We have to enter NATO to enter EU

In the last few years, we have witnessed the NATO enlargement always preceding the EU enlargement. If you look at the map of Europe, from the Baltic to the border between Croatia and Hungary, you will se how the “tidal wave” has been going east.

Foreign Minister Miomir Žužul and Prime Minister Ivo Sanader set out resolutely from day one: Vatican, Bruxelles, Berlin, Strasbourg, Washington... But former Foreign Minister Tonino Picula said that those are just meaningless gestures.
We asked Hido Biščević, State Secretary and Minister Žužul’s closest partner, how does he comment that statement.
Strategically speaking, there are no significant differences between this government and the last, because our strategic goals reflect the expectations of the majority of the citizens of Croatia, so I cannot see the point of making such a statement. Under no circumstances is this just political cosmetics. Anyone who knows anything about the technique of preparing high level meetings knows that meetings with presidents, prime ministers and ministers are not held just for the sake of taking pictures. The success of our ambitious dynamics will eventually be judged based on results.

Internal consolidation

But the new government’s priorities – EU and NATO membership, good neighbourly relations – are not at all different from the last government’s priorities.
The difference is in dynamics. I am convinced that the new government is much more operative in the realisation of these priorities. It has already reached a decision for all of the possible steps and measures in the realisation of NATO membership to be considered regularly, and adopted the national program for the meeting of the criteria for joining the EU. This new dynamic is clearly visible in a new operative activeness of the government administration bodies.

Yes, but it is still just an impression. The first concrete proof of Croatia’s success on its road to the EU will be the European Commission’s positive opinion and the start of the membership negotiations, will it not? And the ground has already been prepared by the past government.
Within the next few months, results will show whether this government is successful or not. It is true that the past government has brought us to this point and that it did a successful job. But there is one aspect of approaching the Euro-Atlantic integrations that has been missing, I think, and that is internal consolidation of the system. You can enter the EU as a stable country, or you can enter the EU as an unstable country, if there is an economic, geostrategic or some other interest for you to be invited – this is probably more true for NATO than it is for the EU. So, the internal consolidation of the system or state is a process that should be concurrent with the process of approaching the EU. I think that is one of the differences in relation to the past government.

Romano Prodi’s statement that the nonratification of our SAA by all of the EU members might affect the European Commission’s opinion came quite as a surprise. How do you comment Foreign Minister Žužul blunder, when he went to disclaim that statement, while it was later to be confirmed by Jacques Wunenberger?
It was no blunder, as there obviously was a lot of misinterpretation and “word of mouth” involved as regards Mr Prodi’s statement. Unfortunately, it seems to me that our public is like a lover plucking the petals of a flower and going “she loves me, she loves me not” – we will enter the EU, we will not. Something like in 1992, when it was “they will recognise us, they will not”. I do not know whether it is media’s or diplomacy’s fault, but Croatia is no longer in a position when it has to catch a cold whenever someone abroad sneezes. We have to approach our obligations in a calmer and more responsible manner, because we cannot efficiently work with high temperature on consolidating our internal system in order to enter the negotiations with the EU with maturity and expertise.

Media responsibility

Why does Minister Žužul in his talks with the EU diplomats guarantee full co-operation with the Hague, which also means the arrest and extradition of General Gotovina, while HDZ government officials do not want to send such unambiguous messages to their electorate?
You cannot expect to approach the EU with double standard policy, let alone enter negotiations with it. So, there are no special messages for the domestic scene, because that is where the principle of responsibility and respect for international obligations must also be strengthened. There are no double standards as regards addressing the domestic and the international public, or HDZ electorate and European diplomacy.
I am well aware that the case of General Gotovina is what intrigues journalists the most. You have seen that the new government transferred the issue of co-operation with the Hague within the sphere of justice and that good communications has been established with the Prosecutor’s Office.
Simply put, if Minister Žužul or any other government official said that we will extradite General Gotovina, it would mean that we know where he is. But screaming headlines sell papers and we have to bear in mind that media also share a part of the responsibility in Croatia’s relations with the EU.

Yes, but if even the government does not know where Gotovina is, that does not mean that it cannot take a clear and honest stand on that issue.
This government made it clear that Croatia will be consistent in fulfilling the assumed international obligations and will fully co-operate with the Hague...

Does that include the willingness to arrest and extradite General Gotovina?
All else is looking beyond the horizon. When concrete questions are asked, answers will follow. The Hague Tribunal’s mandate, Security Council’s relevant resolution and our Constitutional Law are the three pillars, the three main parameters of our relations with the Hague.

One EU diplomat told me that the right thing for the Croatian government to do would be to ask of the cities and districts who pronounced General Gotovina their honorary citizen to refute that decision. Allegedly, that would be welcomed by the EU diplomacy. What do you think of that suggestion?
Such ideas and suggestions, of course, need to be paid due attention to, but I think it is much more sensible and in the long term more useful to confront the problems, solve them, and then after that life will adapt itself to the new realities.

Policy continuation

Italy still has not ratified our SAA. Before the Senate last Thursday, Minister Frattini predicted an EU future for Bulgaria and Romania in 2007, but said not a single word about Croatia, not even when he was talking about the Western Balkans. What does that tell you?
I think it is the natural result of the present condition in the leading EU states’ relations with Croatia. It is only to be expected that when we enter the “play-offs”, few European ministers, especially those most influential, will express a clear stand on anything. Considering the fact that they consult each other before reaching a final decision, of course you will not hear an unequivocal statement from any of the ministers. That is just the way it is. In no way is that a sign that our international position in danger, or that our chances of getting a positive EC’s opinion are lessened.

Minister Žužul said that the past government neglected Croatia’s NATO ambitions. If we know that during part government’s rule Croatia was received into the Partnership for Peace and Action Plan for NATO Membership, and launched military reform to meet the NATO standards, what could have been the point of Minister Žužul’s statement?
There is no doubt that the past government did a lot in approaching the NATO alliance. But as regards the Partnership for Peace, I believe that that is the result of the efforts of the government that came before the past one. However, I do not want to divide these periods into the results of this or that government’s efforts, because they are all a part or the continuation of the same process. The talks and negotiations on entering the Partnership for Peace began as early as 1993, which is little known in public, but I clearly remember that I was the ambassador to Turkey at that time, and later the assistant minister. That is the continuity of the state policy I am talking about and we can be satisfied that at least in that respect there is some continuity in this country. Our priorities cannot change with each elections, nor does the battle for a better past warrant a better future.

Security positioning

Some people believe that it is in Croatia’s national interest to enter the EU, but not NATO. What do you think of that?
Entering the EU and NATO are two parallel processes. However, in the past few years we have seen that NATO enlargement often preceded that of the EU. If you look at the map of Europe, from the Baltic to Croatia’s border with Hungary, you will see how that “tidal wave” has been moving east.
I meant to say that the security positioning of a country facilitates its economic and political consolidation within the context of joining the EU. Simply put, the EU enlargement means the enlargement of its economic interests, and that means tapping into the new markets and opening the opportunities for new investments, and that requires security. European capital will not flow into unstable or crisis regions. That is why the security aspect of the NATO Alliance is directly linked with entering the EU.