SECRETARIAT WORKING PARTY TASK-FORCE "ENLARGEMENT"

THE COORDINATOR JF/bo , 24 February 2000

Briefing No 18

THE EUROPEAN CONFERENCE AND THE ENLARGEMENT OF THE EUROPEAN UNION

(First update)

•= The views expressed in this document are not necessarily those held by the European Parliament as an institution.

INTRANET: http://www.europarl.ep.ec/enlargement INTERNET: http://www.europarl.eu.int/enlargement EPADES: epades\public\elargiss

PE 167.410/rév.1 Or. FR

EN EN The briefings drafted by the European Parliament Secretariat's Task Force on Enlargement aim to present in a systematic, summary form, the state of discussions on the various aspects of enlargement of the Union and the positions adopted by the Member States, the applicant countries, and European institutions. Briefings will be updated as the negotiations progress. The following briefings have already been published:

Number Title PE No Date Languages

1 Cyprus and membership of the European Union 167.284/rev. 6 01.03.00 All 2 Hungary and the enlargement of the European Union 167.296/rev. 2 01.02.99 All 3 Romania and its accession to the European Union 167.297/rev. 2 26.02.99 All 4 The Czech Republic and the enlargement of the Euopean Union 167.335/rev. 4 22.03.00 All 5 Malta and the relations with the European Union 167.350/rev. 4 01.03.00 All 6 Bulgaria and the enlargement of the European Union 167.392/rev. 3 11.10.99 All 7 Turkey and relations with the European Union 167.407/rev. 3 10.02.00 8 Estonia and the enlargement of the European Union 167.409/rev. 3 02.03.00 All 9 Slovenia and accession to the European Union 167.531/rev. 2 11.11.99 All 10 Latvia and enlargement of the European Union 167.532/rev. 3 18.01.99 All 11 Lithuania and enlargement of the European Union 167.533/rev. 3 23.11.99 All 12 Poland and accession to the European Union 167.587/rev. 3 25.10.99 All 13 Slovakia and accession to the European Union 167.609/rev. 3 29.02.00 All 14 Russia and enlargement of the European Union 167.734/rev. 2 25.10.99 All 15 The institutional aspects of enlargement of the European Union 167.299/rev. 1 21.06.99 DE-EN-ES -FR-IT-SV 16 Controlling and protecting European Union finances with a view to enlargement 167.330 09.03.98 DE-EN-ES-FR-IT 17 Environmental policy and enlargement 167.402 23.03.98 DE-EN-ES-FR-IT 18 The European Conference and the enlargement of the European Union 167.410/rev. 1 24.02.99 DE-EN-ES-FR-IT 19 Budgetary aspects of enlargement 167.581 12.04.98 DE-EN-ES-FR-IT 20 Democracy and respect for human rights in the enlargement process of the EU 167.582 01.04.98 DE-EN-ES-FR-IT 21 Enlargement and Economic and Social Cohesion 167.584 08.05.98 DE-EN-ES-FR-IT 22 Statistical Annex on Enlargement 167.614/rev.8 10.04.00 EN 23 Legal Questions of Enlargement 167.617 19.05.98 DE-EN-ES-FR-IT 24 Pre-accession strategy for enlargement of the European Union 167.631 17.06.98 DE-EN-ES-FR-IT 25 Cooperation in the area of justice and home affairs in the enlargement process 167.690/rev.1 30.03.99 DE-EN-ES-FR-IT 26 Women's rights and enlargement of the EU 167.735 14.07.98 DE-EN-ES-FR-IT 27 Enlargement and Agriculture 167.741 03.09.98 DE-EN-ES-FR-IT 28 Switzerland and Enlargement 167.777/rev. 1 08.03.99 All 29 Enlargement and Fisheries 167.799 12.10.98 All 30 Common foreign and security policy and enlargement of the European Union 167.822/rev. 2 14.03.00 DE-EN-ES-FR-IT

