Athens, 11 January 2007
Mr. G. Koumoutsakos: Good morning and a happy new year to all of you.
Regarding Foreign Minister Ms. Bakoyannis’ programme, tomorrow, 12 January, she will meet with the Personal Envoy of the UN Secretary General for the FYROM name talks, Mr. Nimetz. This meeting will take place at 15:30.
On 13 and 14 January, the Minister will be in Munich at the invitation of the cultural foundation of the Allianz Group, which is organising a series of lectures on “The Future of Europe”, with the participation of many important European figures, including German Foreign Minister Mr. Steinmeier. During her stay in Munich, the Minister will meet with representatives of the Greek community there.
From 14 to 16 January, Ms. Bakoyannis will accompany Prime Minister Mr. Karamanlis on his trip to Zagreb, on 14 January; Ljubljana, for the events marking Slovenia’s accession to the Eurozone, on 15 January; and Belgrade on the 16th of the month.
On Thursday, 18 January, Ms. Bakoyannis is scheduled to attend the annual reception held by the President of the Republic in honour of the Diplomatic Corps.
On Tuesday, 16 January, Deputy Foreign Minister Mr. Evripidis Stylianidis will address the Euromoney Conference in Vienna. This year’s Conference will focus on the rise of the East – particularly countries of the Black Sea and the CIS. Mr. Stylianidis will refer to the conditions prevailing in these countries, the existing legal and institutional framework, and the difficulties and problems faced by foreign investors. Finally, he will set out the priorities of Greek economic diplomacy in the Black Sea region, as well as the role that the Black Sea Economic Cooperation (BSEC) is being called upon to play in the wider region.
Yesterday, 10 January, Foreign Minister Ms. Bakoyannis sent a letter to her Turkish counterpart, Mr. Gul, expressing her condolences regarding the airplane crash in Baghdad, in which 29 Turkish workers lost their lives.
Finally, as you may know, in November 1999, within the framework of the strengthening of the EU’s Common Foreign and Security Policy (CFSP), the EU Council’s Political Committee approved the European Diplomatic Programme (EDP). The EDP is aimed at creating a common culture for European foreign policy through the training of young diplomats in EU member states.
This year’s programme, which is being co-organised by the current Presidency, Germany, and the preceding Presidency, Finland, is focussed on the EU’s relations with China and India, and is being carried out in five stages. Within the framework of the third stage, on 11 and 12 January – in Athens – the Greek Foreign Ministry’s Diplomatic Academy will host two diplomats from Ireland and Germany in order to be briefed and, subsequently, represent our country at the negotiation simulation to be held in Budapest.
That’s it for announcements. I am at your disposal to answer any questions you might have.
Mr. Kottaridis: Are we expecting Mr. Nimetz to submit a proposal concerning the name issue?
Mr. G. Koumoutsakos: No, there is no information to that effect.
Ms. Tassouli: A comment on yesterday’s incident in Imia, and whether shots were fired.
Mr. G. Koumoutsakos: As far as I know, the information regarding shots being fired in the air has been verified as inaccurate.
Mr. Santamouris: Is Mr. Nimetz coming from Skopje, or will he be going to Skopje from here?
Mr. G. Koumoutsakos: He will visit Skopje after Athens.
Mr. Santamouris: And a second question: Whether it is becoming clearer whether and when Mr. Gul will be coming to Athens.
Mr. G. Koumoutsakos: No. Communication through diplomatic channels is in progress for the designation of a date.
Ms. Kourbela: First of all, I would like you to tell us, Mr. Spokesman, whether the Greek government supports the proposals presented by the European Commission yesterday regarding the common energy policy. That is the first question. The other question concerns direct trade between the Union and Turkish Cypriots. When will the discussion of the issue be initiated under the German Presidency?
Mr. G. Koumoutsakos: As you rightly said, yesterday the European Commission submitted its thoughts and proposals. These are being evaluated.
