Distinguished,
Excellencies,
Ladies and gentlemen,

Our present hosts, President Pahor and President Josipovic have offered a model based on solidarity and partnership in the European integrations of the countries from the region. Thank you for providing us with this opportunity to discuss on the highest level our region’s most essential issue – the enlargement. Especially, having in mind that President Hollande will have the opportunity to hear our needs, challenges and arguments.

Tommorow we mark the 50th anniversary of the disasterous Skopje earthquake. In recent past, South East Europe suffered a disaster of another kind – isolations, divisions and conflicts. Just as ruined Skopje needed world solidarity to be re-built, so does our region need European solidarity in order to integrate where it belongs both in terms of geography and values – the European Union.

Excellencies,

In the case of Macedonia, the European Union faces a paradox. The corner-stone of the European Union is also its stone of stumbling. The Union is based on the respect of human rights, rule of law and equal principles to all. These basic values have been violated in the case of Macedonia

The Republic of Macedonia is a candidate for EU membership since 2005. Ever since 2009, we continuosly have positive recommendations for starting the accession negotiations. Yet, on the last European Council in June, Macedonia was not even discussed, which can at least be characterized as unfair and unprincipled. I wish to speak very openly and honestly with facts and arguments.

First, for four years the EU member-states are solidirizing with a member-state that demands the unthinkable from us – violation of human rights, the right of selfidentification, of human dignity. We are expected to reach a mutually acceptable solution with Greece for the name issue.

The question is how to solve this issue when we have no party to talk to. Greece rejects our initiatives for direct meetings. They also rejected the last proposal from Prime Minister Gruevsk for directing of all efforts towards a final solution of the bilateral issue, through direct communication between the two Prime Ministers and their teams. Athens’ answer is that there is no need for a meeting since Greece is not the one blocking Macedonia, but the EU. Today, on this table we have representatives of three member-states. I expect to hear whether it is true that the European Union is blocking us, or, is it Greece?

Second, for a year and a half, the EU member-states have been ignoring the judgment by the International Court of Justice from 5th of December 2011. A judgment that clearly points out that in our case, the principle of rule of law is being violated, that the very international commitments that Greece has taken volunerely have been violated.

Thirdly, in our region there are positive examples that gave results. Where there is will, there is a way. Through its engagement, EU helped Croatia to join the European family. But, in the case of Macedonia, the principle of parallel process in the integrations and overcoming bilateral issues does not apply.

Fourth, we are witnessing another positive example – the dialogue between Belgrade and Pristina, held under the auspices of Baroness Ashton; a process that gave results. In our case, however, since 2009 untill now, EU does not invest energy to bring us to the same table so that we could reach a solution. Truth be told, Commissioner Fule tried to bring together the Ministers of Foreign Affairs of Greece and Macedonia on a joint table with him, but Greece rejected this proposal as well.

Fifth, Greece is continuously hiding behind the principle of solidarity in NATO and the EU. This means violation of the very framework in which the talks are being held – the Security Council Resolutions 817 and 845, the Interim Accord and the judgment of the International Court of Justice.

I have been asking many leaders for the past four years to ask Greece to adhere to the framework; a framework that is created by the five permanent members of the Security Council. My effors have not born fruit yet.

Excellencies,

We recently discussed with President Pahor on how to unblock the process. He is right when saying that what is needed is a Macedonian initiative; that what is needed is a pragmatic and persuasive step that will not leave the European Councile indifferent.

I offered you five arguments whith which you can ask Greece to behave in a European manner towards a candidate country and a neighbor, towards the region and towards EU’s collective interest. Now you shall hear the compromises that my country made in its efforts to solve this issue.

First, in 1992, under pressure from Greece, we changed our Constitution, affirming the peaceloving policy of my country. We confirmed that we do not have territorial claims and that we have no intention to interfere in the sovering rights and internal affairs of other countries.

Second, in 1993, the Republic of Macedonia agreed to be admitted in the United Nations under a provisional reference.

Third, my country agreed to discuss the differences over the name. Although natural right of every state is to make a decision for its own name, the Republic of Macedonia made another compromise.

Fourth, in 1995 we signed an Interim Accord with Greece, which was ratified and adhered only by us. By this Macedonia made a very difficult decision which is unimaginable for almost all other countries – change of the most important national symbol - the national flag.

Fifth, just before the NATO Summit in Bucharest in 2008, we accepted a specific proposal by the mediator Nimetz. Have this proposal been accepted by Greece, then the Macedonian citizens would have decided on a referendum. However, we were blocked.

I ask you all, present here today, would you be ready to make such compromises as the Republic of Macedonia? Can anyone claim that Macedonia is an uncompromising party?

Ladies and Gentlemen,

The ancient Greek dramatist Menander says that “nothing is more useful than silence”. Is this the motto of the contemporary Greek diplomacy regarding the name issue? If so, then, where is the source of the Greek silence? Is the quietness in Brussless the reason for the silence in Athens?

At a time when the EU is recovering from the credit crisis, it is also facing with the loss of the credibility of its enlargement policy. The ethimological root of the term credibility is in the Latin credo – to believe. The Macedonian citizens believe in the pover of the Union to bring foth peace, welfare and progress. The undecisiveness of the European lidership puts this trust into question. Believe me, the least we want to see is a bankruptcy of the European idea.

We do not have a plan B. The only think I do not know is whether the European Union has a plan B. However, whether it has one or no, it is up to us to create the European Union within Macedonia, to work hard on fulfilling the standards and criteria, to create the European agenda by ourselves, to make the screaning process by ourselves. When the date comes, we will be ready. We will continue with the reforms for the good of our citizens. We continue to work actively on all fields, since this process cannot be for us, without us.

Excellencies,

The date and the starting of the negotiations have double power. If granted, then then become part of the solution of the challenges faced by the country and the region, since they create favorable ambience for reforms. If denied, they turn into a source of new problems.

The idea of NATO and EU membership is a unifying factor for our multiethnic, multilinguistic and multireligious society. If Greece wishes to play on this card, if Greece wishes to test our ability to survive as a state, then I will immediately tell you that it is playing a very dangerous game indeed. Dangerous both for the region and the EU.

Would we have such a EU today if older member-states behaved in the same manner as Greece treats us? If the EU allows one member-state to violate the internationally undertaken commitments, Security Council resolutions, International Court of Justice judgments, then there is a danger of this becoming a rule instead of an exception. Then we might face with greater anarchy and unpredictability in the international relations.

Distinguished attendees,

In the year when we celebrate the 125th anniversary of the birth of rge great European, Jean Monnet, we also remember his warning “The veto is a profound reason, and at the same time a symbol of incapacity to overcome national egoisms. Most often it is an expression of the deepest and unconditional blockades.” Let us not allow for the veto to deprive the idea of Europe as a peace project. Let us not allow for the corner-stone of the European Union to become a stone of stumbling for the European idea.

Thank you.