2 PE 167.410/rév.1 Number Title PE No Date Languages

31 Security and defence and enlargement of the European Union 167.877 30.10.98 DE-EN-ES-FR-IT 32 The European Economic Area (EEA) and the enlargement of the EU 167.887 17.11.98 DE-EN-ES-FR-IT 33 The PHARE Programme and the enlargement of the EU 167.944 04.12.98 DE-EN-ES-FR-IT 34 The Economic and Monetary Union (EMU) and the enlargement of the EU 167.962/rev. 1 20.10.99 DE-EN-ES-FR-IT 35 The industrial policy and the enlargement of the EU 167.963/rev. 1 24.06.99 DE-EN-ES-FR-IT 36 Agenda 2000 and the accession process to the EU 168.008/rev. 2 16.12.99 DE-EN-ES-FR-IT 37 Enlargement and external economic relations 168.062/rev. 1 08.09.99 DE-EN-ES-FR-IT 38 The role of the European Parliament in the enlargement process 168.065 27.01.99 DE-EN-ES-FR-IT 39 The social aspects of enlargement of the EU 168.115/rev. 1 01.07.99 DE-EN-ES-FR-IT 40 Nuclear safety in the applicant countries of Central an Eastern Europe 168.257 22.03.99 DE-EN-ES-FR-IT 41 Public opinion on enlargement in the EU Member States and applicant countries 168.296 22.04.99 DE-EN-ES-FR-IT 42 The Russian minority in the Baltic States and the enlargement of the EU 168.307 03.05.99 DE-EN-ES-FR-IT 43 Energy policy and the enlargement of the EU 168.394 10.06.99 DE-EN-ES-FR-IT

To obtain copies of the above briefings, please contact:

Mrs E. Deguffroy, Luxembourg, SCH Room 602, Tel. (352) 4300-22906 / fax: (352) 4300-29027 Task Force on Enlargement, Brussels, LEO 06D119, Tel. (32 2) 284 2381 / fax: (32 2) 284 4984 Task Force on Enlargement, Strasbourg, IP2 447, Tel. (33 3) 8817-4408 / fax: (33 3) 8817-9059

INTRANET: http://www.europarl.ep.ec/enlargement INTERNET: http://www.europarl.eu.int/enlargement EPADES: epades\public\elar

3 PE 167.410/rév.1 BRIEFING ON THE EUROPEAN CONFERENCE AND THE ENLARGEMENT OF THE EUROPEAN UNION

CONTENTS

Page

INTRODUCTION...... 7

I. THE POSITIONS OF THE EU INSTITUTIONS...... 8 (a) The Commission...... 8 (b) The parliamentary dimension and the position of the European Parliament ...... 8 (c) The Council...... 10 (d) Proceedings of the European Conference ...... 11

II. THE POSITIONS OF THE MEMBER STATES...... 14 Belgium...... 14 Denmark ...... 14 Greece ...... 14 Spain...... 14 ...... 15 France...... 15 Ireland ...... 16 Italy ...... 16 The Netherlands...... 16 Austria ...... 16 Portugal ...... 16 Finland...... 16 Sweden ...... 16 United Kingdom ...... 17

III. THE POSITIONS OF SOME OF THE APPLICANT STATES Bulgaria ...... 17 Hungary...... 17 Latvia...... 17 Lithuania...... 18 Malta ...... 18 Poland...... 18 Romania...... 19 Slovenia...... 19 Slovakia...... 19

IV.THE TURKEY ISSUE...... 19

ANNEX

4 PE 167.410/rév.1 INTRODUCTION The European Council meeting held in Luxembourg on 12 and 13 December 1997 envisaged the enlargement process as a comprehensive, ongoing integration process, which was to progress in stages at a pace tailored to each applicant country in accordance with its level of preparation. It is an individual accession process applying to all Central and Eastern European applicant countries (CEECs) as well as to Cyprus and Malta. The European Council also decided to set up the European Conference, which had been proposed by the Commission as a multilateral forum for political consultation. The objective of the Conference, according to the European Council, was to bring together the Member States of the European Union and those European countries wishing to become members which share its values and internal and external objectives. The 15 Member States, the 10 CEEC applicant countries and Turkey were invited to participate. The Conference meetings are held at two levels: between the Heads of State and Government on the one hand and the foreign ministers on the other. The Conference is chaired by the Member State holding the Council Presidency. At the Presidency's invitation, the Heads of State and Government and the President of the Commission meet at the Conference once a year, as do the foreign ministers. The only meeting held so far at the level of the Heads of State and Government was in London on 12 March 1998 under the UK Presidency. The President of the European Parliament also played an active role in the meeting and expects to be invited to future meetings. The first meeting of the Conference at foreign minister level was held on 6 October 1998 in Luxembourg during the Austrian Presidency and the second on 19 July 1999 in Brussels during the Finnish Presidency. Turkey declined the invitation to participate in all the above meetings.

