PRESS CONFERENCE- FINLAND

GEORGE A. PAPANDREOU HOLDS PRESS CONFERENCE
AFTER THE CLOSE OF THE INFORMAL EU SUMMIT
AT GYMNICK, FINLAND

September 5, 1999

The Finnish Presidency of the EU
EUROPE
into the New Millennium
Saariselka Finland

GEORGE A. PAPANDREOU: The main issues we discussed were Turkey and EU expansion. One of the main reasons we discussed Turkey was of course the recent earthquake there. Greece has called for an important initiative in keeping with the EU’s decision to give humanitarian aid to Turkey following this tragic event.

We worked on this proposal with the European Commission last week, in conjunction with Hans van den Brook. I would say that we were not only positive towards this decision, but satisfied with the additional funds that will probably be necessary to deal with the crisis in Turkey. So we agreed on this financial package for Turkey at our meeting. Of course we did not make any final decisions at Gymnick, but we gave an informal order to the Commission to work on this package, so that we can finalize our official position on the Turkish financial package at our first Council of General Affairs next week.
Turkish Minister for Foreign Affairs Ismael Cem has been invited to attend this initial meeting next week as a guest speaker. This is a new step for us. You may remember that during the Kosovo crisis we invited a number of guest speakers to attend a lunch. I personally suggested this to Tara Haalonen at our recent meeting in Cologne. I am happy to say that Ismael Cem has accepted our invitation next Monday. I believe this will provide an excellent opportunity for us to have an open and informal discussion with the Turkish Minister for Foreign Affairs and his associates about EU-Turkish relations. We will also be ready to announce the decisions we have made to Mr. Cem.

The second issue we discussed was the question of Turkey’s EU candidacy. I would like to emphasize that Greece clearly stated that we are in favor of Turkey becoming a member of the EU and that Greece does not condone any criteria for candidacy based on religion or race. The fact that a nation is Christian or Muslim or any other religion does not constitute a criterion for eligibility for EU membership. The actual criteria are completely different: they are based on European values. I do not want to go into details, but these values are similar to those drawn up in Copenhagen - a just society, democratic institutions, good neighborly relations, and so on.

During our discussions, we referred to our agenda at the Helsinki summit. We discussed the possible ‘road map’ for Turkey’s candidacy (which Mr. Ecevit and Mr. Schroeder have already discussed in writing) as a useful as a way of dealing with the issue, and a basis for making our final decision about Turkey’s candidacy at Helsinki.

We expect to have many more discussions on this and several other related issues.
We discussed the question of EU expansion, the possibility of starting negotiations with a number of other countries whose possible candidacy is being assessed, Malta, and in general the future policy of Europe in terms of candidacy, negotiations, assessment, and so on. These issues will have to be discussed as a whole.

I wish the Finnish Presidency every success in this difficult undertaking. I believe the discussions today were extremely productive and the prospects are encouraging.

JOURNALIST:Does this mean you would not be opposed to an EU invitation to Turkey to begin negotiations for membership at Helsinki?

GEORGE A. PAPANDREOU: First of all, we are not opposed in principal to the participation or eligibility of Turkey. What we are discussing now are the preconditions for this and what they mean. In other words, the mutual commitments both sides will have to undertake. Of course, they will have to be part of an overall framework so that we deal with all candidate countries equally and without discrimination. However, we do have to make special provisions concerning the details of each individual candidate country.

Personally, I believe that if we really want to help Turkey we must not simply say that she is an eligible candidate, but that as for all other candidate countries Turkish eligibility means full candidacy status, which means control, observation, funding, and participation in discussions, meetings, and co-operation in general.

I believe that whatever we choose to do regarding Turkey, it should not be a third kind of policy or candidacy. Our policy towards Turkey should be the same as our policy towards all the other candidate countries; but in order for us to reach that stage, we must first set the necessary preconditions.

Various countries have different suggestions about how we should approach this issue. I believe that we are now addressing some of the key issues that will help us define what Turkey really feels about becoming an EU member. This is an interesting discussion, but I don’t think we should draw any definite conclusions today. Hopefully, we will be able to reach those conclusions at the Helsinki summit.

