We welcome the European Parliament's proposal for a recommendation on Bosnia and Herzegovina to be submitted to the Council. We have read the comprehensive report and the recommendation with great interest and are pleased to note extensive accord with regard to both the analysis of the situation in Bosnia and Herzegovina and the steps which Sarajevo and the international community should next take.
In its last meeting of 5 March, the GAEC welcomed the formation of the new Government in Bosnia and Herzegovina. Established on 9 February after difficult negotiations, the Govern¬ment is a broad coalition of the major parties of the three ethnic populations, headed by the new Prime Minister Nikola Špirić, a Bosnian Serb. The Council also took the opportunity to call on Prime Minister Špirić to ensure the swift and effective implementation of the whole range of reforms still to be undertaken, stressing that this was not least a requirement for concluding the Stabilization and Association Agreement.
The negotiations on the Stabilization and Association Agreement were successfully concluded at expert level at the end of 2006. The four remaining preconditions for the conclusion of the Stabilization and Association Agreement concern reforms of:
• the police
• public radio
• public administration
A further precondition is cooperation with the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia.
By taking the appropriate steps, the Government of Prime Minister Špirić could broaden Bosnia and Herzegovina's perspectives vis-à-vis the EU.
The EU's attention is currently directed at police reform in particular. The Agreement on police restructuring of October 2005 confirmed the basic principles of the envisaged changes:
• Police issues to be addressed at state level
• No political influence
• Necessity of functional local police areas
On 27 December 2006, the Directorate for Police Restructuring (DPR) presented its final report. This must now be approved at political level, namely by the Governments and Parlia¬ments of the whole state and the entities. Main points of contention are the Republika Srpska's demands to preserve its police/home affairs ministry and police areas extending beyond the entity borders.
The Council called on the new Government to use the current momentum to make progress on police reforms. This remains a precondition for the conclusion of a Stabilization and Asso¬ciation Agreement with the European Union. The EU welcomes the talks on the report of the Police Directorate. It however remains concerned that the deadline of 2 March, by which an agreement on police reform was to be reached, was not observed.
The European Union expects all parties to respect the commitments made under the political Agreement of October 2005. We urge these parties to reach an agreement which observes the three principles specified by the European Commission:
• All competencies for legislature and budget issues concerning the police must be vested at state level;
• Functional local police areas must be determined by technical policing criteria;
• There must be no political interference in operative police work.
Progress is also needed in the constitutional reform process to strengthen the state's ability to function and bring the existing constitution in line with EU standards.
The successful formation of a Government has paved the way for new progress. The swift adoption of the package of constitutional changes agreed by the six political parties in March 2006 would be a good first step. This would lay the ground for the introduction of a more ambitious process by the middle of 2007 with a view to making Bosnia and Herzegovina an even more effectively functioning state. For this reason, the Council decided to extend the mandate of the EU Special Representative in Bosnia and Herzegovina. From 1 March, there¬fore, Special Representative Dr Schwarz-Schilling will – on the basis of his extended man¬date – play an advisory and mediating role in the constitutional reform process.
In June last year, the Dayton Peace Implementation Council (PIC) had decided to close the Office of the High Representative (OHR) on 30 June 2007 and end the mandate of the High Representative. Following its review at the end of February, however, the Peace Imple¬mentation Council saw itself forced to revoke this decision, judging that developments since summer 2006 had not lived up to expectations. The resurgence of nationalist rhetoric and the standstill in reform efforts are not facilitating the start of a sustainable process. This situation is accompanied by unpredictable regional factors following delays in the status process for Kosovo. The latter played a particularly significant role in the Peace Implementation Council's decision to postpone the deadline. As is clear from point 32 of your draft proposal for a European Parliament recommendation to the Council, therefore, the PIC's assessment of the situation in Bosnia and Herzegovina concords with that of the European Parliament's draft recommendation.
New reviews should now take place in October 2007 and February 2008 with the aim of realizing the transition from the Office of the High Representative (OHR) to EU Special Representative (EUSR) on 30 June 2008. Until now, however, Russia has declared itself unable to subscribe to this view in as far as the decision extends beyond November 2007, and has announced that it wishes to draw its own conclusions.
One of Bosnia and Herzegovina's highest foreign policy priorities – alongside full member¬ship of the EU – is to accede to NATO. The NATO Summit in Riga in November 2006 represented an important step in this respect with its invitation to participate in the programme "Partnership for Peace" (PfP). Formal accession to the programme followed on 14 December 2006. NATO's decision was a testimony to the successful progress made in defence reforms, namely the development of unified armed forces serving the whole state.
Allow me to say a few words about the International Criminal Court's verdict on the appli¬cation of the Genocide Convention (Bosnia and Herzegovina vs Serbia and Montenegro). The ICC decided that, while Serbia was not guilty of genocide, it had, with regard to the massacre in Srebrenica, violated its obligation to prevent genocide. Serbia had also violated its obli¬gation to punish genocide by failing to arrest as yet the accused party Mladic and hand him over to the International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia (ICTY). The Inter¬national Criminal Court maintains that Serbia is obliged to take immediate measures to refer persons suspected of genocide to the ICTY.
The ICC declined to sentence Serbia to pay damages, despite the application made by Bosnia and Herzegovina to this effect. The European Union expects the concerned parties in the region (both in Bosnia and Herzegovina as well as in Serbia and Montenegro) to accept and fully respect the verdict of the International Criminal Court. In a declaration of 26 February, the EU Presidency expressed its hope that all political forces in Belgrade as well as the general population would take the verdict as another opportunity to further distance them¬selves from the crimes committed during the reign of Milosevic in the name of the former Federal Republic of Yugoslavia.
Among Bosnian Serbs and in Serbia, the verdict was generally received with relief, and in some cases misconstrued as an acquittal. There was a clear overriding feeling of disappoint¬ment and frustration among most Bosniaks. The verdict can hopefully nevertheless now help to close a painful chapter in the recent history of relations between Bosnia and Herzegovina and Serbia and Montenegro.
Thank you very much.