As regards the principles of the Conference, participating countries must share a common commitment to peace, security and good neighbourliness, respect for other countries’ sovereignty, the principles upon which the European Union is founded, the integrity and inviolability of external borders, the principle of international law and the settlement of territorial disputes by peaceful means, in particular under the jurisdiction of the International Court of Justice at The Hague. The Conference is also a multilateral forum for political consultation intended to address issues of general concern to the participants and to broaden and deepen their cooperation on foreign and security policy, justice and home affairs and other areas of common interest, in particular economic matters and regional cooperation. At the inaugural meeting of the European Conference priorities were agreed in a number of areas: transnational organised crime, the environment, foreign and security policy issues, exchanges of information on social and economic policy, and regional cooperation.

Turkey’s refusal to participate in the Conference and the existence of other regional bodies dealing with similar issues has prompted some countries to question its usefulness. Called upon to debate the future of the Conference, in Helsinki the Fifteen managed only to note their disagreement and postponed any relevant decisions to a later date. The European Council did, however, make a fundamental decision with regard to Turkey, and one which will undoubtedly have an impact on the scope of the Conference’s work. As the Commission recently declared, it is to be hoped that Turkey will participate in the European Conference from now on and become a fully-fledged, active member, thus enabling the Conference to function as intended. The debate on the future of the Conference focuses mainly on its composition, its terms of reference and the organisation of its work. All in all, however, the Conference has received positive feedback, and most countries consider it to be a useful body for political consultation in the context of the enlargement process.

5 PE 167.410/rév.1 I. THE POSITIONS OF THE INSTITUTIONS OF THE EUROPEAN UNION

(a) The Commission

The Commission proposal to convene a European Conference was originally set out in Agenda 2000 (Volume I, For a stronger and wider Union, Part Two, The challenge of enlargement)1, taking up the idea put forward by France in 1996. For the Commission, the European Conference was not to be regarded as part of the accession strategy per se, but was to provide an opportunity for countries to consult each other on a broad range of issues relating to the Common Foreign and Security Policy, justice and home affairs. On the CFSP front, the Conference was to act as a forum in which international issues of common interest, such as relations with Russia, Ukraine and the other CIS member states or security in Europe, could be discussed. It was to enable participating countries to be more closely involved in the drawing up and implementation of joint actions, declarations and procedures, which would thus gain in authority and consistency. Furthermore, as the European Union and the other participants in the Conference have many common concerns in the field of justice and home affairs (e.g. the fight against organised crime, terrorism, corruption, drug and arms trafficking, money laundering and illegal immigration), the European Conference was to facilitate cooperation between national authorities, particularly between the police and the courts, and with Europol.

The Commission subsequently played an active role in the various meetings of the EuropeanConference. It refrained from proposing to relaunch the European Conference before the European Council in Helsinki, however. In the composite paper on the progress towards accession achieved by each of the applicant countries, submitted to the Helsinki European Council, the Commission merely noted that the future role and composition of the Conference was to be considered by the Council, adding that 'it is hoped that Turkey will participate in the European Conference from now on and become a full and active member, thus enabling the Conference to function as intended, perhaps with some improvements to its working methods'.

(b) The parliamentary dimension and the position of the European Parliament2

The European Parliament is involved in the EU enlargement process in various ways. Be it via its activities stemming from the assent procedure – pursuant to Article 49(1) of the Treaty on European Union – consultation as provided for by various articles of the Treaty, or political initiatives, underpinned by Parliament’s Rules of Procedure, its role in this area is considerable. By making skilful use of the legal and regulatory instruments at its disposal and by creating special new procedures, Parliament has strengthened its position and become an important partner in the process. Since the publication of Agenda 2000 in July 1997, Parliament has played a vital role in providing impetus and supervision vis-à-vis the other institutions and the applicant countries.

1 See Task Force Briefing No 36 on Agenda 2000 and the accession process to the EU. 2 See Briefings Nos 36 and 38 on the role of the European Parliament in the enlargement process. See also ‘Topical Note No 2 on the enlargement-related activities of the European Parliament Committee on Foreign Affairs: 1997- 1999’. These three documents were drawn up by the Task Force. The texts of all the resolutions referred to can be found at: http://www.europarl.eu.int/enlargement/positionep/fr/defaut.htm. This paragraph is also based on the excellent Working Document PE 231.896 by the Committee on Foreign Affairs.

