Verbatim report of proceedings

Wednesday, 6 July 2005 - Strasbourg

26. The Balkans: 10 years after Srebrenica

  President.   The next item is the Council and Commission statements on the Balkans 10 years after Srebrenica.

  Douglas Alexander, President-in-Office of the Council. Mr President, I am delighted to be here at the European Parliament at the start of the British Presidency of the European Union. The next six months will be a critical time for many of the western Balkan states. As Minister for Europe, I am looking forward to pursuing the inherited agenda and working to help the countries of the region move further along the road to Europe.

Next week – as recognised by the title of this debate – marks the tenth anniversary of the massacre at Srebrenica in July 1995. Seven to eight thousand Muslim men and women were killed in cold blood in the worst act of genocide in Europe since 1945. We recognise that the international community failed to realise what was happening until it was too late and failed in its duty to protect innocent civilians, unarmed men, women and children. However, whatever the sins of omission of the international community, which we deeply regret at this time of sadness and remembrance, let us not forget the sins of commission by the attacking Bosnian Serb forces. The ultimate responsibility lies with those who murdered, raped and tortured in cold blood.

As we all know, some have already been tried and found guilty of their part in these atrocities, others have been acquitted. But those held most responsible – Ratko Mladic and Radovan Karadzic – are still at large as fugitives from justice. Ten years on from this terrible event, it is surely time for the authorities in the region – in Serbia and Montenegro, in Bosnia and Herzegovina, and in Croatia – to grasp the nettle and meet their international obligations to cooperate fully with the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia. But it is also time for them to honour their obligations to their people to remove the outstanding obstacles to them taking their rightful place within the European family of nations. I call upon all those in a position to make a difference to work together to remove this poison from the body politic, and to hand over all outstanding fugitives indicted for war crimes so that they may face justice in The Hague.

It is also a privilege, in taking over the European Union Presidency at this time, to be faced with so much hope and, indeed, opportunity. Croatia is on the cusp of opening accession negotiations to become a full member of the European Union, only ten years after the end of the war in 1995. As the European Council has made clear on a number of occasions, it is Zagreb’s responsibility to remove the one outstanding obstacle to these negotiations: the continuing failure to cooperate fully with the International Criminal Tribunal in The Hague. As the European Union Presidency, we stand ready to open negotiations as soon as the Council is satisfied that this obligation has been met. Clearly, the easiest way to overcome this obstacle would be to arrest and hand over the fugitive Ante Gotovina.

It would be a sign of our commitment to all the western Balkan countries and to the Thessaloniki commitments that they are all prospective candidates if we were able to open accession negotiations during our Presidency. But the ball lies firmly in Zagreb’s court.

The Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia has also made much progress since the outbreak of ethnic conflict in 2001. Whilst there is still work to do to implement fully the terms of the Ohrid Framework Agreement, later this year the Commission will publish its opinion on the Republic’s application to join the European Union submitted last year. As with any other applicant, full compliance with the Copenhagen criteria is a precondition. We look forward to assisting the authorities in Skopje in making further progress on the terms of the Stabilisation and Association Agreement, especially in targeting corruption and organised crime and implementing economic and judicial reform.

The timing of opening negotiations will depend on the authorities’ commitment to tackling these issues in deed as well as in word. In Albania, it would appear that the recent elections passed in a generally peaceful manner. While the count continues, we urge all political forces to respect the due electoral process and resist premature judgements on the outcome. Nevertheless, we hope that a new government can be formed as soon as possible to ensure that Albania can continue her progress towards a stabilisation and association agreement. In this respect, the new government will need to tackle the endemic problems of corruption and organised crime and implement judicial reform if it is to fulfil its European aspirations which we fully support. One of the greatest challenges we face, of course, is Kosovo. The time is fast approaching when we should address the difficult and sensitive issue of Kosovo’s final status. Any outcome must work for all of Kosovo’s communities and reinforce regional stability. That is why the contact group and the European Union have both ruled out any return to the status quo ante-1999 or any internal partition of Kosovo. Neither would serve the interests of the people of Kosovo or the region.

As for independence, that is clearly one option. But I would remind those who advocate independence that they must convince all communities and the world at large that independence can work and that the rights of Kosovo’s minorities as well as those who have yet to return to Kosovo after the violence of 1999 will be fully respected. If the people of Kosovo wish to join the European mainstream, they must learn to live together as equals, respecting their differences.

The current comprehensive review of standards is therefore a critical challenge. How positive the review will be depends on progress on the ground. Its outcome is not a foregone conclusion. I recognise that there has been real progress with standards implementation, but more needs to be done. A failure to demonstrate commitment for further work in key areas would not bode well for a positive outcome to the comprehensive review. The future is therefore in the hands of the Kosovo authorities in Pristina. In the meantime, the European Union has an important role to play in supporting further progress, in particular in the area of economic development.

Serbia and Montenegro have clearly made great strides in the last six months. In April, the European Commission concluded a positive feasibility study recommending that the European Union open negotiations with Serbia and Montenegro on the Stabilisation and Association Agreement. The Council of Ministers has accepted this recommendation and invited the Commission to prepare a negotiating mandate. This is an important step for Serbia and Montenegro’s progress towards European Union integration.

By 5 October, which marks the fifth anniversary of the democratic changes in Belgrade, or by the tenth anniversary of the Dayton-Paris Accords in November at the latest, we would like Serbia and Montenegro to have begun negotiations for a stabilisation and association agreement. But cooperation with the International Criminal Tribunal must continue to improve and in this respect Mladic and Karadzic are key, all the more so in light of the anniversary of the Srebrenica massacre, which we will commemorate next week.