The only thing I would like to say at this time is that – due to the concern regarding the energy issue, arising from recent Russian-Belarus developments – we want to say that we believe that stable and reliable energy relations between the European Union and Russia are in the interest of both sides.
The German Presidency intends to pursue the deepening of the energy dialogue with Russia, and this effort is supported by Greece.
Regarding the Regulation issue, the relevant discussion is expected to be carried out on the level of the working group and, if need be, Coreper, and all the information indicates that it will be discussed with a view to there being a specific decision regarding the need for progress on this issue at the Council of Foreign Ministers on 22 January.
Mr. Gilson: During a Turkish National Assembly debate on 9 January, Turkish Foreign Minister Mr. Gul claimed that he asked the Greek authorities why the minority in Western Thrace is subject to discrimination, and he said specifically that it is the region that has remained the furthest behind in the European Union. Why is it in last place? Is it true that such a question was asked, and what answer did Mr. Gul receive?
Mr. G. Koumoutsakos: The Greek government and all Greek governments have made efforts to make optimum use of economic support via European funds, through the 3rd Support Framework, and now with planning for the utilisation of the 4th Support Framework. The region of Thrace is one of the regions for which special care is being taken regarding the best and most extensive utilisation of the 4th CSF.
Beyond that, regarding the issues concerning the Muslim minority raised in Mr. Gul’s speech at the recent session of the Turkish National Assembly Committee, the Foreign Ministry has taken a clear stance.
But I would like to say here that in Mr. Gul’s speech certain positive references were also made, such as that to Turkey’s firm will to proceed with the improvement of relations with Greece.
With regard to the minority dimension, as I said, there has been a very clear answer from the Foreign Ministry.
Mr. Kapoutsis: Mr. Spokesman – on the same subject – is it your assessment that the Turkish side is trying to introduce a Thrace issue into the list of bilateral problems?
Mr. G. Koumoutsakos: My answer of the day before yesterday has all the information regarding how the Greek side addresses this issue.
Mr. Kapoutsis: Mr. Gul and Mr. Erdogan refer to a Turkish minority when referring to Muslim Greek citizens in Thrace. Do we accept this without any protest or some other view?
Mr. G. Koumoutsakos: You’re forcing me to repeat – word for word – my answer from the day before yesterday, which you already know. In this answer I state that all of the members of the Muslim minority of Thrace are Greek citizens and citizens of Europe who enjoy full equal rights and equality before the law.
I also stated that Greece is proud of its European minority policy, which is constantly evolving, and which we think should be taken as a model for emulation.
Beyond that, it is self-evident that the rights and quality of life of Muslim Greek citizens of Turkish, Pomak and Roma origin are not a subject of negotiations.
Mr. Meletis: Does the reasoning you just set out mean that if and when Mr. Gul visits Athens he will be recommended not to visit Thrace? Because I imagine that if, following a session of the Turkish National Assembly stating the list of matters under negotiation with Greece, he comes here and immediately afterwards visits Thrace, it will create a picture that is completely different from the one you just read out to us.
To complete my question, following this qualitative upgrading of the Turkish view on “Thrace issues”, do you believe Gul should be welcomed to Thrace when he visits Athens?
Mr. G. Koumoutsakos: The option of visiting any region of the country, including the region of Thrace, is, as we have repeatedly said, absolutely open, and there is no cause for concern on the part of Greece arising from such visits.
Moreover, this option – for all foreigners to be able to visit all the regions of the country – is fully in line with the fact that Greece is, as I stated, proud of its European minority policy.
Mr. Vitalis: First, regarding the issues concerning Turkey, Mr. Spokesman. You said that the information to the effect that shots were fired, if only in the air, in Imia yesterday has been verified as being inaccurate. The question, however, is this: When will Greek fisheries be able to do their work without problems within Greek national waters? And second, if there was any harassment – I’m not talking about shots, you denied that, but the coast guard vessel’s once again trying to hinder the fishing process, whether this issue will be resolved.