6 PE 167.410/rév.1 1. Assent procedure during final negotiations

Under Article 49(1) of the Treaty on European Union, ‘any European State which respects the principles set out in Article 6(1) may apply to become a member of the Union. It shall address its application to the Council, which shall act unanimously after consulting the Commission and after receiving the assent of the European Parliament, which shall act by an absolute majority of its component members.’ This provision, already in force when Austria, Finland and Sweden joined the EU, confers upon Parliament the power to ratify the outcome of the negotiations, a power which could be equated with that enjoyed by the national parliaments. Essentially, unless the European Parliament gives its assent, no new applicants may join the EU.

2. Mandatory consultation laid down in the treaties

The enlargement process is not merely a question of negotiating with applicant countries, but of adopting a series of legislative acts (mainly regulations and decisions) for the purpose of establishing, inter alia, Accession Partnerships, or adopting financial instruments to assist applicant countries (pre-accession structural instruments, etc.). Parliament participates in the adoption procedure for these acts too, although its powers are more limited. In most cases Parliament acts under the codecision or consultation procedures provided for in several articles of the treaties.

3. Political initiatives: preliminary European Parliament resolutions on the various aspects of enlargement in general and on the European Conference in particular

The power conferred upon Parliament via the assent procedure is exercised during the final stage of negotiations; according to a well-established principle, Parliament expresses its opinion on the outcome of the negotiations and not on the actual principle of the accession of a new Member State. Nevertheless, given the key role it has to play, the other institutions also have an interest in ensuring that Parliament is fully involved in the process right from the start; for this reason, before assent is given or withheld, Parliament adopts a series of preliminary resolutions designed to make its position known on the general and sectoral aspects of enlargement. As for the European Conference, in its resolution of 4 December 1997 on the Commission Communication ‘Agenda 2000 – For a stronger and wider Union’, Parliament already clearly stated that the Conference should be an essential and discrete pan-European instrument for political cooperation, but that it should on no account be a substitute for bilateral negotiations on enlargement. Parliament was required to play an important role in the Conference and the Council should take all necessary measures to ensure that it participates fully in this new forum. The former President of the European Parliament, Mr Gil Robles, was invited to attend the Conference and subsequently made a statement about it at the April 1998 part-session. At the Conference, which was held in London, the informal nature of the meetings was emphasised and no specific arrangements were made with regard to the role of the European Parliament. At a meeting in Bucharest on 13-14 March 1998 the President of the European Parliament informed the presidents of the 10 parliaments of the Associated Countries of Central and Eastern Europe about the meeting and the special role he had played in it. For all practical purposes, these meetings of the EP President with the presidents of the parliaments of the applicant countries could be considered the parliamentary dimension of the enlargement process. As regards the future of the European Conference, in its resolution of 16 December 1999 on the Helsinki European Council, the European Parliament merely expressed its regret that no concrete decision had been taken on the future of the Conference.

7 PE 167.410/rév.1 c) The Council

At the Luxembourg Summit of 12 and 13 December 1997 the Council adopted the Commission’s proposal for the European Conference. It stressed that the provisions set out in paragraph 5 of the Presidency conclusions did not constitute ‘preconditions’, but rather ‘aspirations’ to which countries wishing to participate had to adhere. These provisions and general aspirations for the Conference as defined in the conclusions of the Council Presidency can be summarised as follows:

(1) members of the Conference must share a common commitment to peace, security and good neighbourliness, respect for other countries’ sovereignty, the principles upon which the European Union is founded, the integrity and inviolability of external borders, the principle of international law and to the settlement of territorial disputes by peaceful means, in particular under the jurisdiction of the International Court of Justice at The Hague;

(2) the European Conference is a multilateral forum for political consultation intended to address issues of general concern to the participants and to broaden and deepen their cooperation on foreign and security policy, justice and home affairs and other areas of common interest, particularly economic matters and regional cooperation.

In accordance with the Presidency conclusions published after its first meeting in London on 12 March 1992, the Conference is thus a unique forum for direct and informal exchanges at the highest level and an ideal framework within which participants may further their cooperation, building on a raft of joint, tried-and-tested activities. In the light of a Council report on the work of the Conference and of other similar forums, the European Council, meeting in Vienna on 11 and 12 December 1998, decided that a meeting would be held at foreign minister level in 1999 in Helsinki to examine the conditions for accession and the future role of the European Conference. At the same time, it confirmed its invitation to Switzerland to become an ‘elected member’. Subsequently, although the programme of the German Presidency had included the option of convening the European Conference at the level of the Heads of State and Government in the first half of 1999, expressing the intention to do everything possible to guarantee Turkey’s presence at the meeting, the Conference did not take place. Ultimately, in the Council report on the European Conference of 6 December 1999, submitted to the Helsinki European Council, the following options emerged as to the future of the Conference, though not one of them secured unanimous support:

•= countries other than those seeking EU membership should also be invited to participate in the Conference •= the number of topics on the Conference agenda should be increased •= the structure and working methods of the Conference should be altered, though it was not specified how •= it would serve no purpose, at this stage, to take any new decisions on the Conference.

