Athens, 12 October 2006

Mr. G. Koumoutsakos: Good morning. As you know, the Informal Meeting of EU Mediterranean member states begins this evening with a working dinner. We went through the programme at last week’s briefing, and the relevant information sheet has been distributed to you.

Regarding the bilateral meetings to be held on the margins of the Informal Meeting, Foreign Minister Ms. Dora Bakoyannis will meet at 18:00 today with her Slovenian counterpart, Mr. Rupel, and at 19:15 with the Foreign Minister of the Republic of Cyprus, Mr. Lillikas. Beyond that, the programme is the one that has been announced to you.

Let me also mention that tomorrow morning, at 09:45, a bilateral agreement on the avoidance of double taxation is to be signed by Greece and Malta.

Beyond that, the Minister’s programme is as follows: On Monday, 16 October, Ms. Bakoyannis will meet with the Speaker of the Parliament of Finland, Mr. Lipponen. The meeting will take place at 11:00, at the Foreign Minister’s office.

On the morning of Tuesday, 17 October, Ms. Bakoyannis will depart for Luxembourg to participate in the proceedings of the EU General Affairs and External Relations Council (GAERC). The General Affairs agenda includes the issues of Sudan, developments in Zimbabwe, and developments in the Western Balkans. The emphasis will be on Bosnia-Herzegovina, and during the luncheon, according to the information we have so far, the Foreign Ministers’ discussion will focus on developments in Kosovo. Developments in Iran and Georgia will also be discussed. And they will probably look at preparations for the EU-Ukraine Summit Meeting.

On Wednesday, 18 October, the Foreign Minister will meet at 10:30 with His All Holiness Bartholomew the Ecumenical Patriarch, and at 13:30 the Ms. Bakoyannis will host a luncheon in the Ecumenical Patriarch’s honour.

Finally, on Thursday, 19 October, Ms. Bakoyannis will meet with EU Enlargement Commissioner Mr. Olli Rehn, who will be visiting Athens.

Turkish State Minister for Economy Mr. Ali Babacan – who is the principal negotiator for Turkey in the negotiations with the EU – will also be visiting Athens on Thursday, 19 October, and Ms. Bakoyannis will meet with him at 11:00.

Regarding the programmes of the Deputy Foreign Ministers, on Thursday, 12 October, Mr. Valinakis will participate with Foreign Minister Ms. Bakoyannis in the working dinner being held within the framework of the Informal Meeting of Foreign Ministers of Mediterranean EU Member States, in Lagonisi.

On Friday, 13 October, Mr. Valinakis will participate, with the Foreign Minister, in the proceedings of the Informal Meeting of Mediterranean EU Member States, in Lagonisi.

On Monday and Tuesday, 16 and 17 October, Mr. Valinakis will be in Luxembourg to participate with Foreign Minister Ms. Bakoyannis in the proceedings of the GAERC.

On Thursday, 19 October, at 14:00, Mr. Valinakis will participate in the Conference being organised by the European Investment Bank on subject of “Southeast Europe – A Region on the Move”, at the Grande Bretagne. Mr. Valinakis will speak on the first heading: “Perspectives for the region – a view from politics”. Other speakers on this heading will include Mr. Olli Rehn, Mr. Ali Babacan, Lord Paddy Ashdown, and Ms. Emma Bonino.

On Monday, 16 October, at 17:00, Deputy Foreign Minister Mr. Evripidis Stylianidis will participate in the Greek-Turkish bilateral meeting of experts and the Greek-Turkish-Bulgarian trilateral meeting of experts on the confronting of the flooding of the Evros River. These meetings will take place in Alexandroupolis.

These meetings are aimed at:

a.       working out details so that the Greek-Turkish-Bulgarian early-warning system can function smoothly,

b.       the reaching of an agreement with Turkey regarding the urgent projects that must be completed on the Evros River to facilitate the channelling of its waters to the sea, and

c.       optimum management of water coming from Bulgaria, so as to avoid flooding in the coming winter.

Regarding the programme of the activities of the UN Security Council, the relevant information handout will be distributed to you. I would just like to mention that at the private meeting that took place on 9 October, the Security Council recommended by acclamation that the General Assembly appoint South Korean Foreign Minister Mr. Ban Ki-moon as the next Secretary General, from 1 January 2007 to 31 December 2011. This choice is expected to be adopted formally on 13 October.

Your questions, please.