Mr. G. Koumoutsakos: Greek fishing boats have the right to fish, and they do fish. Beyond that, I have nothing to add.
Mr. Vitalis: On another issue. Regarding Mr. Nimetz’s visit. You said before that there is no information to the effect that Mr. Nimetz . . .
Mr. G. Koumoutsakos: I didn’t say “there is no information to the effect that”. I said that I have no information relevant to this matter . . .
Mr. Vitalis: Yes. The question is: For precisely what reason – if we believe the recent items in the news – did the Greek side take the initiative to invite Mr. Nimetz here? If we don’t know whether there is some new proposal.
Mr. G. Koumoutsakos: I will set out, once again, the framework within which we are moving on this specific issue.
The recent decision of the Skopje government to rename – after many years – “Petrovac” airport “Alexander the Great” is, historically speaking, totally unfounded, and, from a political point of view, clearly counterproductive.
The Greek position on the name issue is well known, and we have made it clear to our partners and allies. We have repeatedly stressed that the reaching of a mutually acceptable solution on the name issue would have multiple positive repercussions:
· First, regarding the course of bilateral relations with the neighbouring country, which would enter a period of spectacular improvement on all levels; on the political level, the economic level, and other levels.
· Second, regarding regional cooperation and stability. Given that a counterproductive pending issue would be resolved.
· Third, regarding the course of the neighbouring country’s Euro-Atlantic aspirations, based on good neighbourly relations and relations of trust, which are principles of the European Union and an obligation of candidate countries.
Greece has taken the necessary constructive steps for the resolution of this pending issue. We have, first of all, accepted as a basis for negotiations the proposal made by Mr. Nimetz early in 2005.
We consider that the responsibility lies with the other side, which can, if only now, follow the example of Bulgaria and Romania – and the other peoples of the Balkans – who are moving ahead, looking with resolve to the future – the common European future – and are not taking steps backward, persisting in a distortion of the past.
There will be an opportunity for Mr. Nimetz to be briefed in detail on these positions during his meeting tomorrow with the Foreign Minister.
Mr. Pollatos: I assume Mr. Nimetz was briefed in this regard by Mr. Vasilakis. So would you perhaps like to tell us or describe to us what Greek proposal for the finding of a mutually acceptable solution for the name issue will be put forward by Ms. Bakoyannis? That is, can you tell us what name we will propose tomorrow to Mr. Nimetz?
Mr. G. Koumoutsakos: I’ve answered your question.
Mr. Pollatos: I don’t think so.
Mr. G. Koumoutsakos: In my previous answer.
Mr. Pollatos: I restate my question: Will we propose a name for the finding of a solution?
Mr. G. Koumoutsakos: I stated that the Greek side showed its constructive stance at the beginning of 2005.
Mr. Meletis: Just as you say that Greece’s stance was constructive in accepting the proposal, isn’t Skopje’s stance constructive in accepting the other Nimetz proposal?
Mr. G. Koumoutsakos: I’m talking about Greece’s position. If you want to talk about our neighbouring country’s position, that’s another matter.
Mr. Meletis: I’m asking, isn’t Skopje’s stance considered constructive for accepting the other Nimetz proposal, which we rejected?
Mr. G. Koumoutsakos: I repeat that I’m talking about the Greek proposal.
Ms. Karaviti: Regarding the Greek position, I wanted to ask whether the statement made by Mr. Molyviatis about a year ago still holds true: That Greece retains the right of veto regarding Skopje’s entry into international organisations. And also, in the light of Mr. Karamanlis’ recent interview with FAZ, that use of the veto is not always appropriate. Whether Mr. Molyviatis’ position still holds.
Mr. G. Koumoutsakos: I see no difference between the two positions. The Greek policy on this particular issue is based fully on what is clearly provided for by article 11 of the Interim Agreement.
