Ladies and gentlemen,
It is my pleasure to welcome you to this event on the occasion of the presentation of the book “The Macedonian issue and Bulgaria – Classified documents 1950-1967”. This book brings to light for the first time classified documents of the Bulgarian state relating to the elaboration of its policy on the Macedonian issue during the period 1950-1967.
I would like to thank the Society for Macedonian Studies and the Bulgarian State Archives for inviting me to present the result of their joint effort. This fruitful and sincere cooperation between scientific institutions in Greece and Bulgaria on an issue of such importance – to both countries – is yet another indication of the fact that our two countries have for many years definitely turned a new page in their relations. They now form part of the same European family and they are both members of the North-Atlantic Alliance, having left the past behind them. Greece and Bulgaria cooperate closely on all levels – political, economic, energy, culture – and constitute a strong axis of stability and development for the whole of Southeast Europe.
Ladies and gentlemen,
Dear Friends,
This book looks into a particularly complex issue, given that its mere mention gives rise to different reflexes not just in Greeks and Bulgarians, but also in all the peoples of the region.
Here it is important to make one thing clear: Through their history, the peoples of the Balkans have had fundamental differences that led to conflicts and enmities between us. It is also known, however, that there are other issues that had the exact same effect on the relations between us, without having any real foundation. The issues that have troubled the region and its peoples in the past – issues that do not constitute real unbridgeable differences, but were nonetheless exploited by third parties seeking to further their interests. Unfortunately, we the peoples of this region often tolerated such interventions.
In my view, the Macedonian issue is one such issue. The book we are presenting here today provides evidence of the way in which this issue became a tool for pursuing interests and objectives that had nothing to do with its substance. The Bulgarian state documents that have been brought to light are yet another proof – added to the long list of other historical studies – of the fact that in the modern era, the Macedonian issue has become another Cold-War ideological construct to a great extent. It is the result of the rivalries triggered by the Cold War in the turbulent region of the Balkans. Almost all the players in the region, along with the two superpowers, have used this regional difference as a useful springboard to pursue their own interests. But in this way, the issue became even more complicated. In this way, they contributed to ingraining distrust even deeper in the peoples of the region. Unfortunately, our neighbourhood has been paying the price for the issue’s exploitation, the consequences of this short-sighted policy (both on the part of the superpowers and on the part of the region’s countries) to this day.
Let’s be frank, dear friends: two decades have passed since the end of the Cold War, and yet the exploitation of the Macedonian issue in the period of tension between East and West and the faits accomplis it has led to are still having a significant impact on cooperation and stability in the region. This is why it is time to leave all this behind us: The stereotypes, the reflexes, and the rhetoric of an era that has ended. We should put forward a calm and realistic thinking in an effort to find solid and sustainable solutions on such pending issues. This is the objective of Greece’s policy.
Ladies and gentlemen,
Negotiations within the framework of the United Nations between Greece and FYROM on the name issue of our neighbouring state have lasted more than 15 years. Greece has repeatedly given tangible proof of its crystal-clear will and dedication to this goal of finding a mutually acceptable solution. Over the past few years, we have succeeded in imparting fresh momentum to the international efforts towards finding a solution.
In order to achieve that, we took an important step. We made the terms under which we would enter negotiations publicly clear. We clearly delineated our goals and pursuits. It was the incumbent government that spoke openly about a solution on the basis of a compound name with a geographical qualifier erga omnes; a solution which would reflect the reality in the region and would set free the dynamic for regional cooperation. We spoke boldly and realistically to our international partners and the Greek people.
With this clear position, we liberated Greece’s argumentation. During our major campaign to inform the international community, we repeated the same argument atevery opportunity: that we are faced with a substantial political issue with negative consequences for our good neighbourly relations and for regional stability and cooperation. We have proven that we want a genuine solution to be found for this real problem, with strong political will and in a constructive spirit.
This continuous and reliable position of Greece was well received and understood by our international collocutors. At the Bucharest NATO Summit, our allies unanimously decided that a solution has to be found on the name issue before our neighbouring state can be invited to join the Alliance. They adopted Greece’s position that alliances cannot be built on a foundation of serious pending matters that keep us attached to the past.
The decision of the Bucharest Summit indisputably confirmed the credibility of Greece’s foreign policy. Without a doubt, Bucharest was an important turning point in our efforts. It was of course not the end of the path. Our final objective, finding a mutually acceptable solution, is still ahead of us.
It is with the same self-confidence and the same responsibility that Greece is ready to continue the negotiating efforts intensively. We are seeking a realistic, feasible and practical solution that would pave the way for a future of stability and growth. Persistent intransigence, irredentist mindsets, and the distortion of history have no place in such a future.
I hope that the message of the international community will finally be heard by our neighbouring country’s government. And that they will decide, without any more pretexts and delays or efforts to divert attention, to join us in working towards achieving a mutually acceptable solution. That they will stop looking to the past and take the necessary steps in order to move forward towards their European and Euroatlantic future, with Greece’s firm support.