Mr. Gilson: How do you comment on the fact that while the EU is discussing the implementation of the Ankara Protocol, the President of the European Commission, Mr. Barroso, is receiving the leader of the Turkish Cypriots? Whether you have been informed of the results of this meeting and whether Mr. Talat or the leadership of the occupied territories have a say in the implementation of Turkey's obligations to the EU.

Mr. G. Koumoutsakos: No positions have been taken publicly. Following these meetings statements were not made to the news media. I have nothing to add on this. As you know, the Turkish Cypriot community is interested in the course of the trade Regulation. I have nothing more to say on that.

Mr. Santamouris: As an "expert on airplane crashes", I would like you to take a position on the manner in which Turkey is trying to "take off" toward Europe. That's one. The second is: Whether, in your opinion, the Commission's statement of its concerns regarding the extent to which Turkey is willing to ratify the Customs Union Protocol is timely. Thank you.

Mr. G. Koumoutsakos: Regarding the course of Turkey's compliance with the obligation to implement the Customs Union Protocol, and in general the fulfilment of its obligations, we have repeatedly stated our position. We needn’t add anything.

If one sought a recent position from the EU, it would be yesterday's statement from Mr. Barroso, to which I refer you.

Ms. Adam: An initial attempt, in Nicosia, to get Foreign Minister Ms. Bakoyannis’ comment on the Finnish Presidency's proposal, which is developing behind the scenes, failed. Do we perhaps have – today – an initial stance on this behind-the-scenes proposal from the Finnish Presidency?

Mr. G. Koumoutsakos: I don't think anyone could have anything to add to a stance from the Foreign Minister.

Let me add here that this effort on the part of the Finnish Presidency is in the nature of a sounding out of the parties directly involved. It is an effort toward progress on the issue of the Regulation, and this is an issue that has concerned the EU for some time now. There have been a series of efforts from the EU Presidencies – efforts undertaken during this time – beginning with the Luxembourg Presidency.

As this process of sounding things out is in progress, I will repeat the Foreign Minister's statement that the contents of this proposal are not being commented on.

Ms. Adam: A clarification on this. The initial presentation of the Finnish Presidency's proposal clearly and directly linked the issue of the Regulation – as a sort of exchange – with Ankara's fulfilment of its obligations. Subsequently, this is being divided into two. That is, for there to be two proposals – for the Regulations to be separated from the Protocol. Is there any position on this? That is, is the second version preferable to the first? Or are we not interested?

Mr. G. Koumoutsakos: I will not take a stance, as I said, for the reason I gave you. This is a process of sounding out, which is in progress, and I will not take a stance, whether on the procedural aspects or the substantial aspects of a proposal that, as I said, is sounding things out and is in progress.

What I can repeat is our firm position that the obligations that have been undertaken – and in this particular case we are referring to the Protocol – are independent and firm. They cannot be considered together with, or affect the balance of things in, a discussion that concerns the EU; that is, how the EU will come to adopt a Regulation. In this case, the trade Regulation.

Ms. Adam: … there are other member states that have already taken a stance: “The Finnish proposal is very good”, “it should move ahead”, “it should go to the EU institutions”, “it should come before Coreper”, etc. What is hindering the Greek side from taking a position on the Finnish proposal?

Mr. G. Koumoutsakos: First of all, allow me to say that I am not aware of the stances you referred to – that it should go to Coreper or elsewhere. I haven’t seen those stances. Beyond that, our stance and handling of this process-in-progress is the one I set out for you, and my stance won’t change on this.

Mr. Meletis: Does this firm position that you stated mean that any effort to link the Regulation with the issue of the Protocol is rejected by the Greek government?

Mr. G. Koumoutsakos: I gave you the basis on which the Greek government is discussing this issue in a process that is currently in progress.

Mr. Meletis: I'm asking, that is, whether the linking of the two things is something that Greece does not accept.

Mr. G. Koumoutsakos: I gave you our firm principle. I said that it is not advisable – I see it as not being advisable, while of course you may have a different view and you can draw conclusions and make criticisms – I do not see it as advisable for Greece to negotiate with itself regarding a process that is in progress.

Mr. Kapoutsis: Mr. Spokesman, a clarification. If I understand correctly, you do not want to comment on the statement from the spokesman of the Turkish Foreign Ministry regarding airplane crashes, railway accidents, etc. Is this the case? Did I understand correctly? There was a question a short while ago and it wasn't answered.