I would also like to underline the importance of dialogue between Belgrade and Pristina in the interests of all the people of Kosovo. Only through participation in the democratic institutions of government can Kosovar Serbs ensure that their concerns are taken into account. We have welcomed Belgrade’s decision to encourage the Kosovar Serbs to participate in the decentralisation working groups and look to Belgrade to carry this through.

Bosnia and Herzegovina have also recently made important progress towards the opening of negotiations on a stabilisation and association agreement with the European Union. This prize is within Bosnia and Herzegovina’s grasp but will remain out of reach until it has met the relevant conditions, which include agreeing on police restructuring, reforming public broadcasting and demonstrating full cooperation with the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia.

We would like Bosnia and Herzegovina to open SAA negotiations under our Presidency by the tenth anniversary of the Dayton-Paris Peace Agreement, but that requires further progress by the Bosnian authorities to meet the feasibility study priorities.

I have attempted today to summarise the present situation regarding our priorities for the Western Balkan countries over the next six months. There are certainly big challenges ahead, but let me end on a note of optimism.

In the last ten years so much has changed for the better: free and fair elections have been held throughout the region; changes of government via the ballot box are routine; large-scale conflict no longer threatens; countries of the region work together to improve the lives of their citizens. The European Union and other international partners are united in working with the region to maintain stability and create prosperity. The dark days of the early 1990s seem predominantly to be a distant memory. But as we move further down the road to closer integration between the western Balkan countries and the European Union, it is up to the countries concerned to make their cases irrefutable.

We understand that the European Union’s commitment to the regions has to be honoured and we undertake to do so. But during this time of introspection within the European Union and of uncertainty about its future shape and direction, it is all the more important that the countries of the region fulfil their own commitments, not in the interests of the European Union – although that is important – but for the sake of their people who for far too long suffered at the hands of those who claimed to represent their interests but who in fact only fomented hostility and strife.

(Applause)

  President. Thank you, Minister. I should like to congratulate you on winning the contest for hosting the Olympic Games. I hope – and I am sure everybody here feels the same – that it will be not only a world event, a British event, but also a European event.

  Olli Rehn, Member of the Commission. Mr President, almost 10 years ago to the day, on 11 July 1995, Srebrenica fell. No-one should ever forget the horrors that unfolded during the following days and weeks. We have a duty to remember so that we will see no other Srebrenicas; so that ethnic hatred and destructive nationalism will be definitively buried in Bosnia and Herzegovina, in the Balkans and in the whole of Europe.

I shall go to the commemoration ceremony in Srebrenica next week to honour the victims and their families. I shall go there to express Europe’s support for peace, reconciliation and democratic development and for the European future of the Western Balkans. I also expect all the parties to ensure that the ceremony will be a dignified event and will contribute to the reconciliation process. Reconciliation is a very painful process after a devastating war like this, after violations of the most fundamental human rights, but it is also a necessary process. The European Union, as the greatest peace and reconciliation project, can testify to that and serve as an example of what can be achieved, including in the Balkans.

Justice is an essential element of reconciliation. There can be no reconciliation until war crime suspects are held accountable in a court of law. In this respect, the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia, the ICTY, plays a crucial role. The countries’ cooperation with the ICTY has steadily improved, which is an encouraging sign, but more remains to be done to achieve full cooperation. Only then can this very sad chapter in the region’s history be truly closed.

The people carrying the main responsibility for the Srebrenica massacre are still at large. This is unacceptable. Mladić and Karadžić should have no place in the region. Their place is in The Hague.

(Applause)

The European Union has major responsibilities in ensuring peace and stability and enhancing democracy and prosperity on our continent. This is what the European Union is all about.

As Mr Alexander stated regarding the EU’s policy in the Western Balkans on behalf of the Presidency, the inclusion of our Balkan neighbours in the European integration process has been a powerful incentive for enhancing stability, human rights, the rights of minorities and the rule of law in the region. This is no small achievement, and we must make this perspective firm and tangible and thus ensure steady progress towards the respect of European values.

An important and intensive period for the Balkans lies ahead of us. The Kosovo standards review is a work in progress and the status talks are likely to start in the autumn. The prompt resolution of this issue is very important for the stability and progress of the whole region. We are about to open negotiations on the Stabilisation and Association Agreement with Serbia and Montenegro. The Commission is ready to contribute to the timeline Mr Alexander presented, i.e. this autumn, to get the negotiations started.

We also aim to start negotiations with Bosnia and Herzegovina soon, as long as the country fulfils the remaining criteria. When we have fully examined the conduct of last Sunday’s elections in Albania, we can determine the future pace in the negotiations on a Stablisation and Association Agreement with Albania as well.

The Commission’s opinion on the membership application of the Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia is under preparation. We are also looking forward to opening accession negotiations with Croatia, as soon as the one remaining condition is satisfied.

We are all aware of the serious problems that we are presently facing in the European Union. It is only natural that enlargement policy will be a part of the broader debate on the future of Europe. I was therefore satisfied that the June European Council very clearly confirmed the Union’s existing commitments on enlargement policy and on the European perspective of the Western Balkans. This was very wise. Our enlargement policy has helped transform countries in regions that are still very fragile. We shall continue to help them to become stable, democratic and prosperous societies able to join the Union. The building of a better future for the Western Balkans is indeed the best way to commemorate the victims of Srebrenica. It serves the cause of peace, stability and prosperity in Europe, and our own vital interests.

