Paris, 7 March 2008 – On the occasion of the Slovenian Presidency and at the invitation of the Slovenian Parliament, the European Security and Defence Assembly (Assembly of WEU), organised a colloquy on “2008: a decisive year for the western Balkans” on 4 March 2008 in Ljubljana, which was attended by more than 200 participants.

Mr France Cukjati, President of the Slovenian National Assembly, opened the colloquy by stressing Slovenia’s support for an effective European Security and Defence Policy (ESDP). Cooperation with the Assembly was most useful, since the Assembly was important for ensuring proper democratic scrutiny of the ESDP. Mr Robert Walter, MP, Chairman of the Assembly’s Defence Committee, thanked the Slovenian Presidency for its support in organising the colloquy. He noted that important questions remained in the western Balkans, in particular as regards the potential knock-on effect of Kosovo’s declaration of independence. Mr Zmago Jelincic Plemeniti, Head of the Slovenian Delegation to the Assembly, underlined that there was as yet no clear concept of “European security”. He pointed out that Europe’s role in the western Balkans was not sufficiently well recognised.

During the first session on “The EU Presidency and the western Balkans in 2008”, Mr Anton Anderlic, Chairman of the Defence Committee of the Slovenian National Assembly and Member of the Slovenian Delegation to the Assembly, presented the results of the Conference of Defence Committee Chairpersons of the National Parliaments of the EU Member States, the European Parliament, and the Parliaments of the Candidate Countries, held in Ljubljana on 3 March. Public opinion was often critical of the loss of soldiers’ lives and the costs incurred by external operations. National parliamentarians needed to be involved at an early stage in the EU’s operational planning process in order to support such operations and explain their relevance to European citizens. Mr Karl Erjavec, Minister for Defence of Slovenia, underlined that the western Balkans were a priority for Slovenia and for the EU as a whole. It was necessary to open up European perspectives for the region and 2008 would indeed be of key importance. Lieutenant General David Leakey, Director of the EU Military Staff, noted that the overall security situation in Bosnia and Herzegovina had been benign since the beginning of the EUFOR presence in 2004. Economic development, the fight against corruption and police reform were crucial for stability. This was why it had been agreed that no end date would be set for the termination of Operation EUFOR Althea, but rather an “end state”, namely, “self-sustaining and enduring security and stability”.

During the second session on “Governance, economic and social development and security in the western Balkans”, Mr Boris Divjak, Chair of the Board of Directors, Transparency International, Bosnia and Herzegovina, acknowledged that bribery was a problem in most countries in the western Balkans. He compared the situation to Rubik’s cube, since all the problems were interlinked. He underlined the need for an integrated system of law and order. Dr Andrej Lepavcov, Foreign Affairs Adviser, Private Office of the Prime Minister of the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, expressed his country’s hope of being invited to join NATO during the spring summit of the Alliance. The former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia had been an EU candidate since 2005 and hoped that accession negotiations would be launched soon. Mr Ognjen Tadic, Vice-President of the National Assembly of Republika Srpska, Bosnia and Herzegovina (Serbian Democratic Party), said it was time to decide whether Bosnia and Herzegovina was to be considered as an independent country or still to be seen as an international protectorate. Mr Tadic also stressed the urgent need for EU economic investment.
 

The third session on “The western Balkans after Kosovo’s declaration of independence” was chaired by Mr Rudolf Petan, Member of the Slovenian Delegation to the WEU Assembly. Mr Selmo Cikotic, Minister for Defence, Bosnia and Herzegovina, explained that the Bosnian defence reforms had had stabilising effects for the country as a whole. They had helped to overcome ethnic misunderstanding. But civil police reform was still far from completion. Soon there would no longer be a need for the EUFOR military structure, but only for some civilian support. Ms Zylfije Hundozi, Chairman of the Foreign Affairs Committee, Parliament of Kosovo, stressed that the people and institutions of Kosovo would do their best to contribute to regional peace and stability. Kosovo’s priority was Euro-Atlantic integration. According to Ms Judy Batt, EU Institute for Security Studies, there was not one Albanian question but several. Albanians had been living in different states for a long time and Albania had never pursued the goal of uniting all the Albanian communities. The real issue was not Albanian nationalism but the challenge for the states in which they lived to deliver efficient administrative structures and democratic freedom. In Kosovo, the economic situation was very difficult and would remain so for some considerable time to come. It was to be hoped that European integration prospects should help to mould the Kosovar identity.

The closing session on “A European outlook for the Balkans” was chaired by Mr Militiadis Varvitsiotis, Chairman of the Foreign Affairs and Defence Committee of the Hellenic Parliament and Member of the Greek Delegation to the Assembly. Dr Wim Van Meurs, Centre for Applied Policy Research, Munich, underlined that the prospect of EU accession was a very strong incentive to promote stability in the western Balkans. One of the reasons was undoubtedly that the EU provided the reform guidance and tangible economic assistance needed for the process of state-building. Mr Militiadis Varvitsiotis expressed the fear that Kosovo’s independence might open doors that had been locked for years and send the wrong signal to other regions of the world where there were secessionist tendencies. He insisted that economically sustainable states were vital to Europe and highlighted the strategic importance of providing Serbia with an EU roadmap.

During the debates, attention was drawn to the importance of convincing public opinion of the need for external operations. The national parliaments had a major role to play in that respect. It was also pointed out that there were situations in which EU intervention was more appropriate than NATO action. The dispute about the name of the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia was also discussed at length by participants. Other topics were the EU’s current action in Bosnia and Herzegovina and the latter’s EU accession prospects. Questions were also raised about the particular type of support Kosovo would need in the future. Another concern was how far fears of Albanian nationalism were justified, to which various speakers replied that Kosovo’s future lay within Europe. A number of parliamentarians were also worried that Kosovo might create a precedent for other regions of the world with secessionist tendencies.

The western Balkans will be the subject of a report to be submitted at the Assembly’s next plenary session in Paris (3-5 June 2008) by Mr Pedro Agramunt (Spain, Federated Group).

The day after the conference, on Wednesday 5 March, members of the Assembly visited the Bohinjska Bela Military Mountain School, where they were given a demonstration by the 132nd Slovene mountain Battalion.