JOURNALIST:What was Greece’s response to the Swedish proposal?

GEORGE A. PAPANDREOU: I think it is a very interesting proposal. As I said, the ‘road map’ was discussed by Mr. Ecevit and Chancellor Schroeder. The Swedes have now come up with a proposal that gives substance to this idea. This is one of the issues we shall be discussing in the coming months. In general, though, my attitude is favorable.

JOURNALIST:Is Greek foreign policy towards Turkey changing? And if so, why?

GEORGE A. PAPANDREOU: Let me put it this way. Greece is making a very clear statement, and this might constitute a change. You can interpret that however you like. But it is in Greece’s interests to see Turkey move closer to Europe, and ultimately it is in Greece’s interests that Turkey joins the EU. However, as I said, this process entails responsibilities for both sides. What we hope to achieve at Helsinki is the steady realization of these responsibilities on both sides, not just on Turkey’s side but on the EU’s side also.

JOURNALIST:Earlier today, someone said that there has been a significant improvement in Greek-Turkish relations, partly due to the earthquake and partly due to other causes. Do you agree?

GEORGE A. PAPANDREOU: First, I would say that the decision reached by Mr. Cem and myself to begin a series of bi-lateral talks on six different issues was a real breakthrough. We reached tis decision when we met in New York on the sidelines of a UN summit a few months ago. These talks began two months ago, and the first round of talks on questions of mutual concern proceeded well. Another round of talks will take place next week, and I expect we shall see a number of specific initiatives and agreements on certain issues of mutual interest. This all began before the earthquake. So yes, there has been a significant breakthrough in that respect.

Secondly, the earthquake created a new climate, an impressively positive climate, for the first tie in diplomatic history. By this I mean that this tragedy generated a genuine feeling of human warmth between our two peoples. I would say that in fact our citizens outdid our diplomats. They went further than our political leaders and sent a very powerful message to us: the people are urging us to work together for peace and telling us that co-operation is in our mutual interest. So now it is up to us to move forward, to translate this message into action. I hope that we can maintain this positive climate by working together to improve bilateral relations

This does not mean that we have resolved our differences. Problems like Cyprus - which is not a bilateral issue – do exist, and also other problems such as Turkey’s territorial claims to certain islets in the Aegean. These issues are still there. So I don’t want to give the false impression that all our problems have suddenly been solved. This is not the case. But the current climate could allow progress to be made on these issues, which require political will.

JOURNALIST:You said earlier that it is in Greece’s interests to see Turkey join the EU. I would like to know why this is in Greece’s interests. You also said recently that you would help Turkey join the EU. What specific steps is Greece taking to help Turkey become a member of the EU?

GEORGE A. PAPANDREOU: On the question of Greece’s interests, we discussed these specifically during our talks with Turkey. Co-operation on tourism, economic cooperation and development, cultural cooperation, environmental cooperation, institutional cooperation, and cooperation on the Balkan Stability Pact, the Black Sea, the Mediterranean, and of course what we call the security of our citizens, which includes organized crime, terrorism, drug trafficking, and illegal immigration, are all issues which we are discussing. If we work together on these issues, we both stand to gain considerable financial and political benefits that are in our mutual interest.

I am convinced that Greece and Turkey can work together to create greater regional stability. We could synchronize our policy on Kosovo, Bosnia, the Middle East, the Black Sea, the Caucasus, Azerbaijan, and Armenia. These are just some of the areas where we could work together and have a real political impact.

Greater economic cooperation will guarantee greater prosperity for our citizens Greek and Turkish businesses are already collaborating, our markets have complimentary technological structure. We really ought to see this as an important prospect.

From the Greek perspective, I think our first priority is to see how we can help bring about the necessary reforms that Turkey must carry out through the EU. Greece has undergone enormous changes since 1974, since the Junta. Since we joined the EU, we have carried out successive reforms so that we can become core members of the EU. We hope to join the EMU in the near future. This is an important but difficult process, and on a multilateral level I think we could be very useful. I know that Turkey refuses to discuss EU issues on a multilateral basis, but I believe we can see this as the beginning of a new era in our talks.

