
ladies and gentlemen of the press, for your attentive and responsible
reporting to the public about our work. It was through you and through
your work that the public at large was informed of our activities. As
already mentioned by the Director of the Government PR and Media
Office, Mrs Brglez, the Presidents will now be available to you to the
left and right of the sitting area according to the programme you have
been made familiar with. Thank you.
GOVERNMENT PUBLIC RELATIONS AND MEDIA OFFICE © 2002
|