Mr. Santamouris: You said before that Greece has taken the necessary steps, considering the first Nimetz proposal as a basis for discussion. Mr. Meletis mentioned the corresponding move on the part of Skopje. Each country rejects the proposal it didn’t accept and accepts the other as a basis for discussion.
In a recent interview, Mr. Burns stated that some steps have been taken and additional steps remain to be taken, and that the US expects the assistance of both governments in facilitating the mediator’s task.
The question is whether – as was the case when the proposals were put forward – some time later, if not during this visit from Mr. Nimetz, we will have a proposal that is a combination of the names and the conditions for the acceptance of names.
And I have a second question to ask following your answer, because it concerns a different issue.
Mr. G. Koumoutsakos: Just a clarification that I think is useful. There is no first or second Nimetz proposal. There is the proposal of 2005, as there have been many other proposals in the past – proposals that were not made known and did not move ahead. So there is no first and second proposal – there is the early-2005 proposal.
The Greek government considered that the proposal, while not satisfying us fully, can be a basis for negotiations, and it is with that position that it considers and continues to consider that it has taken the necessary constructive steps toward resolving this pending issue.
As for how this process may or may not evolve, I cannot see into the future. I cannot know exactly how things will evolve in the future.
Mr. Santamouris: Because you are giving a clarification, if you would, and …
Mr. G. Koumoutsakos: A clarification with regard to the first proposal; because, for an issue that has been pending for 15 years, you realise that there is no first proposal. There were previous proposals, which did not move forward.
Mr. Santamouris: Do we, therefore, consider “Republika-Macedonije Skopje” a basis…
Mr. G. Koumoutsakos: The relevant statements on this matter still stand.
Mr. Santamouris: On the basis of this discussion, are all the accompanying conditions for this particular proposed name included?
Mr. G. Koumoutsakos: The statements from that period and all the subsequent statements, which maintain the same position, stand.
Mr. Vitalis: The question is specific. Is the name “Republika-Macedonije Skopje” a basis…
Mr. G. Koumoutsakos: It is in principle a basis for negotiations, despite the fact that it does not fully satisfy the Greek side.
Mr. Santamouris: The question was formulated. The question is whether…
Mr. G. Koumoutsakos: Your second question; I believe I answered your first question.
Mr. Santamouris: No, you haven’t answered about Mr. Burns. Mr. Burns expressed his hope that both governments should further assist the mediator . . .
Mr. G. Koumoutsakos: The Greek government has provided its assistance.
Mr. Santamouris: And this is precisely the question, whether, according to the Greek side, what could be considered as its assistance has been completed. This is what I am asking.
Mr. G. Koumoutsakos: It is clear that the Greek Government remains and participates in the process of finding solutions with the positions that I mentioned before.
Ms. Barbarigou: Yesterday, Nicholas Burns expressed the hope that the issue of the final status for Kosovo will be resolved within two months following the elections in Serbia on 21 January. Do you believe that there is a possibility of finding a solution in such a short period of time?
Mr. G. Koumoutsakos: This is an assessment of Mr. Burns, on which I am not willing to comment. The way things stand and according to information, following the elections in Serbia on 21 January and towards the end of the month, Mr. Ahtisaari will put forward his thoughts on the matter to the Contact Group. We will take a stance when the elements of Mr. Ahtisaari’s thoughts become known.
Mr. Pollatos: In a TV interview this morning, Ms. Bakoyannis said that we cannot be certain about anything with regard to Greek-Turkish relations. Does this mean that she agrees with Mr. Papandreou that there is tension in our bilateral relations? This is the first part. And whether, within the framework of confronting the situation and remaining vigilant, we will continue to downplay anything that happens within Greek territory, if the Imia islets are still included within our borders.
Mr. G. Koumoutsakos: Let me start by disagreeing with your position on downplaying what is happening on Greek territory. I absolutely disagree with your wording, but of course you have the right to use the words you wish.