I am looking forward to continuing to work closely with European Parliament and its relevant committees to this end.

(Applause)

  Doris Pack, on behalf of the PPE-DE Group. – (DE) Mr President, ladies and gentlemen, after 1945, the promise was made that there would be no more mass murder, Srebrenica is a byword for its having been broken. Ten years on from Srebrenica, the Western governments have to ask themselves why they did not intervene in good time to prevent expulsions, murder and war. At the beginning of the 1990s, they looked the other way and let Milošević, Karadžić and Mladić have a free hand to expel people from their homes, to rape them and, eventually to put them to a gruesome death, which is what happened at Srebrenica, where, in a cowardly manner, Serbian criminals slaughtered thousands of Muslims before the eyes of UN troops acting under an inadequate mandate.

As we commemorate this massacre today, we call on everyone to endeavour to get Karadžić and Mladić, who bear responsibility for it and are now on the run like the cowards they are, handed over to the Tribunal. There is no hope of reconciliation in Bosnia and Herzegovina if they are not. Good though it is that high-ranking Serb politicians will be attending the commemorations at Srebrenica, they should also prevent certain Serbian politicians from naming in the same breath the Serb victims of the conflict in Bosnia-Herzegovina and the victims of Srebrenica, as if they were talking about one and the same thing. The failure of the Serbian parliament and of the parliament of Republika Srpska to condemn these massacres testifies to their lack of either maturity or penitence. How are the Serbs to show either if those who represent them do not first give a good example?

Today is an opportunity to remind the Serbs in particular that reconciliation is possible only when one acknowledges one’s own guilt, and, as a German, I know what I am talking about. It took a relatively short time after the war for our relations with the rest of the world to be restored, and that was because we admitted our responsibility for the heinous crimes committed in Germany’s name. By no means are all Serbs guilty today, any more than all Germans were guilty then, and so those holding political power or religious authority, and the media, should do everything in their power to make reconciliation possible. At the same time, though, the EU must neither stint in its efforts nor shirk its responsibility in helping the countries in the region to put their tragic past behind them and set their sights on a better future.

The young people in the region have gained the right not to be left high and dry by us, but it is their politicians, their parents and grandparents upon whom the obligation rests of preparing for the day when they will be able to name the events at Srebrenica as the crimes they were and to reach out the hand of reconciliation.

(Applause)

  Hannes Swoboda, on behalf of the PSE Group. – (DE) Mr President, it is with embarrassment, indeed with shame, that we commemorate the victims of the massacre at Srebrenica. Many of those who carried it out have not yet been arrested, but we too, as representatives of the people of Europe, cannot fail to be aware of our share in the blame for the tragic events in the Balkans, and to face up to the consequences, and it is not only the victims and their families who have the right to hear us acknowledge our guilt and express our regret. It is also for the sake of Europe’s future, for the sake of the region’s future, for the sake of Serbia’s future, that there must be an acknowledgement of one’s own guilt, an acknowledgement without which forgiveness and reconciliation will be impossible. Acknowledgement and sorrow are needed, not in order to humiliate Serbia, in order that the Serbs as a whole might be condemned, and not in order to excuse the misdeeds and crimes of other peoples, but we do expect them.

We must be clear in our minds about the fact that contemplation of the past helps to build a better future. It is now for Europe to give this region a clear vision of what the future can be like. History shows us how the countries of the Balkans were for too long at the mercy of the interests and schemes of the great European powers, as well as of Turkey, which you may or may not, depending on your point of view, regard as having been one of them. What I say now I say not only as rapporteur for Croatia, but also as one who is committed to the region as a whole: we have to give them a chance to put their own house in order, to show that they have learned their lessons from history, that they take human rights – and the rights of minorities in particular – seriously.

As Mr Alexander and Commissioner Rehn have described to the House the various processes by which it is intended that these countries should be brought closer to the European Union, I would like to make it abundantly clear that the object must be to give them the chance to accede to it as Member States. It may well be the case that other sentiments prevail today, and people fight shy of enlargement, but we, in Europe, must be clear in our own minds about the need to prepare ourselves for an enlargement along these lines. Nor must we lose sight of the fact that these countries are themselves under an obligation to do their homework and do their bit in making their accession possible.

Many of their young people, though, look to Europe as their ideal, and it is for their sake that, as Mrs Pack has just said, we must hold out to them the prospect of one day, when the time is ripe and they have overcome their own problems, being in a position to become Member States of the European Union. Whatever our criticisms of the way in which the European Union is developing, we have to concede that, for many people in the Balkans, the great hope is that they will one day belong to the European Union and be part of one single Europe, and we must give them the chance to do that.

(Applause)

  Annemie Neyts-Uyttebroeck, on behalf of the ALDE Group. – (NL) Mr President, Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen, next Monday, it will be ten years ago since Srebrenica was captured by Bosnian Serb troops under the UN troops’ noses, that the slaughter of more than 80 000 Muslim men and boys began, that thousands of women, children and elderly were deported and hundreds of women were raped. Immense misery was inflicted and still persists to this day, while those responsible are still at large, because not all victims have been recovered, many of the deportees were not allowed to return home and, above all, because the misery inflicted is not recognised by many Serbs. This was only recently evident when the Serb parliament rejected a resolution in which the slaughter in Srebrenica was acknowledged and condemned.

From our own experience, we know that post-war reconciliation is possible only when those who were formerly on opposite sides manage to agree on the history of the events, to ask for forgiveness for the misery inflicted and to bring to justice those responsible for the genocide and crimes against humanity.