Mr. G. Koumoutsakos: I didn't realize there was a question on this. You know that there was an answer from me yesterday evening, as soon as the stance from my Turkish counterpart was made public. And I must say – because I know him – that my Turkish counterpart is a respectable person, and that is why his statement made such an impression.

Mr. Polatos: Mr. Spokesman, before 4 October 2005, commenting on Turkey's decision to pursue accession to the European Union without recognizing a member state, you repeatedly talked about an institutional and political paradox and absurdity. I wanted to ask whether you continue to hold this stance, or whether it has changed in any way. And also, with regard to yesterday's statement from Mr. Tan, whether you consider it improper, whether you consider it sarcastic, and whether you agree with those who consider that the Greek side should have requested a retraction, correction or apology regarding the statement, because we are speaking with certainty about people who lost their lives, perhaps due to the Turks. And whether you think that there should be something further from the Greek side.

Mr. G. Koumoutsakos: Regarding the part of your question about institutional and political paradox and absurdity, that clearly remains our stance. And I think that remains a general, objective reality. What we said then and are saying now regarding this continuing paradox is that it must be resolved, and it must be resolved as soon as possible. That is the only logical outcome – that is, for this paradox to be resolved. I think that in the immediate future there will be the potential and opportunities, and there are, for Turkey to move ahead towards resolving this paradox.

As regards the discussion concerning the statements from my Turkish counterpart, we have taken a perfectly clear stance and I do not intend to continue the discussion.

Ms. Adam: The day before yesterday, Greece and Cyprus, in the relevant Committee examining the Chapter on Industrial policy, exercised their veto on this Chapter. Should we see this as an isolated act or will the Chapters under examination meet with a Greek a veto as well from here on in, until such time as Turkey fulfils its obligations?

Mr. G. Koumoutsakos: First of all, let me set out two parameters for the sake of accuracy. As you know, the discussion in the screening process for various Chapters is in progress. The purpose of the screening process is for there to be a picture of where the country that is a candidate for accession stands with regard to legislative adjustments – every country that is a candidate for accession, with regard to the Chapters set out in the accession process.

In Chapter 20, which concerns Enterprise and Industrial Policy, the screening process had reached the stage called "outcome of the screening report". In this process, which is reaching completion, the Greek side has expressed and is expressing certain doubts and reservations of substance.

There is no question of a veto in a process. There were reservations, which were judged to be serious. The outcome, as far as I know, is that this Chapter will not come up for discussion again in the immediate future or at this stage.

Journalist: (off microphone)

Mr. G. Koumoutsakos: They concern the contents of the Chapter. It was not a political stance imposing a veto. They concern the content. There were reservations. Questions of a technical nature. We don't need to mention them here. There was also a stance from the Cypriot Representation, within the framework of their consistent policy, which is well known. Precisely because these problems exist, the discussion on this part of the Chapter is being moved back to a later time.

Mr. Meletis: Is there another Chapter that is coming to the screening report stage? Do you know?

Mr. G. Koumoutsakos: Not in the immediate future, as far as I know. But the screening process is continuing.

Mr. Meletis: If I understand correctly, the Cypriot side in the working group raised the issue not of technical details regarding the Chapter, but a position of principle, that Chapters do not open and do not close if the Protocol has not been implemented. Did I understand correctly?

Mr. G. Koumoutsakos: Yes.

Mr. Meletis: It's just that the Greek side didn’t take the same line, it was . . .

Mr. G. Koumoutsakos: The Greek side took the following stance: that it shares the anxieties and concerns of the Cypriot Representation and added a number of questions and concerns regarding the substance of the Chapter. With the result that I described to you.

Mr. Gilson: How do you see the recent threats from Turkey to France regarding the possibility of the French National Assembly's passing a resolution criminalising denial of the Armenian genocide?

Mr. G. Koumoutsakos: Listen, I will take a general stance that threats or insinuations of a strong tone in public statements are not things that should characterise a candidate country’s course toward accession. I have nothing more to say.

Ms. Kourbela: First of all, I want to ask whether Ms. Bakoyannis will meet with Mr. Rehn.

Mr. G. Koumoutsakos: Yes, I said that.

Ms. Kourbela: And the second is: Is there a Greek proposal that will serve as the basis of tomorrow’s discussion on cooperation between the Mediterranean countries on illegal migration?