Beyond that, I do not think that the Foreign Minister’s position needs further interpretation. The views of the leader of the main opposition party are the views of the head of the main opposition party, views that we fully respect.
The Greek government follows with resolve a well-thought-out policy, not only at a European, but also at a bilateral level, in order to fully safeguard Greek interests, but also to ensure that Greek-Turkish relations follow a course for the better, without crises.
Mr. Meletis: Could you tell us what new elements have come up that made it necessary to hastily call Mr. Nimetz to Athens, to inform him of Greece’s positions, given that you say they haven’t changed. And do you consider that this change in the name of Skopje’s airport is a violation of the Interim Agreement?
Mr. G. Koumoutsakos: With regard to the recent decision of the government in Skopje, there have been full positions on the part of the government and the Foreign Ministry. There is a statement of the Foreign Minister. I also mentioned certain things today. This is the framework and we do not have anything to add to that.
With regard to Mr. Nimetz’s invitation, I also think that my initial position has answered your question.
Mr. Meletis: And a second question: I would like to ask what the difference is between the double name, which is being proposed in a way by Skopje, and the current situation. That is, Greece, the 25 EU member states and the European Union, NATO and the UN call Skopje “FYROM” and another 140 countries, members of the UN, call it “Republic of Macedonia”. Is this different from this double name?
Mr. G. Koumoutsakos: This is indeed the international environment within which Mr. Nimetz’s mission is being carried out. There are countries of considerable weight that have officially stressed that irrespective of their policy to bilaterally recognise the neighbouring country with its constitutional name, they are ready to adjust their decision to the decision that will come out of this process, in case a mutually acceptable solution is found. Therefore, the international environment, in this sense, i.e., of unilateral recognitions, is not static.
Mr. Gilson: There are assessments on the part of diplomats from countries which are members of the “Contact Group” that, regarding Kosovo’s final status, we will not be discussing full independence, but rather broad autonomy. Is your assessment the same?
Mr. G. Koumoutsakos: This is not the time for a discussion of this issue. Various assessments are formulated by anonymous sources – diplomatic or otherwise. Greece’s positions have been stated repeatedly. We are indeed at a crucial point in the whole process.
I told you what the timeframe is for the next few days and for the near future. We will see how it develops. Mr. Ahtisaari’s proposal must be put forward. Beyond that, we can take a stance.
Mr. Gilson: And a second and final question. The judgment of the European Court of Human Rights of 9 January, awarding 900,000 euros in pecuniary damages to the Greek Higher Secondary School in Fener due to the seizing of a building, do you think that this sets an important precedent for hundreds of other real estate properties – of minorities, religious institutions – that have been expropriated by the state?
Mr. G. Koumoutsakos: I do not think further comment is called for on a clear judgment by the European Court of Human Rights, which – just as all other judgments of this reputable court – creates a legal reality.
Mr. Gilson: Do you have any other comments to make on this judgment?
Mr. G. Koumoutsakos: No, none. I said that it is a clear judgement that needs no further comment.
Mr. Santamouris: Given that Mr. Gul’s statements concerning the minority in Thrace, followed this decision, I would like to know whether the Ministry has foreseen the possibility that this legal reality created in the eastern Aegean might affect, in any way, things in the western Aegean, as well. Thank you.
Mr. G. Koumoutsakos: I do not believe that when the international community is working, the international community’s decisions can become a reason for a change in behaviours, creating concerns in certain states vis-à-vis other states. The international community is working. There are judgments by international courts of justice, which have to be fully respected.
Mr. Santamouris: Excuse me, my question did not have to do with the relations between two states . . .
Mr. G. Koumoutsakos: You said in the western Aegean. I do not know of another country apart from Greece.
Mr. Santamouris: . . . Whether momentum is being created on certain issues being raised – not just by Turkey – regarding Thrace.
Mr. G. Koumoutsakos: I am not willing to go into assessments on that. Thank you.