The tragedy has also painfully exposed the shortcomings of the EU’s foreign and security policy at that time, as well as those of UN peacemaking and peacekeeping policy. Some of these have since been rectified, but unity of foreign and security policy is still not guaranteed, mainly because of a less than total willingness on the part of the EU governments. The European Union and its Member States did manage, though, to stabilise and improve the situation in the Western Balkans both under their own steam and with NATO backing. These efforts must be continued and the prospect of accession to the European Union must be kept open. That will only be possible, though, when all authorities in the region fully cooperate with the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia and bring those responsible before this tribunal.

  Daniel Marc Cohn-Bendit, on behalf of the Verts/ALE Group. – (FR) Mr President, some people of our generation find it difficult to talk about Srebrenica, because it is true that we have always asked ourselves what we would have done when, for example, the fascists came to power in Germany. For a long time, we in Europe have been onlookers: the British, by tradition, tended to be pro-Serb, as did the French; the Germans were for Croatia and the Bosniaks had nobody. For years, we left the Bosniaks alone. It was following the tragedy in Srebrenica that we understood the necessity for a European position, in other words a position that could not be either British, German or French, but that had to be a common position.

Today, when we discuss the Srebrenica massacre, we must question the behaviour of Europeans, question the behaviour not of the Dutch soldiers who were in Srebrenica but of the UN itself, because, while the UN’s mandate in Srebrenica authorised the 50 000 soldiers posted to Bosnia to do everything, to control the traffic and so on, it did not authorise them to protect the population. As Europeans, we must examine that, and consider what we did. Mrs Pack was right to bring up the role of governments: her government, at the time headed by Mr Kohl, closed its eyes just like the socialist government in France. That was also the reality of the time.

Today, the European Union provides political stability. The Dayton Agreements provided stability, but nobody here is talking about the problems posed by the Dayton Agreements. Those agreements, which were necessary at the time, contain an ethnic definition of the region, an ethnic definition that is included in the Bosnian constitution. The tragedy in Srebrenica cannot be overcome unless we address the problem of the Dayton Agreements, unless we address the problem of the ethnic definition of the region, because it is that ethnic definition that is now preventing not only the Serbs but also the Croats and Bosniaks from admitting their crimes. That is why we are calling on you, Mr President, Mr Alexander and the Commission, to launch a European initiative to re-open the debate on the Dayton Agreements. Ten years on, we need to re-examine what was decided. The Bosnian constitution is an ethnic constitution that will not allow Bosnia to join the European Union. In conclusion, if we do not have the courage to challenge the Dayton Agreements, we will never learn the lessons of Srebrenica.

(Applause)

  Erik Meijer, on behalf of the GUE/NGL Group. – (NL) Mr President, ten years ago, the presence of the Dutch armed forces gave the people of Srebrenica a false sense of security. This place that was proclaimed a safe haven was an indefensible island in the middle of the much bigger Serbian Republic, which was, and still is, considered a safe haven by another section of the population. By completely misjudging the situation, action was not taken in time to prevent the inevitable surrender from culminating in retaliation and even mass murder. My group takes the view that the ultimate outcome would not have been much different had there been an EU centralised common foreign policy or a mandate that authorised Dutchbat to use more force and ensured support in the form of aerial bombardments.

If you want to guarantee the peaceful coexistence of the three nations in Bosnia, you have to look for solutions that are backed by all parties and not just by one or two that enjoy our favour. Only a federative model that recognises diversity, along the lines of Belgium and Switzerland, can do justice to everyone. We have to take as our starting point the reality that the North and East are very much oriented towards Serbia, and the South West towards Croatia, and that it is in those areas that most of the people live. That is why Bosnia and Herzegovina need open borders with the neighbouring countries. Any attempt to create a centralised, united state can only result in a permanent battle for power between the different sections of the population. No one group should be able to dominate another; that is the lesson we should have learned from Srebrenica and from the chaotic implementation of the Dayton Peace Agreement.

  Ryszard Czarnecki (NI).  – (PL) Mr President, today’s debate on the future of the Balkans is being held on the 10th anniversary of the crime which was committed in Srebrenica, and which was the worst in Europe since the end of the Second World War.

There can be absolutely no doubt that part of the reason for the wars and massacres in the Balkans was the lack of action by the European Union and NATO in this region. The EU institutions acted like Pontius Pilate, who simply washed his hands of responsibility. I am delighted that things are changing in this respect, and that in 18 months’ time Bulgaria and Romania will join the EU. It is also to be welcomed that EU military and political forces are working to stabilise the situation in Bosnia and Herzegovina, and indeed I had an opportunity to see this for myself in April of this year. Yesterday I returned from an observation mission to the parliamentary elections in Albania, and it has to be said that these elections were a step in the right direction. They were more democratic than previous elections in the country, and we should acknowledge this progress.

Question marks remain, of course, and there are still a great many questions left unanswered. Among other things, they relate to the future of ‘Solania’, the state named after Mr Solana, and that of Serbia and Montenegro, given that Montenegro wishes to be an independent state. One thing is certain, however, namely that the EU still holds an attraction for these countries, despite the crisis in which it finds itself. It has gone out of fashion to talk about EU enlargement, but it should be stated quite clearly that EU accession for a number of Balkan states would be a very good idea. This is the only means whereby economic and political stability can be achieved in this region, and such stability will benefit the EU in the future.

I should like to conclude by saying that putting fires out in the Balkans costs more than preventing them in the first place.

