Pari Daily
BY Georgi Kadiev
Mr Hombach, governments in the region have been suspicious about the Stability Pact, thinking it might become a sort of 'waiting room' for full EU membership.
I never understood the logic in that suspicious. The Pact is a classic case of an entity that actually clears the road to the EU. And this was also recently confirmed by EU Commissioner Guenther Verheugen who said that without regional cooperation there will be no EU accession. This was also the whole idea behind the Pact. Of course, certain conditions must be fulfilled before EU entry, and not only in the area of democratic institutionalisation but also in the economic area.
What is the philosophy behind the Stability Pact?
It is a rapprochement process. People get closer to each other. It has a positive side - there is money in it. And it has a negative side - it means some people much change their habits. The question concerning the Pact is what strategy to choose to achieve its goals. And my suggestion has always been to do what we historically know: start with solving little problems and go from there. In Germany after World War II, if we had started with a conference how to re-unite Germany, we would have had another conflict. So we started with little issues: coal, steel, and so on, and we've built up. The same strategy will work here: first we do what is possible, and what is not possible, we will do later. This is the pragmatic approach we have. If Serbia and Kosovo talk about energy trade and exchange, I am happy already. All that we do aims at European integration. The aim of the Stability Pact is to render itself obsolete. And this will happen when all countries are integrated.
The Pact has often been criticised about being slow in launching certain projects. The opening of the Danube river on Serbia's territory is maybe the best known failure.
I am scandalised by this! I don't like what happened there. I believe it is an international scandal! The governments in Europe issued in February 2000 in Portugal that the Danube river must be free for transport by August 2000. And still nothing! Both sides,the Yugoslavian government and the European governments accuse each other. Everybody says '30% of the guild is mine but 70% is his!'.This is a typical game of bureaucrats. I say both sides bear 50% of the guilt each. And when bureaucrats can't do the job, politicians come into the game. This is scandalous... I have two more months on the job and will spend a lot of my time on solving the Danube issue. I can't let this go. And I also want the international community to understand how complicated the procedures we created have become. Romania, Bulgaria and Yugoslavia lose more money every day as a result of the blocked transport than they get from international institutions.
The reconstruction of the Novi Sad bridge is another painful issue.
This is a big problem. I know people in Novi Sad want to go from one part of the city to the other. We secured financing for the bridge months ago. Now I hear that the EU is also ready to take over full responsibility. As I said, this is a big problem and requires a big organisation to solve it. And it is good the EU is taking control. But I know what happened with the Danube issue: the Stability Pact has transferred the mandate to clear the Danube to the EU last year. At that point I thought we were right to do so. But as of today, I think we should have kept the mandate for ourselves because the problem now is not money but procedures and the bureaucracy. It may have been easier to overcome the bureaucracy if we still have the mandate.
Send to Kindle
