ADDRESS OF THE PRESIDENT OF THE REPUBLIC OF CROATIA AT THE ATLANTIC PARTNERSHIP ADVISORY GROUP MEETING
"We have assembled here today to discuss some very important topics for NATO as well as for the future of European area. I wish to share with you some of my thoughts on one topic and this is security of and prospects for the Southeast of Europe".
ADDRESS OF THE PRESIDENT OF THE REPUBLIC OF CROATIA AT THE ATLANTIC PARTNERSHIP ADVISORY GROUP MEETING
Ladies and gentlemen,
First, I would like to welcome you all in the Republic of Croatia and wish you success in your work.
We have assembled here today to discuss some very important topics for NATO as well as for the future of European area. I wish to share with you some of my thoughts on one topic and this is security of and prospects for the Southeast of Europe.
The break-up of the Cold War order implied the creation of a new political configuration of European area. The processes of disintegration and integration ran almost simultaneously on the European continent. Western Europe focused on strengthening the integration process that had been developing during a very challenging time of the division into Blocs. On the other hand, Eastern Europe was faced with the break-up of a political totalitarian order, its organisations and all that in the former times had constituted a monolithic, communist Eastern bloc.
During the Cold War, a socialist Yugoslavia existed in the area of South-eastern Europe. The unity of the state was based on the authority and charisma of Josip Broz Tito as well as on the role and influence of the multi-ethnic Communist Party and the Army. Tito's death denoted also the beginning of erosion of those integrating factors as well as strengthening of national demands for a different arrangement of the socialist community.
Slobodan Miloševic was one of those who wanted to use the break-up of Yugoslavia in order to create a Greater Serbia, using the preservation of Yugoslavia as a pretext. Serb personnel in the joint Yugoslav Army found in him its new leader and as time went on it assumed full control of a huge military machine that had been created by all peoples in the former state. To make the tragedy even worse, the Army that had been financed by joint contributions of all citizens was used for war and violence directed against these same citizens. The consequences of it are too well known to all of us.
In this way, the Southeast of Europe was faced with the horrors of war in addition to all problems pertaining to the break-up of the Cold War order and the politically totalitarian regime. Four years of war as well as other forms of violence in the years after signing the Dayton Agreement in the territory of the former socialist Yugoslavia were a setback for the processes of democratic consolidation and political and economic transition. Instead of catching up fast with the integration processes, the whole region halted and is still dealing with the aftermath of war and violence. Under such circumstances, it is much more difficult to catch up. However, as the example of the Republic of Croatia shows, this is not impossible.
The processes of democratic, political and economic transition in the southeast of Europe are exceptionally complex. They necessitate the participation of regional factors just as well as external ones that we most often call by a common name of international community.
International community has participated in the conflicts in this area in different ways and in different forms. Each of them had both its successes and its limitations. However, one must admit that stabilising the southeast of Europe without international community would have been much more difficult.
International community has created and implemented different operations and missions to resolve the conflict and manage the post-crisis situation in our region. As time goes by, it is getting clear that there can be no long-term stabilisation of the region if regional factors do not assume responsibility. And for them to be able to play their part, they have to be prepared and trained.
It should be stressed that NATO and the European Union have been taking part at different levels in preparing the states of the region to assume ever more responsibility for regional security and stability. NATO has done much through its presence in those parts of the region that still possess a potential for spreading destabilisation as well as through bilateral and multilateral support to specific states in their security sector reforms. The membership in the Partnership for Peace programme was of crucial importance for three states – Macedonia, Albania and Croatia – in setting the course of reforms so that in the future they can most and best contribute to regional stability. Invitation and admission of these states to the full-fledged membership is the next important step that will have significant positive impacts on the security and stability of the region.
NATO has provided most assistance in the process of transforming defence and military capacities, while the European Union is focused on some other parts of the security sector. There, we can spot a problem. There is an ever smaller likelihood of aggression and armed conflict in the region. The processes of demobilisation and transformation changed the focus of armed forces on new tasks and new forms of organisation. All emphasise the need for creating small, well equipped and mobile forces. Concepts of territorial defence are slowly ceding their place to concepts of mobile forces. All in the region are committed to the development of cooperative security and membership in the European Union and NATO.
On the other hand, there is a continuous emphasis on new security threats the region is faced with. These are: organised crime; corruption; illegal drugs, arms and human trafficking; terrorism, proliferation of weapons of mass destruction etc. These dangers are predominantly to be faced by other parts of the security sector such as police forces, the justice, intelligence and security services, customs service etc. Reforms of those sectors are a constituent part of the integration processes linked to the EU accession. In other words, that part of the sector that is today in the region, so to say, the idlest is the part that has more or less undergone transformation with NATO assistance while reforms of those parts of the security sector that are very busy or are supposed to be very busy mostly rely on domestic efforts.
And there, I will tell you, those domestic efforts for reforms are pretty weak, they differ from state to state and are mostly dependent on the current political will and structure. If the ruling structures are not sincerely committed to profound reforms of the security sector, their states are not ready and not capable of facing up to new challenges. Then, they themselves become unreliable partners on whom one cannot build stability of the region. What is the utmost consequence of such a situation? These are unreformed and unprepared parts of the security sector that are supposed to confront the chief security threats in the region. This situation is untenable in the long term and new efforts are needed to change this.
It is necessary to add another element that we face in the region. I must say that there are still some who wish a slowdown of the integration process and who persistently arouse fears from European integration. They do not want European rules and standards in our system because this would narrow down or entirely eliminate space for their illegal activities. They do not want an efficient justice system because this would imply a review of their privatisation and other projects. They inspire Euro-scepticism because well-ordered justice and other systems do not suit them.
Today, it is perfectly clear to us that it is only our state institutions that can guarantee that mistakes in politics and the economy made over the last ten years will be avoided. This cannot be done by any institution from outside. We are developing our institutions and wish to develop them on the basis of positive European experiences.
Finally, I wish to emphasise once again that long-term stabilisation of the region is not possible without joint action of international community and states of the region.
Thank you.
Press releases