  Georgios Papastamkos (PPE-DE). – (EL) Mr President, I agree absolutely with my honourable friend, Mrs Doris Ρack, that Srebrenica should be a permanent living memory. The tragedy, which claimed thousands of lives, marks and imposes the end of a chapter and the final move from the tragic past in the area to a new era of peace, security and prosperity. It marks and imposes the overcoming of ethnic standards and historical and cultural bondage through dialogue and assent.

The European Union failed to act as a reliable power for the production and export of security to its neighbours. If the reason was the immaturity of the European political system, then the message is the need to arm the European Union with the qualities of a single and genuine political identity.

The Western Balkans continue to lag well behind in terms of economic development and regional integration. No one doubts the efforts of the European Union. However, the approach of each Balkan country separately, on its own, has proven to be inadequate. In my opinion, an advanced and cohesive strategic plan is needed for the area, a single contractual framework for a privileged partnership between the ΕU and the Western Balkans. I am talking, Commissioner, about a plan which will articulate the development priorities of each country in a single regional entity. The programmes under which the European Union intervenes must be of a cross-border, cross-regional character. This will help regional economic integration and the construction of a climate of political collectiveness, cooperation and trust.

The immediate challenge for relations between the European Union and the Western Balkans can be reduced to the following triptych: articulated political dialogue, cross-border infrastructure networks and the opening of the markets. I wish the British Presidency good luck.

(Applause)

  Jan Marinus Wiersma (PSE). – (NL) Mr President, our primary concern today is, of course, to remember the most horrifying event from recent European history, namely the murder of thousands of men from the Muslim enclave of Srebrenica in Bosnia and Herzegovina in 1995. The story of Srebrenica has had an enormous impact in Europe and the rest of the world, but particularly in my country, the Netherlands, for it was Dutch wearers of the UN’s blue helmets who, at that time, appeared incapable of offering citizens, inhabitants and refugees the protection they needed. Ten years on, this debacle is still a subject for debate in the Netherlands. The sense of horror and sympathy for the victims of this mass killing and their surviving relatives is great. Our thoughts are mainly with those who cannot live with the fact that those responsible for this crime, the then Bosnian President Karadžic and General Mladic, are still at large.

Remembering should, though, go beyond sympathy with the victims. We must learn from the lessons and try to move on. First of all, to the countries of the Balkans, whom we must support if they are to be able to come to terms with the experiences of the wars they have lived through, we make our pledge: ‘Never again’. While remembering the past, though, we must above all look to the future. The support given by the EU needs to be within a clear framework, with an important role played by the prospect of integration into the EU, which the Council has held out. Support from the EU will help bring about peaceful, stable and prosperous societies.

Let there be no doubt, though, that the responsibility for the future rests, in the first place, on the countries of the Balkans themselves. There is now, fortunately, peace in Bosnia and Herzegovina, but they have not fully come to terms with the past, and that is forming an obstacle to the functioning of the state and society, and so important decisions on such matters as the return of refugees and the arrest of those suspected of war crimes are not being taken. I believe that coming to terms with the past is as important as working towards the future.

A second lesson is broader, and that is the lesson that has been hotly debated in the Netherlands. ‘Never again, not in Europe, but, above all, not anywhere else in the world’ means that vigilance is called for to prevent dormant conflicts from escalating into bloody and hopeless situations. We must be more alert and act more rapidly, and where necessary, take a tougher line, when what happened at Srebrenica threatens to repeat itself, in order to prevent European troops from ever finding again themselves in the same situation as Dutchbat ten years ago.

  Marco Pannella (ALDE). – (IT) Mr President, representatives of the Council and the Commission, ladies and gentlemen, in the 59 seconds available to me I would simply like to point out a small detail. There is something that you should be ashamed of, although you do not realise it.

Yesterday evening in this Parliament a commemoration was held and next week ceremonies are planned in Srebrenica. Among the many embarrassments that have been got rid of there is one in particular, called Emma Bonino. Emma Bonino has been got rid of: she does not exist any more, she is not invited.

I understand the reason behind this, because Emma Bonino, when she was in Srebrenica in her role as European Commissioner, tried desperately to warn the Dutch Government, which did not listen to her, and we are well aware of the consequences. Yes, Emma Bonino was there, as Reuters can bear witness. All the recordings have been found. At the time of the tragedy Emma Bonino got through twice to Radio Radicale, and also to the BBC, to say that thousands of people were missing.

Mr Morillon, we will be able to speak again about the issue of responsibility, and of all the initiatives, on another occasion.

Mr President, thank you, my time is up. We shall see whether it will be possible to commemorate Srebrenica in another way, by giving it, at the least, the tribute of truth and an acknowledgement of the cowardice of Europe and the UN.

(Applause)

  Joost Lagendijk (Verts/ALE). – (NL) Mr President, in this debate and at this time, a great deal of attention is being paid to the past, and rightly so. How was it possible for what happened in Srebrenica to occur and what are the lessons we should draw from it?

Srebrenica not only has a painful past, it also has a painful present. There are people from Srebrenica who are languishing in refugee camps, still unable to return home. Children are given a totally one-sided view of the events ten years ago, as a result of which a necessary conciliation is not forthcoming. The identification of victims is desperately needed if those left behind are to begin to accept their loved ones’ terrible fate, but because identification is expensive, it takes far too long. What we now need is not just to consider what happened ten years ago, but also Srebrenica today, which will involve understanding it and, where necessary, providing funds to rescue it.