8 PE 167.410/rév.1 It was actually the final option which won the day, since the European Council meeting held in Helsinki on 10 and 11 December 1999 decided that the future of the Conference would be reviewed in accordance with the progress made and with the decisions on the accession process to be taken in Helsinki. The Council thus decided to change neither the structure of the Conference (most Member States advocated its extension to Ukraine and Moldova in particular), nor its agenda. France, meanwhile, announced that it would organise a Conference meeting under its presidency in the second half of 2000, possibly at the level of the Heads of State and Government.

(d) Proceedings of the European Conference

The 15 Member States, Cyprus, the 10 applicant countries from Central and Eastern Europe and Turkey were invited to participate in the first Conference. Turkey declined the invitation. Other European countries which had not initially been invited subsequently expressed the desire to participate (FYROM, Iceland, Norway, Switzerland and Ukraine). Of these, Switzerland was invited to the Conference held under the Austrian Presidency, having been elected a member- designate by the European Council in Vienna. The Presidency likewise decided to invite Malta to the 1999 Conference, as its application for EU membership had been reinstated.

The Conference meetings are held at two levels: between the Heads of State and Government on the one hand and the foreign ministers on the other. The Conference is chaired by the Member State holding the Council Presidency . In accordance with the decisions of the Luxembourg European Council and at the Presidency's invitation, the Heads of State and Government and the President of the Commission must meet at the Conference once a year, as must the foreign ministers. However, the only meeting held so far at the level of the Heads of State and Government was in London on 12 March 1998 under the British Presidency. The President of the European Parliament also played an active role in the meeting and expects to be invited to future meetings. At this inaugural meeting, priorities were established in a number of areas:

•= international organised crime3: the participants are determined to continue their efforts to combat the scourge of organised crime, in particular trafficking in drugs and human beings, and terrorism. A group of experts on drugs and international organised crime was set up; •= environmental protection4: the participants affirmed their determination to work actively to improve environmental protection and to promote sustainable development in this area; •= foreign policy and security issues5: the participants recognised that their interests will increasingly converge. They therefore pledged to deepen and extend their cooperation in order to strengthen Europe's voice and values in the world;

3 See Task Force Briefing No 25 on cooperation in the area of justice and home affairs in the enlargement process. 4 See Task Force Briefing No 17 on environment policy and EU enlargement and Briefing No 40 on nuclear safety in the applicant countries of Central and Eastern Europe. 5 See Task Force Briefing No 30 on the Common Foreign and Security Policy and the enlargement of the EU; see also Briefing No 31 on security and defence and enlargement of the European Union.

9 PE 167.410/rév.1 •= economic competitiveness6: they decided to foster employment and exchange information on their economic and social policies and how best to strengthen the competitiveness of their economies by equipping people with the skills needed to tackle the challenge of the ; •= regional cooperation7: the participants welcomed the new regional cooperation programmes and pledged that they would be dynamic and consistent.

The European Conference meeting held in London also discussed the crisis in the Kosovo province of the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia. The 26 Heads of State/Government and the Presidents of the European Parliament and of the Commission subsequently signed a joint declaration and confirmed their intention to align themselves with the European Union's policy on Kosovo and to take national action in support of the shared objectives of ending the violence and securing a political solution in the region.

The first Conference meeting at foreign minister level was held on 6 October 1998 in Luxembourg during the Austrian Presidency. The debate focused primarily on the fight against organised crime and the sexual exploitation of children and how to prevent such exploitation, ways of combating trafficking in human beings, and regional cooperation in environmental matters. Foreign policy was also discussed, particularly the situation in Kosovo and Albania. The second Conference meeting at foreign minister level was held in Brussels on 19 July 1999 during the Finnish Presidency, when the topic of discussion was the western Balkans. It was also decided that the group of experts on drugs and organised crime should be disbanded, as it had already completed its task.

