- Published: 08.02.2004.
We do not need a diplomacy that asks for negotiation advice over mobile phones
After a short leave, Hido Bišćević is back in diplomacy as State Secretary at the Croatian Ministry of Foreign Affairs. With the diplomat that has nearly the same authorities as Foreign Minister Miomir Žužul we spoke on the occasion of US Secretary of State Donald H. Rumsfeld’s visit to Croatia.
Since the new government was formed, media have
been announcing a big turnaround in policy towards the US. What kind
of a turnaround will that be?
In our political orientation there will be no changes or turnarounds,
and not only when the US is concerned. The change concerns the dynamics.
The speeding up of the relations with the EU and intensifying the relations
with the US has as the objective a firmer foreign policy positioning
of Croatia that is supposed to facilitate a more stable internal development.
That is the main objective of Croatia’s foreign policy, to create the
circumstances in which Croatia will solve its most acute economic and
social problems. “At peace with the world, at peace at home” - that
is the massage that has, after all, been written in the preamble of
the government’s program.
Present diplomacy’s flaws
Yes, but that formula could be reversed – without
solving domestic problems, there can be no successful foreign policy.
Of course. That can be explained by that part of the government’s program
that concerns the relations between foreign policy and political parties.
The government’s program clearly states that there is no party foreign
policy, only foreign policy of the Republic of Croatia. That fact needs
to be re-emphasised in these new conditions, at the beginning of the
new government’s mandate. It was precisely foreign policy partyism that
burdened the past government’s foreign policy activities. Launching
initiatives on a party level, without institutionalising them through
government institutions, is a way that leads to political anarchy. When
a country stops caring about the unity of its foreign policy platform
and starts taking initiatives that have international implications on
its own, it may have negative consequences that may be hard to control
or rectify.
Sounds good, but the fact is, however, that Croatia’s
foreign policy has never been co-ordinated and unambiguous.
I think that Croatia is now mature enough to consolidate a decision
making system and then work out and establish a vertical of decision
making. By that I do not mean that there should be a chain of command
or a new Defence and National Security Council that will reach a decision
on a certain position that all need to reiterate. We need to establish
a system of consultations that will, after an analysis by the Ministry
of Foreign Affairs, profile Croatia’s position regarding certain issue
in accordance with its national interests. That position does not need
to be rigid and operative assignments will be drawn from it. That is
what has been missing in Croatia’s diplomacy. It is only now that Croatian
diplomacy is reaching the stage where it can act in accordance with
the demands of modern-day international relations. First we had the
pyramidal structure of decision making, then in the last three of four
years we had a totally horizontal structure where there was not enough
co-ordination. One of the consequences of that is the professional erosion
of the foreign affairs system. Thankfully, we no longer need a diplomacy
that will reach for its cell phones during negotiations, asking for
instructions on what to do. But, by the same token, we do not need a
diplomacy that will reach for 5 or 6 cell phones, because that is the
perfect way for it to get paralysed.
Media simplify things
The relations towards the US have changed, though.
In which direction is that change going?
Once again, I would not call it a strategic turnaround, but a dynamisation
of these relations. Objectively speaking, the United States, as the
world’s greatest power, regardless of whether a part of Croatian public
disapproves of certain segments of its foreign policy or not, can be
an active partner in the realisation of our strategic goals.
Does Croatia need to decide what it will concentrate
mostly on – the EU or NATO?
This is a classic case of the media’s need to simplify things. It seems
that we have lost the habit of looking at international relations in
all their complexity, but rather through a simplified prism of proverbs,
so that we would not have to think too much. Without security, there
can be no investment. Or, in other words, without the spreading of the
concept of democratic security on Croatia, there will be no spreading
of the European idea, which is the basis for investment. That is, of
course, putting it simply. But NATO enlargement is, in a way, the spreading
of that security zone which enables the EU enlargement as well.
After the enlargement 1 May, Croatia, together with 5 or 6 countries,
as well as Romania and Bulgaria, will find itself in an uncovered space
security-wise.
This is an epochal process of creation. For the first time in history,
a common European house is being built. We claim that it is impossible
to build that house if four or five rooms on the ground floor remain
locked. Even more so if you cram in there the families that were at
war just recently. The process of spreading the security zone from the
west to the southeast is in the interest of the European idea.
Does that mean that Croatia wants to take a more
active part in the region?
I have recently said to an ambassador: “Do not think that our wish to
join the EU is a wish to get out of this region as soon as possible.
On the contrary, by entering the EU, we will spread the security zone
in the region and assume all the obligations and responsibilities that
come with it”. By that we will provide an example for other democratic
forces in the region to recognise the worthiness of efforts that are
need to be made in order to get the full membership. A “red card” to
Croatia might have a discouraging effect on these forces. Those who
think that it is not yet time for Croatia to enter negotiations with
the EU should take the responsibility for what might happen in the region.
NATO membership means assuming obligations
Would Croatia profit by sending its troops to
Iraq?
I have to give a diplomatic answer. This is a very complicated issue,
considering the international position of Croatia, the attitude of the
parties and the issue-conscious public. Joining the NATO alliance means
the readiness to assume certain obligations and responsibilities. The
international security system is not a buffet from which you can take
whatever you like and leave the rest. It requires active participation
from each country, according to its possibilities, of course, and according
to agreements with partners. Croatia is already taking part in the operation
in Afghanistan, Sierra Leone and other African countries. We need to
confirm ourselves from the point of international profiling as a country
that is capable of performing such operations, especially considering
the fact that we have been at war just seven years ago.
Policy of pulling by the sleeve
Does Croatia need to decide between the EU and
the US regarding the non-extradition of the US citizens?
No. When mom and dad are fighting, the kid need to save its skin. The
relations between the EU and the US are “on the rocks” right now because
of the operations in Iraq, weapons of mass destruction, WTO and steel,
and reflect a deeper process where you have the US as undisputedly the
world’s greatest power, and Europe that is on the rise and wants to
overcome its image of economic giant and political dwarf. That Europe
is gradually synchronising with Russia, which is slowly reaching its
former level of industrial democracy. If you try to imagine that process
20-30 years from now, you will see that there is a transatlantic rivalry
here. Small countries are always in the hardest position. When there
is a balance of strength, small countries are constantly pulled by the
sleeve. That seems to be the current thing nowadays, as there are some
15 countries between the Baltic and the Adriatic that are “on the market”.
Do you think that the Americans will offer a “take it or leave it” non-extradition
agreement?
It is precisely because of the United States’ wider interests in the
Adriatic region, that has been formally united by the Adriatic Charter
between Croatia, Albania and Macedonia, and that then goes on to NATO
members Greece and Turkey, that the American diplomacy has come out
with any direct requests or put any pressure.
Content-related and formal changes in relations with the Hague
Can Croatia now finally
co-operate with the Hague in a normal fashion?
I think that a lot has changed in the relations between Croatia and
the Hague Tribunal. That change is apparent in the new way of communication,
and a lot has changed content-wise too. Politically speaking, a lot
has changed by transferring the whole issue within the jurisdiction
of justice. I will give some examples: the handing of documents to Gotovina’s
lawyers and the handing of documents regarding the Paško Ljubičić case.
There is one more fact that is seldom mentioned by the public – the
testifying of Croatian witnesses in the Hague is going smoothly without
any problems. Croatia remains consistent in its attitude of respecting
all international obligations and it is ready for a full co-operation
with the Hague, whereby it will follow three guidelines, and these are
the relevant Security Council resolutions, the Tribunal’s mandate and
our Constitutional Law on Co-operation with the Hague Tribunal.