Mr. G. Koumoutsakos: There is very intense concern. As you know, the issue of confronting illegal migration is of major concern to the European Union. The fact that the issue is being discussed is important. I think that all of the Mediterranean states share the concern that exists, because they are facing this challenge. Greece is particularly sensitive on this issue, because it has increased responsibility as a country on the European Union’s external border.

The discussion is open. And if specific ideas and proposals are submitted, they will be examined within the framework of an informal – as I said – discussion. It will be useful for this discussion to take place.

And I remind you here that there is a Greek proposal, which has not been rejected by any member state or any Mediterranean member state, to look at the possibility of forming a European Coast Guard.

Ms. Kourbela: I asked this question because there has been correspondence between heads of state and government and Mr. Barroso on this issue. That is, he has sent a letter regarding illegal migration.

Mr. G. Koumoutsakos: All this forms the basis of the discussion that will take place.

Mr. Barakat: Regarding the discussion to take place in Lagonisi, as they will discuss the issue of illegal migration. Why was an invitation not  sent to the Foreign Ministers of the other side of the Mediterranean, where the Arab states are, where the immigrants come from?

Mr. G. Koumoutsakos: The nature of this meeting has been defined. It is being participated in by Mediterranean EU member states, and they will discuss the issue amongst themselves. You know that countries from the other side of the Mediterranean have not been excluded from the discussion of the issue of illegal migration.  The issue is discussed repeatedly in the political dialogue that exists with the European Union and within the framework of the Euro-Mediterranean Partnership. I think it is also addressed by NATO’s Mediterranean dialogue. So there is no issue of the exclusion of the other countries of the Mediterranean from this discussion and from this concern.

Ms. Fryssa: Two questions. First, why is the Ecumenical Patriarch coming next week? And second: whether we have anything new regarding the publishing of Skopje books in our country.

Mr. G. Koumoutsakos: I will have to find out the precise reason for the Ecumenical Patriarch’s visit.

Regarding your second question, we are not concerned by this issue. This was asked last week, as well. The issue doesn’t concern us. I don’t know whether there is a negligible number of books made available somewhere. They may be available somewhere. But, as I said, we are not concerned about this issue.

Ms. Kolliopoulou: I wanted to ask what the subject of discussion will be this evening, as I am under the impression that illegal migration will be discussed tomorrow.

Mr. G. Koumoutsakos: This evening’s discussion will focus on the future of the European Union and developments in the Middle East.

Ms. Kolliopoulou: And a second question, regarding your comment on the issue of the Armenian genocide. The position you took answers to the statements of  Turkey. I want to know about the proposal itself. Because in a way you are accepting the French proposal, which is that denial of the Armenian genocide be criminalised. Whether you have some comment.

Mr. G. Koumoutsakos: I reiterate that threats, strongly worded public statements and recriminations cannot, I believe – and I can’t remember this occurring in the past – be a positive factor in the relations between candidate countries and member states. And I pointed this out as a general position.

With regard to the substance of the issue, you are aware that the French National Assembly – if I am correctly informed – is voting on this today. And I will not take a position before what is apparently such an important vote. With regard to Greece’s position, you know that there is a resolution from the Hellenic Parliament on this, condemning the Armenian genocide.

Mr. Fourlis: I wanted to ask whether, in the light of yesterday’s events, Mr. Tan’s statement – the one you commented on – and the demarche we had regarding an automobile in Pangrati. Do you think that the climate is being prepared appropriately for Mr. Gul’s visit, and, by extension, are the relevant consultations regarding the scheduling of this visit coming to completion?

Mr. G. Koumoutsakos: The consultations on the scheduling of Mr. Gul’s visit are continuing. The time for the visit, which I hope will be finalised through this process and this communication, is set tentatively for the second half of November.

Mr. Meletis: Mr. Spokesman, I wanted to ask whether there is a Foreign Ministry dossier regarding the contents of the exploratory contacts, which have been going on for four or five years now.

Mr. G. Koumoutsakos: Beyond a memo given to the then Foreign Minister, Mr. Molyviatis, by former Alternate Foreign Minister Mr. Giannitsis – which you are all aware of – there is a dossier containing minutes.

Mr. Meletis: Why do I ask? In the discussion that took place yet again on the occasion of Mr. Papandreou's interview, the impression that was given was that the only briefing that the government received regarding the five years of exploratory contacts was this memo from Mr. Giannitsis. And I wanted to ask: Didn't anyone at the Foreign Ministry think, in the last two years – Mr. Molyviatis, and now Ms. Bakoyannis – to ask for this dossier; to request that Mr. Skopelitis give a detailed briefing regarding whether these talks got anywhere? Did they get anywhere? Because an issue is being created here: that you gave us – the government says – a memo that didn't say anything. Given that there are records, and that a particular person – an official – conducted the talks, wasn't anyone asked to find out where these talks stood and what had been discussed? If only for public opinion to be informed regarding what's happening.