Essentially, the Conference has achieved the following:

(a) International organised crime

The inaugural meeting in London entrusted the British Presidency with the task of setting up a joint group of experts on drugs and organised crime, which was to be responsible for drawing up a report on the growing problems posed by such crime to European societies, particularly in eastern Europe. The group, subsequently referred to as the ‘Kohl group’, had to submit recommendations to the Conference within 12 months. At its first working session at the meeting of foreign ministers on 6 October in Luxembourg, the debate centred on the fight against the sexual exploitation of children (particularly pornography) and trafficking in human beings. The Conference noted the preliminary findings of the group of experts on drugs and organised crime and declared that the prevention of and fight against the sexual exploitation of children and the fight against the smuggling of human beings (a new and serious form of organised crime) called for concerted action at all levels.

6 See Task Force Briefing No 34 on economic and monetary union (EMU) and the enlargement of the EU; see also Briefing No 39 on the social aspects of enlargement of the EU. 7 See Briefing No 21 on the enlargement of the EU and economic and social cohesion.

10 PE 167.410/rév.1 At the working session of 19 July 1999, the foreign ministers once again debated how to coordinate their efforts more effectively in the fight against international crime. The discussion was largely based on the final report submitted by the Kohl group in March 1999. This report underlined the need to strengthen transnational cooperation between law enforcement agencies and the courts, particularly by improving the exchange of information and the technical and legal bases enabling organised criminal groups to be prosecuted, and by setting up joint training schemes. At the end of the meeting, the President of the Council of Ministers and Finnish Minister for Foreign Affairs, Tarja Halonen, announced that the participants had agreed to accept the measures proposed by the group of experts and implement its recommendations. As recommended in the report, the Conference also decided to disband the group. Cooperation in the fight against international crime now falls within the remit of the group of experts set up under the Pre-Accession Pact on organised crime (approved on Thursday, 28 May 1998). Moreover, certain operational aspects of cooperation can now be dealt with by Europol.

(b) Foreign policy

The Conference had already debated the Kosovo crisis and signed the above-mentioned joint declaration at the inaugural meeting in London. At the meeting of Tuesday, 6 October 1998, the members of the Conference once again discussed the Kosovo crisis and condemned in the strongest of terms the persistent violation of human rights and excessive use of force against civilians. They endorsed Security Council Resolution 1199 of 23 September 1998 and supported the idea of holding a Conference on the economic future of Albania. The EU Member States also welcomed the fact that their partners fall in with the EU line on sanctions. The Conference urged the Belgrade authorities to support actively the immediate return of all refugees and displaced persons and to guarantee their safety. The members of the Conference then pledged to help all those in need and to support all programmes devoted to this cause. The Conference also adopted a declaration on Albania, welcoming the prospect of cooperating with the new government in Tirana, especially with regard to economic and democratic reform and the improvement of internal security.

Subsequently, at the meeting of 19 July 1999, the ministers reviewed the latest developments in Kosovo following the adoption of Resolution 1244 by the United Nations Security Council, the deployment of the international security force in Kosovo and the adoption of measures to establish an interim civilian administration. The Fifteen welcomed the fact that their partners had decided to support the EU sanctions against the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia and thanked neighbouring countries for having assumed this responsibility despite the adverse repercussions. In its conclusions, the Finnish Presidency stressed that all the ministers emphasised on the need to secure a safe return for all refugees and displaced persons, including Serbs. The participants also confirmed their commitment to play an active and constructive role in achieving the objectives of the stability pact for the Balkans, particularly those concerning regional cooperation. Lastly, the ministers underlined the importance of respecting democratic values and protecting human rights so as to re-establish peace and stability in the countries of south-eastern Europe, including the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia. To this end, they expressed the wish to strengthen their relations and increase their support to the democratic forces of the FRY and the representatives of civil society.

11 PE 167.410/rév.1 (c) Regional cooperation on environmental issues

Regional cooperation on environmental issues has been on the agenda from the very first Conference meeting. The Conference thus welcomed the various regional cooperation schemes which have been implemented and in which the members of the Conference are actively involved. These included: the Central European Initiative, the -Mediterranean Partnership, Black Sea economic cooperation, the Council of Baltic Sea States, the Barents Euro-Arctic Council and the successful conference of European environment ministers which was held in Aarhus within the broader framework of the ‘Environment for Europe’ process. The Conference noted the considerable amount of work that had been done on environmental issues in these different contexts. It also agreed that the Presidency would begin by inviting those responsible for implementing the various regional cooperation agreements, the Commission and the European Environment Agency to submit reports on their experience and projects on regional cooperation on environmental issues, specifying the difficulties they had encountered and the solutions found. These reports would then in principle be used as a basis for drawing up a report on best practices, which would be made available to regional cooperation bodies for their future use.