Fortunately, a second Srebrenica is not likely to happen in the Balkans today, but the wounds inflicted across the whole region then can be healed structurally only if the countries of the Balkans know themselves to be welcome in Europe. I am therefore completely behind the Commission’s position that stated that the countries of the Balkans still have the prospect of membership. The Balkans are in Europe. So is Srebrenica. Let us never forget that lesson.

  Jaromír Kohlíček (GUE/NGL).  – (CS) Peace will not be achieved in the Balkans until we stop applying different standards to the different communities. Anyone who thinks that the International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia applies the same standards to everyone is very much mistaken. It is quite intolerable that the pilot of the plane that fired two missiles at a train travelling over a bridge, the second one of which hit a pillar and destroyed both the bridge and the train, has not yet been brought before the Tribunal. There is no point pretending that you are unaware of these things, ladies and gentlemen. How many Albanians or foreign Muslim mercenaries have been sentenced so far? Some of these people are now ruling over Kosovo, and they have your backing. Can you sleep soundly at night, ladies and gentlemen? Are you quite happy to discuss such matters calmly in this Chamber? As if that were not enough, you even want to endorse their split from Serbia. You should be ashamed of yourselves.

Paragraph 4 of the motion for a resolution quite rightly says that all those guilty of war crimes must be caught and brought before the Tribunal, and I believe that you are quite serious about this. If that is the case, then you should monitor the work done by the Tribunal. If you have even a shred of honour, then we should try to ensure that this issue appears on the agenda again in the near future. If you believe that those in power are and will continue to be exempt from punishment, then you should say so quite clearly. The public in the EU and in the rest of the world will doubtless react in such a way that makes it quite clear what they think about such hypocrisy. The amputated heads and maimed bodies of the victims should not be forgotten, and both friends and enemies should be subject to the same justice. Hundreds of thousands of refugees are still waiting to return home, for example to Slavonia and the border regions between Croatia and Bosnia. Today the Czech people are commemorating the 490th anniversary of the burning at the stake of Jan Hus by the Catholic church. He has not yet been rehabilitated.

  Bernd Posselt (PPE-DE). – (DE) Mr President, we could talk for many an hour about the errors of the past, and, having done so in the places where they were made and also, in the past, in this House, I would rather concentrate on the errors of the present time.

Let me start with the statement by the President-in-Office of the Council to the effect that negotiations with Croatia, a country crucial to the stability of the region as a whole, could begin only as and when Mr Gotovina is extradited. It is very interesting that, in saying that, you put yourself at odds with the Luxembourg Presidency, and are acting as if the United Kingdom were to be allowed to assume the Presidency of the Council only on condition that the Loch Ness Monster were caught first. Nobody in this House has any idea where Mr Gotovina is. If you have any knowledge of his whereabouts, then I would ask you to inform both this House and the Croatian Government.

We should be treating Croatia in the same way that you – wrongly – want to treat Turkey, which is to say that we should start negotiating with it, and it is only if full cooperation turns out to be lacking – and we have a committee to monitor whether that is the case – that we should abandon or suspend them. The fact is, though, that Croatia is a Central European democracy with a stabilising influence on the whole region, and so a start should be made on the negotiations.

On Bosnia, to which I turn secondly, Mr Cohn-Bendit is absolutely right to say that the Dayton Agreement has failed. What is needed is a Bosnia-Herzegovina made up of three people with equal rights and, above all, of free citizens. Failing that, the structure will be a source of new dangers and grave conflicts.

Thirdly, there is Kosovo, which I visited only a few days ago, and where radical elements will gain in strength if we carry on letting President Rugova miss the mark with his policy of seeking peace. In view of the bombings a few days ago, I appeal to the Council to tarry no longer and to move towards the inevitable, that being an independent Kosovo – subject to stringent conditions, planned for long-term existence, and monitored by the international community.

The fourth point I want to make has to do with minorities, about which we talk endlessly. In Kosovo’s Assembly, minorities are guaranteed representation. In Serbia’s parliament, a new electoral law, introduced a few years ago, makes it impossible for any representative of a minority to have a seat. What we need is uniform standards across the board, without which we will not be able to arrive at a credible policy.

  Borut Pahor (PSE). (SL) – One of the major reasons and perhaps the key reason for the tragic war in the former Yugoslavia was the fact that the international community was neither consistent nor even-handed in its approach to solving the key question, that is, the right of people to self-determination.

At the moment there is peace in the region, but we are still some distance from the kind of progress that would bring about long-term prosperity. It is right and proper that with this report and the action of the Commissioner we are sending a message to the region that it is welcome in the European Union, and it is also right that we are placing emphasis on economic progress, although it is as yet insufficient.

The European Union faces a task that in a certain way it faced before the tragic war took place, namely to have a consistent and even-handed view of the basic questions of status relating to the peoples and states in the region. The Dayton Agreement cannot secure progress in Bosnia and Hercegovina because what that country needs is a modern constitution. We must find a solution to the question of the independence of Kosovo and the rights of Serbs and Montenegrins to self-determination. We cannot accept that the Macedonians do not merit the name they have given themselves. These are all fundamental questions of status.

I would like to support the Commissioner in that the European Commission should be more active in this policy than it has been hitherto.

  Anna Ibrisagic (PPE-DE). – (SV) Mr President, the resolution we shall vote on tomorrow is important, not only because it comes at a time when, ten years after the massacre, there are still people who do not believe that it happened, but also because neither the Serbian nor the Bosnian-Herzegovinan Parliament has been able to agree upon such a resolution. The Serbian Members of the Bosnian Parliament could not accept either the wording of the resolution or the compromise proposals.