Mr. G. Koumoutsakos: Mr. Meletis, there is no need to state the obvious, when Mr. Skopelitis is continuing the process of exploratory contacts. It is obvious that Mr. Molyviatis, the Foreign Minister at the time, and Ms. Bakoyannis have talked repeatedly with Mr. Skopelitis. And of course they are aware of what is contained in the dossier, which exists and continues to exist following the change of government in the March 2004 elections.

The answer – and here I will refer to the statement from the government spokesman – is clear. From what was handed over to the Foreign Ministry, to the Ministers, to Mr. Molyviatis's then, and Ms. Bakoyannis more recently, it cannot be inferred that such momentum existed – that such progress had been made – as to lead to the conclusion that the finalization of a general agreement was imminent, as has been written and stated. And I will hold to that.

Ms. Adam: On this issue, can the government confirm, after two years in office, that apart from the exploratory contacts there were also political contacts of a different kind until the beginning of 2004? And if you don’t have documents proving that, have you asked the main opposition party to clarify this for you?

Mr. G. Koumoutsakos: I repeat that despite what has come to the Foreign Ministry’s attention and based on the government spokesman’s statement, no conclusion can be drawn that there was such a development, such a prospect for an immediate or imminent agreement. Yes, yes, I see. Apart from that, your question is specific regarding possible political contacts. I have no knowledge of such contacts. I read in the press about them. But I do not know anything about them.

Ms. Adam: I am asking whether you have asked the main opposition party to clarify this very delicate issue for you. The texts from the exploratory contacts do not lead to such a conclusion. The opposition repeatedly insists – both in writing and orally – in Mr. Simitis’ book and the statements of Mr. Papandreou himself, that we were one step away from an agreement, insinuating that – at least Mr. Papandreou in his last interview – there were exploratory contacts and other kinds of contacts. Has the government clarified this point? Has the question been posed?

Mr. G. Koumoutsakos: Listen, I personally believe that the moment when a new government takes over from the outgoing government is crucial in terms of the information handed on from one to the other.

If there are other questions, I would kindly ask you to address them not to the government but possibly to the source of this information, which in any case is neither the Foreign Ministry nor the government.

Mr. Kapoutsis: My question concerns the same issue. Alright, I’ll agree, of course the administration of the state requires continuity …

Mr. G. Koumoutsakos: This is precisely why I spoke of the specific moment when a new government takes over.

Mr. Kapoutsis: But in the wake of this, certain issues have become public and deal with a major national issue: Greek-Turkish relations. Isn’t the government or the Foreign Ministry curious, doesn’t the Foreign Minister want to be briefed by Mr. Papandreou or Mr. Simitis on this issue? Even now,  after what has happened, even after a delay 2.5 years?

Mr. G. Koumoutsakos: You realize that this issue is highly political and therefore as the Foreign Ministry spokesman I do not intend to enter into it.

I told you that the moment of – formal or substantial – transmission of information and conclusions on crucial issues, such as the issue in question is when incoming government takes over from the outgoing government.

I have no further comment on that.

Mr. Fourlis: I just want a clarification. As Mr. Papandreou has explicitly and unequivocally spoken in his interview for the newspaper “Ethnos” of a memorandum handed to Mr. Karamanlis’ by Mr. Simitis. Have you been informed about this memorandum?

Mr. G. Koumoutsakos: I refer you to the government spokesman’s answer.

Mr. Kottaridis: Because obviously if we were on the verge of an agreement, the Turks would know that. As the negotiations are continuing, Ms. Bakoyannis has met again with Mr. Gul; has there been any contact or discussion on the part of Turkey on this issue – the fact that they had come close to an agreement with the previous Government on certain issues?

Mr. G. Koumoutsakos: Whatever has been on the agenda of these talks has been made public and there is nothing further to add to what has been publicly stated.

Mr. Santamouris: When these issues came to the fore through the former Prime Minister’s book, the answer on the part of the Foreign Ministry was that there was no document handed on to the present government. I now see that…

Mr. G. Koumoutsakos: Documents declaring this fact.