Lastly, France announced that it would organise a Conference meeting under its Presidency in the second half of 2000, if possible at the level of the Heads of State and Government.

II. THE POSITIONS OF THE MEMBER STATES

Belgium Since the original French proposal was formulated, the Belgian Government has supported the idea of the European Conference as a means of emphasising the inclusive nature of the enlargement process. However, Belgium sees it not as part of the actual accession process itself but rather as a vehicle through which a better mutual understanding of the overall process may be gained, i.e. as a forum within which better relations may be established, particularly among the applicant states themselves, which will in turn lead to a smoother implementation of the accession process.

Denmark The Danish Government is convinced that the Conference is a useful instrument in the overall enlargement process, but more as a forum for a general discussion of the issues involved, rather than as an integral part of the accession process per se. It also sees the Conference as an important aspect of EU-Turkey relations and in this respect has been very keen for the Turks to participate in it.

12 PE 167.410/rév.1 Greece In a position paper on enlargement of 8 September 1997, while supporting the idea of enlargement itself, the Greek Government nonetheless criticised the idea of the European Conference. It saw little reason for its existence in the first place, was critical of its proposed topics of discussion and had difficulties with the proposed participants, specifically Turkey. In particular, the Greek Permanent Representative to the EU has repeatedly asserted that Paragraphs 4, 5 and 6 of the Luxembourg Conclusions imposed ‘binding conditions’ on participation and that even if Greece chose not to attend the Conference, the strengthening of relations between Turkey and the EU was still contingent on the requirements laid down in paragraph 35 of the European Council Conclusions, namely that Turkey implement reforms on the treatment of minorities, human rights and the establishment of satisfactory and stable relations with Greece. During the Conference meeting in London, the Greek Prime Minister stressed the importance of the strict management of legal systems.

Spain Spain considers the European Conference to be a means of bringing together the EU Member States and the applicant countries. It therefore looks forward to seeing Turkey take part in future meetings. It also considers this forum to be particularly suitable for dealing with issues such as European security and defence policy, the institutional reform of the European Union, cooperation in the field of justice and home affairs and other issues of common interest, such as environmental matters.

Germany Initially, the German Government approved the idea of the European Conference. It was, however, unsure if it needed to have institutional status. However, after the Conference in London Mr Kohl regretted Turkey's absence. He hoped that Turkey would join the other participants later and eventually take part in the group of experts to be set up to consider the problems linked to organised crime and drugs trafficking. In fact, Mr Kohl had been the first to put forward the idea of establishing the group of experts. As regards the future of the European Conference, in view of the conclusions of the Helsinki European Council, the future role of the Conference as a forum for multilateral political consultation between EU Member States and European applicant countries should be looked at in a new light. The acceptance of Turkey as an applicant should allow the pre-accession process to be launched. As an applicant country, Turkey would have the opportunity of participating in the pre-accession strategy already implemented for the other applicant states. In Germany’s view, the existing instruments and institutions provide a complete framework for integration and cooperation in all areas so far covered by the European Conference. Several of the items on the Conference agenda, such as the promotion of human rights and the strengthening of the rule of law and democracy, were already covered by other forums (Council of Europe, Organisation for Security and Cooperation in Europe, etc.) For all the above reasons, consideration should be given to the issue of whether or not to retain the Conference as an additional forum for multilateral political consultation. Germany will not, however, oppose the continuation of the Conference if other Member States call for this.

13 PE 167.410/rév.1 France The French Government, as the instigator of the European Conference, had high hopes for its brainchild. Like other Member States, the French Government does not see the Conference as part of the accession process itself, but rather as a forum for general discussion among the participants. As mentioned in the National Assembly report on the Helsinki European Council, France believes it is too soon to consider expanding the Conference, but hopes that it would become a forum for informal debate between the EU and the applicant countries, including Turkey, on institutional reform, European defence policy and all topics of common concern involving practical cooperation. At the ministerial meeting of 6 October 1998, France suggested organising working groups and colloquiums or seminars on topics of common interest, such as financial stability in Europe, developing ways of transporting goods other than by road, and the promotion of the European film industry and European audiovisual programmes. In the conclusions of the above-mentioned report, it is also suggested that the Conference could be a framework for informal debate on institutional reform and security and defence issues. As for the organisation of the work of the Conference, France emphasis that some interesting initiatives could be taken in this regard. The Conference should not, however, have to compete with other bodies and should be able to follow up the matters it deals with (hence cooperation in the fight against international crime, which was examined on the basis of a report by a group of experts which was subsequently disbanded, would be followed up by another group of experts on behalf of the applicant countries and the Member States in the context of the pre-accession strategy). It might be advisable to define more clearly the various roles and to structure relations between this central body, set up to debate, draw together ideas and put forward recommendations on major trans-European issues and the more specialised institutions which would be involved in implementation.