Because this, my dear friends, is the future of our region. This is our objective. Years from now, the entire region of the Balkans will become a stable and prosperous European neighbourhood. It is this future of security and progress that our peoples look forward to. And allow me to say this: Greece has been playing a particularly important role towards achieving this goal. Through an integrated policy for the Balkans, through its structured strategic planning, Greece has played a decisive role in supporting its neighbouring countries on their European course. We are determined to continue to support them, with the same dedication and persistence.
Ladies and gentlemen,
Dear Friends,
It is worth remembering that the changes brought about by the end of the Cold War – and in some cases the rubble – across the entire region of the Balkans, brought Greece before a historic challenge. Given that we were the only country in the region that had made a choice in favour of its European and Euroatlantic course many years before, we could not choose isolation and entrenchment. Nor could we rejoice in the instability and difficulties faced by our neighbours or try to exploit our advantageous position.
We had the prescience and reflexes to see how short-sighted such a policy would be. We were bold enough to opt for opening up politically and economically in our neighbourhood. A policy of substantial support for our neighbours in their difficult transitional efforts. We invested in stability and cooperation, not in turmoil and competition.
Greece took on – and is still playing – a leading role in Balkan stability and bringing Balkan countries closer to European institutions. This is a strategy that has been promoted consistently by all Greek governments because the European adaptation of the region is the optimum environment for ensuring the development and security of our country.
·During the Greek EU Presidency in 2003, the Union adopted the Thessaloniki Agenda: a commitment to the process of bringing the countries of the Western Balkans closer to the EU.
·In November 2007 we reasserted the Western Balkans on the EU agenda with a new initiative for revitalizing their European perspectives.
·We provided substantial support for the accession courses of Bulgaria and Romania, who acceded to the Union in 2007. Now we are collaborating closely with them within the framework of the EU on all the issues of concern to our neighbourhood.
·We are providing similar backing for Croatia, which is progressing steadily on its European path, and which recently became a member of NATO.
·To Greece’s great satisfaction, NATO was also joined recently by Albania, which just yesterday submitted its official application for accession to the European Union. At the same time, the agreement we signed with Albania on delimitation of the continental shelf and other sea zones between our countries, based on international law, is a particularly significant development that reflects the progress that has been made in our bilateral relations. It is further evidence that where there is political will, the issues being addressed by our countries can be resolved. It is our strategic goal to achieve the same success with all of our neighbours.
·We will continue to champion efforts for there to be full and substantial relations between the European Union and Serbia, because Serbia plays a decisive role in the security and stability of the whole region.
·With regard to the Kosovo issue, we are contributing substantially to maintaining equilibrium in the region, always stressing the particular developmental and stabilizing role that Europe can and must play in the region, to the benefit of all sides.
·Finally, as I have already mentioned, we are prepared to welcome FYROM into the Euroatlantic family as soon as we reach a mutually acceptable solution on the name issue.
In tandem with political support, Greece’s leading economic role in the Balkan region is also quite clear. Through our externalization policy, we are making a significant contribution to our neighbours’ economic development, which is a valuable tool for political stability. To this end, we are providing significant state funding for major infrastructure projects and the provision of development assistance to countries of the region. Our HiPERB programme provides for €550 million in funding through 2011, in support of political, economic and social stability. The results of the impressive Greek investment presence in Balkan countries are just as impressive. I would like to be absolutely clear on this: The externalization policy is not a flag of convenience. Even now, in the midst of the international crisis, Greek capital is buttressing the region’s economies. Greece is a strong market that – with its investment clout – is supporting regional stability even in this difficult state of affairs. With investments of over $20 billion, and having created some 200,000 jobs, Greece is strengthening its leading role in the region’s development.
Ladies and gentlemen,
These are the main axes on which Greece’s policy for the Balkans is based. A structured strategy proving that Greece is fully aware of its responsibility – as the oldest member state of the European Union and NATO in the region of Southeast Europe. A policy that continuously proves Greece’s position as a reliable pole of stability and development; that confirms our leading role, ensuring political and development advantages for our country in the coming years.
We want to move forward, we want to find realistic and viable solutions on those issues that are still pending, leave the past definitively behind us, strengthen our efforts to forge relations of friendship and cooperation. The positive development of Greece’s relations with Bulgaria can become a model for our relations and cooperation with other countries in the region.
The publication of this book is still further evidence of the fact that when there is a climate of mutual trust, cooperation and constructive dialogue can be brought to bear on any issue, without fear syndromes, without obsessions and stereotypes, and with an open mind.
I would therefore like to thank and congratulate the Bulgarian State Archives and the Society for Macedonian Studies on this publication. The latter is without a doubt an important pole for distinguished researchers and academics. Their systematic and impeccable scientific work is a valuable contribution to the conduct of our policy. Finally, I would like to congratulate the Society’s President, Mr. Nikolaos Mertzos; a person who has proven throughout his course from Nymfeo to Thessaloniki that he is a true Macedonian. With his personality and initiatives, he breathed new life into the Society of Macedonian Studies by carrying out an important national work, informing Greek and international public opinion and preserving the historical, cultural and religious heritage of our Macedonia.
I am certain that this book will be very useful and interesting for all those who are concerned with and study the policy and the history of the region of Macedonia and the entire region of the Balkans.
Thank you.