Mr. Santamouris: The initial position was, I remember well, that no document has been passed on to the government. Gradually, we have moved on to the admission that a memorandum exists and today I think it has been added that there is a dossier of minutes. The Ministry’s answer has to do with the conclusion drawn by the Ministry, that there were no dynamics that would lead to a general, final agreement. The question is whether this process, let’s say, of enhancing our knowledge on the papers passed on from one government to the next when it took office or at some other point in time will bring us to a different conclusion. And the second question is whether Ms. Bakoyannis has asked to be briefed by Mr. Papandreou regarding his visit to Turkey or whether she has asked to be informed by Mr. Lipponen – who accompanied Mr. Papandreou at the time – with whom she is to have a meeting in the next few days. Thank you.

Mr. G. Koumoutsakos: To come back to this issue and wrap it up, because I think that things are clear.

You recall this answer, but I am in a position to know, because I gave out these answers. The Foreign Ministry has never denied that Mr. Giannitsis handed on a memo to the then Foreign Minister.

Mr. Santamouris: The dossier of minutes?

Mr. G. Koumoutsakos: The dossier of minutes is an internal matter. Things would be bleak indeed if ministerial records did not remain as minutes. This is fundamental to the continuity of the state.

So there is no question of whether this dossier was passed on. This is the Foreign Ministry’s historic memory. It is part of its day-to-day operation. It would be disastrous if there was an issue of whether to preserve or retain such archival files. This is a given fact.

I am therefore talking about the passing on of such a memo and such specific information. This took place during the handing over of the Ministry by Mr. Giannitsis to Mr. Molyviatis. The content of this briefing is what I have repeatedly stated and what I am today confirming and there is nothing further on that. Your second question?

Mr. Santamouris: The second question is whether Ms. Bakoyannis has asked to be briefed by Mr. Papandreou or whether Mr. Papandreou has offered himself to…

Mr. G. Koumoutsakos: I do not know anything about that. I do not know if there is such a thing.

Mr. Santamouris: Mr. Spokesman, let me ask you something, because you said precisely that this has to do with ministerial documents. The question is whether, apart from the memo submitted, the minutes of proceedings between officials …

Mr. G. Koumoutsakos: No, these are the minutes of the discussions.

Mr. Santamouris: Has there been anything else, even a non-paper, regarding other discussions, what Mr. Papandreou presumably calls political?

Mr. G. Koumoutsakos: I have already answered this. This matter is closed.

Mr. Kalaritis: Therefore, after what you have said, the Foreign Ministry considers Mr. Papandreou’s statements on this particular issue as false?

Mr. G. Koumoutsakos: We have given a specific answer. I have given answers to specific questions, as I have done in the past.

Ms. Adam: One last thing, since we are back to the exploratory talks.

Mr. G. Koumoutsakos: Indeed, you have brought us back and it impresses me.

Ms. Adam: It is worthwhile, yes. The agenda of the exploratory talks at this moment remains exactly the same as the previous one. Is Mr. Simitis’ account in his book –  that there were four headings which included the most problematic of all, the issue of “grey zones” – the only public statement that we have at the moment?

Mr. G. Koumoutsakos: Look, the exploratory talks process is, first of all, of a specific nature, i.e., these are contacts of an exploratory nature. Secondly, this is an ongoing process. I do not know whether there is a discussion at every meeting on a range of issues or whether they deal with something particular. I am not in a position to know that.

Mr. Santamouris: What is your comment on the statements of the US envoy to the OSCE on national minorities in Greece?

Mr. G. Koumoutsakos: This position by the US Permanent Representative is absolutely mistaken and misleading and is in opposition and contrast to reports of a different content included in a series of official positions by the US State Department.

You know that there is a minority in Greece, the Muslim minority. I was given the opportunity to discuss in detail the status of equal rights and equality before the law in our previous discussion.

With regard to the alleged existence of another minority in Greece, an Albanian minority, I would like to say that neither contractual nor customary international law grant the status or the character of a minority to groups of immigrants, however significant they might be.

And finally, as to the alleged existence of a “Macedonian minority”, I think that the 2.5 million of Greek Macedonians living in Macedonia would not be pleased to know that someone has called them a minority.

Mr. Santamouris: Mr. Spokesman the last time a similar statement was made in the OSCE, there was no retraction by the US State Department. What do you expect will happen now?

Mr. G. Koumoutsakos: I cannot know what will happen. In any case, our Permanent Representative will take a stance on that.

Thank you.