JOURNALIST:Is the ‘road map’ something that precedes the recognition of eligibility for membership or will candidate status come first? And how do you define this new approach in relation to the principles and position of the Council of Europe outlined in Luxembourg?

GEORGE A. PAPANDREOU : I will answer the second question first. I think the decisions we made over the past few years, in terms of candidate countries and the preconditions they must fulfill in order to be eligible for membership, have been unified. So I don’t see any contradiction between the decisions we have made in the past and the ones we will make in Helsinki. We have to bring the two together.

As for the ‘road map’ – should that be drawn up before, after, or during negotiations? I think that is simply a matter of coordination rather than a real issue. I think what we are looking for is a real commitment from both sides. If we can achieve that, experienced diplomats will easily find an answer to your question. So long as there is a commitment, that’s what really matters.

JOURNALIST:Mr. Papandreou, you spoke warmly of Turkey. Have you discussed these issues directly with your Turkish counterpart? Did you collude with him before expressing these opinions here today?

GEORGE A. PAPANDREOU: Let me answer for Mr. Cem, even though he is not here today. I can tell you that I spoke with him on the phone yesterday. I told him exactly what I am telling you now. I believe that he listened to what I had to say with great interest, and I believe he wants to see how things between our countries can improve. As I said, we have made progress through dialogue. However, it is important to stress that problems still exist between us. So I believe the next step can be taken either tomorrow or over the next few months. It is very important that we address these critical issues also. But we put forward the proposals to help Turkey today without any preconditions. This is strictly a humanitarian gesture towards Turkey, in a time of crisis.

JOURNALIST:Do you think there is a real possibility that Turkey will be accepted as a candidate country at the Helsinki summit, under certain preconditions?

GEORGE A. PAPANDREOU: Of course. As I said, we are not against this prospect in principle, and we will work constructively to make it a reality. I think all fifteen EU members are cooperating on this issue, and so is Turkey. We are all willing, and I believe the ‘road map; could be the way to succeed.

JOURNALIST: There is still the question of the approx. ECU 700 million which are still in the EU Treasury. Greece yesterday said it was willing to lift its veto on this money. Have you made any progress on this issue?

GEORGE A. PAPANDREOU: We are willing to accept the Commission’s proposal of a loan. The Commission estimates this to be about ECU 500 million. We are sending a team to Turkey to talk to people and assess the damages. We do not have a problem with the size of the loan. Whether it is more or less, we will support this offer. So yes, we did make some progress on this issue today.

JOURNALIST:What are the criteria, the preconditions and commitments that you are demanding of Turkey? You spoke of ‘serious commitments’. What are they?

GEORGE A. PAPANDREOU: We have outlined them many times. If I went over them again, at the next interview you would ask me whether Turkey has fulfilled them or not, whether Turkey is making the necessary steps or not, and we would end up having a theoretical discussion. We must see whether there is genuine political will on both sides to deal with existing problems, and whether this can be proven by drawing up a ‘road map’ , an agenda, or some other route each candidate country must follow. But as I said, every country has its own particular problems. For example, let’s take Lithuania and Letonia. Letonia has a problematic Constitution and a Russian-speaking minority. The Slovaks have the problem of the Hungarian minority. There are different problems, but they all come under the same general principles that apply to all candidate countries. There are problems in Turkey too, and Turkey knows that. So let’s try to find a constructive way to solve them.

JOURNALIST:Given this positive climate towards Turkey, can Turkey hope to see Greece waive its right to veto financial aid to Turkey, and will this result in a solution to the problems?

GEORGE A. PAPANDREOU: I don’t follow your question. The question of financial aid has already been solved. We have stuck to the 1995 Protocol - a decision we discussed with all the political party leaders in Greece. I believe we must find ways to support Turkey, but at the same time we must send Turkey the message that there are still problems that must be resolved. This is a very different approach, and one which I hope will prove to be extremely constructive. I hope Turkey will reciprocate to this constructive way of thinking.

Also in Greek

Photos