As recently as today, someone has placed an explosive charge by the monument erected in Srebrenica in memory of all the victims. As someone born in Bosnia who experienced the war we are talking about today, I feel a responsibility to convey to you at least a few of the many feelings we were forced each day to deal with during the war.

The world was shocked by the video images shown recently in The Hague of young men being executed. We lived those images. I therefore want to describe to you what it is like to be on the other side. I am now going to read out part of an accused’s statement to the Hague Tribunal, written down by a journalist and writer who followed the proceedings. ‘In the corner of his eye, the accused saw a young boy get off the bus. The boy may have been fifteen years old or perhaps younger. He looked at the soldiers and then at the rows of dead bodies in the field. His eyes widened as if he could scarcely believe what he was witnessing. When the prisoners fell to their knees, just before the soldiers were ordered to shoot, the accused heard the boy’s voice: ‘Mummy’, he whispered; ‘Mummy’. That day, the accused heard people pleading for their lives and grown men crying. He heard them promise the soldiers money, cars and even houses. That boy, however, called for his mum, as children do when they have had a horrible dream.’

If we are to have any chance at all of moving on after the Balkan wars, we must primarily ensure that everyone who is guilty of crimes is brought to justice: not only those who are accused before the Hague Tribunal but also those who are still free and who should be prosecuted before the national courts as soon as possible. We owe that not only to those who were murdered but also to those who survived.

  Panagiotis Beglitis (PSE). – (EL) Mr President, in a few days' time, it will be ten years since the greatest barbarity to shake Europe since the end of the Second World War. I refer to Srebrenica. This is one of the blackest pages in the history of European and European civilisation.

Today we have an obligation to strengthen the memory of history, we have an obligation to honour the innocent victims of the ethnic violence in Yugoslavia, the Muslims, Serbs and Croats, without selective sensibilities and without any quid pro quo philosophy when it comes to bloodshed.

Ten years later, Bosnia is still deeply divided. Ten years later, this country has five presidents and two prime ministers and is being kept alive artificially. The international community and the European Union must take initiatives to review the Dayton agreement in order to bring about a functional, federal, democratic and multi-ethnic state.

The European Union has a political and strategic responsibility to defend and strengthen the European prospects and the integration of the countries of the Balkans into the European institutions. We need to firmly oppose those who contest enlargement today with a strategy of political and social democratisation, peace, security and stability through the progress of the Balkans towards Europe.

If we deny the peoples in the name of political expediency, we shall have contributed to the prevalence of the most extreme ethnic forces. Europe made a great many mistakes in the 1990s. It must not repeat them.

  Douglas Alexander, President-in-Office of the Council. Mr President, thank you for your gracious words of congratulation on London’s Olympic bid. I would have been delighted if any European city had been successful in Singapore today, but I am particularly delighted that London has secured this. I hope that the 2012 Games will be a great European success.

I would like to thank all the Members of the European Parliament and the European Commission for their contributions to what has proved to be an insightful and wise debate this afternoon. It is clear that there is a real commitment by all of you to support the European aspirations of the Western Balkan countries. We certainly aim during our Presidency to work towards bringing the region within the European family of nations and will be working assiduously to achieve that. We are conscious of the many challenges ahead, but we are committed to working together to overcome them.

I shall respond to some of the main points that have been raised by Members on both past and future issues. Mrs Pack spoke powerfully on the need for reconciliation. I recognise the need for a wider recognition of responsibility and this was a subject that I discussed only last week with the Reis-ul-Ulema, the Grand Mufti of Bosnia, who has been leading efforts to achieve exactly this reconciliation within and between communities in the regions.

Mr Swoboda rightly recognised the need for countries to have opportunities to right past wrongs. That is certainly true but, as Mrs Neyts-Uyttebroeck reflected, it is necessary for all the countries in the region to cooperate fully with the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia.

Mr Cohn-Bendit spoke of the Dayton Accords and urged the international community to now take the initiative. Whilst listening with care to the points that he made, I would respectfully remind him that only the three constituent communities of Bosnia can make changes to the constitution.

Mr Czarnecki questioned the European Union’s policy towards Serbia and Montenegro. The Serbia-Montenegro state union is a loose federal arrangement, created in 2003 largely through the initiative of Javier Solana. Under the terms of the state union Constitutional Charter, either republic can hold a referendum on withdrawal after February 2006. It is looking increasingly likely that Montenegro will seek to dissolve the union in 2006.

The European Union continues to support the state union as the best means of promoting stability and ensuring faster progress towards Euro-Atlantic integration. However, the European Union recognises the terms of the Constitutional Charter, which allows for a referendum to be held after three years and emphasises the need for any dissolution to be constitutional, consensual, negotiated and transparent.

Mr Papastamkos spoke of the need for a clear regional approach, so let me say a further word about the European Union’s priorities for the Western Balkans during the United Kingdom’s Presidency. During the next six months, a number of key issues will come to a head. The Commission will publish its opinion on Macedonia, Lord Ashdown’s mandate in Bosnia will come to an end and a positive assessment of standards implementation in Kosovo could lead to a process to determine Kosovo’s final status, a process in which the European Union will have a key role to play.

Across the range of Western Balkan issues, the Presidency will help the region make progress towards European standards and values. The Presidency will continue to drive forward the European Union’s Stabilisation and Association process, designed to build stability and prosperity in the Western Balkans and guide these countries towards eventual European Union membership. The progress of each country within the stabilisation and association process will be judged against established political criteria. Full cooperation with the International Criminal Tribunal, as I have already mentioned, remains a key political requirement.

