Distinguished Guests,
Esteemed Excellencies,
Ladies and Gentlemen,

We live in time of exiled and banished, of migrants and refugees. More and more people are rootless and nowhere feel at home. Millions have experienced the 20th century as "life on the run". Until a year ago, about 60 million people were forcibly displaced due to wars, conflicts and persecution worldwide. Today, that number is even higher. Running away from the chaos in failed states and impoverished societies, many of them go to Europe.

The migrants and refugees are the greatest confirmation that the European Union really deserved the Nobel Peace Prize. For them, Europe is an area of peace, security, stability and good governance, a symbol of good and prosperous life.

If for a moment we think about our continent and our Planet without the concept of states and boundaries, we will see that since the dawn of mankind, peoples are in constant movement. There is no person in this room whose closer or more distant ancestors arrived from somewhere.

If we find justification for the migration of our ancestors, then why do we rush to condemn the contemporary migrations? Why do we rush to prevent them with walls and fortresses?

Throughout history, not a single human fortress failed to prevent the natural migration of people and ideas. The Great Wall of China did not prevent the penetration of the invaders in China. The Roman Limes, which stretched from the Atlantic to the Black Sea, failed to keep the northern European nations at a distance. The Medieval fortresses that separated for centuries the feudal lords from the people are now tourist attractions. No matter how protected the Iron Curtain was, it divided Europe and did not stand for even half a century.

Europe, unfortunately, did not survive 30 years without building walls. The physical walls that are now being built across Europe are resulting from the mental walls - prejudice, xenophobia and fear of diversity. It seems that Europe forgets that democracy implies not only the right to be equal, but also the right to be different.

Building up walls, some countries in Europe are now calling upon their national interests. I will remind you of what Vaclav Havel said 15 years ago. There is something that ranks higher than our interests: the principles that we espouse. Principles unite us rather than divide us. Moreover, they are the yardstick for measuring the legitimacy or illegitimacy of our interests.

Yet, the principles are all-humane and universal. One of these principles is solidarity towards the weak, the powerless and the oppressed.

After World War II, the world showed solidarity towards the destroyed Europe. Today, we expect solidarity from Europe to the Middle East and North Africa. Europe is bound to be in solidarity with the region it owes so much to.
First, the name "Europe" is derived from the Phoenician Princess from the Middle East who was kidnapped by Zeus.

Second, science in Europe came from the Library of Alexandria and from other major Middle East centers of knowledge. Thanks to the science, Europe has long been a cultural, economic, political and military center of the world. Today, Europe is a superpower of lifestyle.

Third, Christianity. The Apostle Paul brought the Christianity to Europe from the Middle East. One of the key Christian messages is to love our neighbor as we love ourselves. The parable of the Good Samaritan very clearly illustrates that even the stranger in need is our neighbor to whom we are bound to be in solidarity.

Thus, from the point of view of identity, intellect and values, Europe is the daughter of the Middle East. But how Europe acts today towards its mother and its heritage?

Ladies and gentlemen,

When in 2004 the European Constitution was adopted, the European legislators decided not to include the Judaeo-Christian roots of Europe in the Preamble. From today's perspective, it was probably one of the rare moments of European sincerity towards itself and towards others. How so? The European solidarity was tested three times and three times Europe failed the test.

The first case is related to the European neighborhood. If Europe lived in accord with the Judaeo-Christian values and principles of solidarity towards the neighbor, then, most probably, there would have not been failed states and devastated societies by its borders.

Self-centered, Europe has missed the historical opportunity to transform its neighborhood. It missed the opportunity, using the European Neighborhood Policy, the Eastern partnership, the Euro-Mediterranean Union and the Barcelona Process to create on its borders a space of peace, cooperation, prosperity and democracy. Instead, today we have the opposite – conflicts, anarchy, regression and the return of dictatorship.

The second failure occurred when there was a need for management of the conflicts that have occurred. When a systematic destruction of entire communities begun in the Middle East, when their homes and shrines were being destroyed, the Union did not have a line of lesser, but of least resistance. Too mild in condemnation and opposition to the crimes, now the Union is uneasy with the consequences of those same crimes.

The third failure happens as we speak. If Europe truly lived in accord with the Judaeo-Christian values and principles, which are embedded in the three Abrahamic Faiths, then it would have shown solidarity towards the migrants. Instead of solidarity with the children of the Middle East who run towards her, Europe shows selfishness. Although some European countries are more open to migrants, most countries demand that the migrants pass through some other routes and go to some other destinations.


Distinguished attendees,

We are aware that the migrant crisis is affecting all sides. The countries of origin, the countries of transit and the countries of destination of the migrants. However, as a President of the Republic of Macedonia, I avail myself of this opportunity to speak about the challenges faced by my country and my region.

The migrant crisis has reminded the EU that the Balkans is a European artery, a key European corridor connecting Europe with the Middle East and North Africa. If the Union integrated this corridor on time, then the conditions the migrants are facing would have been different. The Schengen-borders would have been protected. The responsibility of the countries would have been shared. Now, the Balkan corridor and the migrant crisis are testing the Schengen zone.

The EU allowed for the Balkan corridor to turn into a labyrinth in which both the migrants and the EU candidate-countries got stuck. Now, both the countries and the migrants suffer the consequences of the failure of the Union. And the problematic categories such as organized criminal groups and their networks manage their way through this labyrinth with ease.

Dear friends,

The absence of solidarity can be seen in the very public discourse, which, presently, abounds with passive verbs. Instead of saying that we should help the migrants, we say that a financial support ought to be provided. Instead of calling all stakeholders to take care of the migrants, we say that shelter should be provided for them. Instead of saying that people should supply migrants with food, water and clothes, we say that their needs ought to be secured.

So, end up with support without supporters, care without care-givers, supply without suppliers. The concept of personal and collective duty and responsibility has been removed from the public discourse. We shift the duty and responsibility to the undefined others. And so we go around in circles. Is this passive discourse, in fact, a Froidian slip that exposes the subconscious European positions and fears regarding the migrants? Do the passive verbs speak of xenophobia and fear of diversity?

The migrant crisis has exposed the essence of Europe. Self-centered, indecisive towards its neighbors, indifferent towards the migrants.

However, in every crisis lies an opportunity.

The Nobel Prize winner Albert Schweitzer said that "the first step in the evolution of ethics is a sense of solidarity with other human beings." The Migrant crisis is a electro-shock for reanimation of the hardened and indifferent European heart. Therefore, the first opportunity is the renewal of solidarity and the revitalization of ethics and morality.

The second opportunity is practical. The demographic scenario for Europe is worrisome. Europe is growing older. Soon the time will come when the elderly Europeans will create the future of Europe. In the demographically old Europe, the pension and health systems will have advantage over the funds for new jobs, development and innovations. Therefore, the European economic competitiveness globally depends on the migrants as a driving force of European economy.

And they carry with them their ethnic, linguistic and religious diversity. Europe must learn once more how to live with its deepest religious and cultural differences. That is the third opportunity for Europe. A sustainable model of integration of the numerous immigrants in the European societies is necessary. The only sustainable model is the model of integration without assimilation, which implies respect and acceptance of diversity.

After all, a synonime for a beautiful home is the Persian carpet. And the most beautiful Persian carpets are not monochrome, but multicolored.

Thank you.