Mr Posselt raised the issue of Croatia. As a proud Scotsman, I do not want to disabuse him of his apparent certainty that the Loch Ness monster exists, or to dissuade him from the opportunity of visiting Scotland to continue the search, but let me make a deadly serious point to him. The European Union has made it clear that it stands ready to open accession negotiations as soon as there is full cooperation with the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia. We hope this will happen during the UK Presidency, but it is ultimately up to Croatia to take the necessary steps to ensure full cooperation. The easiest way for Croatia to address doubts about Croatia’s commitment to ICTY is to cooperate in locating and detaining Ante Gotovina.

Mr Beglitis raised the question of how European Union help to Bosnia-Herzegovina in implementing the reforms necessary for European Union integration can be taken forward. The European Union is providing a range of instruments to help the authorities carry out the necessary reforms. The European Union Police Mission aims to help the Bosnian police force reach European standards. It focuses on police reform through the monitoring and mentoring of middle-ranking to senior officers in the police force.

The EU CARDS Programme also supports reforms for European Union integration. The European Union Special Representative and High Representative, Lord Paddy Ashdown, plays a coordinating role between the different European Union presences and has played a leading role in encouraging the Bosnian authorities to take the reform agenda forward. I pay tribute to his work today. His Mission Implementation Plan closely reflects the 16 priority areas identified in the European Union feasibility study published in November 2003.

In addition to the terrible anniversary of the Srebrenica massacre, which has been mentioned by so many speakers today and which we will commemorate next week, this year will also mark the tenth anniversary of the Dayton Accords, as was also mentioned in passing by at least a couple of speakers, and the end to the conflict in Bosnia-Herzegovina. I believe that the next six months therefore offer an historic opportunity for these countries to demonstrate their wholehearted commitment to European values, to tolerance and the rule of law, to good neighbourly relations and to the difficult but very serious process of reconciliation, which a number of speakers have talked about today.

None of this will be easy. Each country will face particular and different challenges, but I encourage them to work jointly and to encourage each other on this path. In this respect, I echo the sentiments expressed by Commissioner Rehn. I cannot stress too highly the importance of full cooperation with the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia. Handing over the last remaining indictees for trial in The Hague, notably Karadzic, Mladic and Gotovina, is not just an obscure European Union condition, but is required under several United Nations Security Council resolutions. This will not only transform the nature of these countries’ relations with the European Union but will also serve to transform their societies and contribute to the long-term process of rehabilitation that has been spoken about so convincingly today.

In that respect the joint statement by the presidents of the Dayton signatories issued following the recent meeting of the Mount Igman initiative in Belgrade was a welcome step. It will contribute to the normalisation of relations between those three countries. It represents an excellent basis for further work and we look forward to the implementation of the important commitments it contains.

The forthcoming tenth anniversary of the Srebrenica massacre is a vivid reminder of how far the Balkans have come, but also of how much remains to be done. Thankfully armed conflict is and must remain a thing of the past although, as Mrs Ibrisagic reminded us, recent discoveries of explosives have shown that there are still those minded to advance their cause by violence.

The European Union has recognised the region’s aspirations to join the European family once conditions have been met, but corruption and organised crime are still far too prevalent and economic growth is lacklustre. But whilst we stand ready to help, the answer to these challenges lies not in Brussels, The Hague, London or, with the greatest of respect, Strasbourg. It lies within the region and within the people whose energy and talents have outlived the years of conflict and it depends on their willingness to demand that their decency, hope and integrity are fully reflected.

(Applause)

  Olli Rehn, Member of the Commission. Mr President, after President Chirac’s ill-informed views on British and Finnish cuisine, I feel free to congratulate London as the European city for the venue of the 2012 Olympic Games. J’aime la France, mais ce n’est pas facile toujours.

I thank the honourable Members for a dignified and substantive debate that fully respects our duty to remember and draw conclusions for the present and the future. There was a wide convergence of views on a number of issues.

First of all, on the country’s need to cooperate fully with the Hague Tribunal. Clearly there is no lasting peace without historical truth and justice. We have to learn from what happened so that history does not repeat itself.

I also note wide support for the continuation of our prudently managed accession process, combining the historic mission of European integration for peace, democracy and progress with consideration for our citizens’ legitimate concerns about the absorption capacity of the Union. We therefore have to practice strict conditionality in our enlargement policy.

The future of the Western Balkans is clearly in the European Union. It is fair to say that the European perspective is the glue that keeps the Western Balkans on a peaceful and stable track. So is the future of Bosnia and Herzegovina in the European Union. The Dayton Accord managed to put an end to the war, but I agree with Mr Cohn-Bendit that it is certainly not an ideal constitution on which to build a properly functioning, multi-ethnic modern state. Therefore it is important that Bosnia and Herzegovina can itself reflect on the constitutional changes that can serve the country and its people better than the current construct.

It is up to the people of Bosnia and Herzegovina and their representatives to play a key role in this exercise. In my view, it would not be useful or appropriate for the international community to force yet another blueprint upon its citizens. We need consensus and a consensus-building political process in Bosnia and Herzegovina to achieve that objective.

I can assure you that the Commission will play an active role in the region in order to sustain hopes for its future in Europe. I very much look forward to working together with the European Parliament and the Presidency to achieve that objective.

(Applause)

  President.   I have received six motions for resolutions⁽¹⁾ tabled pursuant to Rule 103(2) of the Rules of Procedure.

The debate is closed.

The vote will take place on Thursday at 12 noon.

IN THE CHAIR: MR OUZKÝ
Vice-President

(1) See Minutes.