Ireland The Irish Government supports the idea of the Conference, on the basis that it could provide a useful multilateral framework for closer consultations between all applicants and the Union and should serve to strengthen their ties with the Union.

Italy Italy, which sets great store by the evolutive and inclusive character of the enlargement process, attaches particular importance to the European Conference and feels that it should be a permanent fixture.

The Netherlands The importance of the European Conference is, in the eyes of the Dutch Government, greater than that assigned to it by the Commission. A memorandum from the Dutch Parliament in November 1997 made this point by indicating that a better name for the Conference would be the ‘Permanent Conference’ in order to make it clear that it is a permanent forum for consultation and exchange of information.

14 PE 167.410/rév.1 Austria Austria has often repeated, notably at the informal meeting in Saariselkä, that the Conference should be used as a platform for supporting not only applicant countries, but also others, such as Ukraine and Moldova. When Austria held the EU Presidency, it proposed to use the Conference as an institutional framework within which a multilateral network could be created, open to those countries which had no prospects of joining the EU in the foreseeable future. In Austria’s view, the European Conference is nevertheless a valuable forum for multilateral exchanges of ideas, but one which must evolve with the enlargement process. Austria has expressed great interest in the idea of using the Conference as a consultation forum for the applicant countries in the run-up to the next Intergovernmental Conference.

Portugal Portugal endorses the concept of the European Conference, which it considers to be a useful body in terms of bringing the European Union closer to the applicant countries, in particular Turkey. Portugal therefore wholeheartedly supported France in its intention to organise a Conference meeting during its Presidency and is now waiting for the discussion topic to be announced.

Finland The Finnish Government considers that each of the countries seeking membership should be treated equally and assessed on the basis of the same criteria. It also wants regular talks to be held with all the applicant states to ensure that this principle of equal treatment is indeed being adhered to and sees the European Conference as an important vehicle in this regard. The Finnish Presidency envisaged the participation of Norway and Iceland as associate members and Ukraine and Moldova as observers.

Sweden The Swedish Government sees the European Conference as fulfilling the role of a steering committee for each of the various intergovernmental conferences which in themselves constitute the accession negotiations. However, it does not in any way see the Conference as a substitute for the negotiations proper, but rather as a background framework to the negotiations with strong links to them. With respect to Turkey, it feels rather that a ‘customs union plus’ framework should be established and that particular efforts should be focused on it. Sweden will willingly take part in the Conference as soon as the Member States decide to convene it. Possible topics of discussion could include certain environmental issues (unrelated to the ‘acquis’) and foreign policy issues. Problems related to the enlargement negotiations should, however, be dealt with by other bodies. As regards opening up the Conference to other countries, Sweden believes that participating countries must have clear prospects of joining the Union and that Iceland and Norway should be offered the opportunity of participating in the Conference under the same terms as Switzerland.

15 PE 167.410/rév.1 United Kingdom The British Presidency intended to expand upon the guidelines laid down by the European Council on 12 and 13 December, with particular emphasis on the Common Foreign and Security Policy and justice and home affairs. When speaking to the Foreign Affairs, Security and Defence Committee of the European Parliament in Brussels on 27 January 1998, Robin Cook stated that the European Conference in London was the single most important event of the British Presidency. He envisaged ‘more than a mere exercise in ceremony but a discussion of issues of real substance’. He then went on to outline five particular areas that the UK wished to concentrate upon, namely: (i) environmental cooperation; (ii) crime and drugs and how to find a European solution to these problems; (iii) means of successfully strengthening and subsequently integrating into the EU the economies of the applicant states; (iv) the development of methods to improve regional cooperation; (v) reaching a consensus on foreign policy.

III. THE POSITIONS OF SOME OF THE APPLICANT COUNTRIES

Not all the applicant countries have given a specific opinion on the European Conference. However, a summary of the opinions of those that have is given below.

Bulgaria The Bulgarian Government does not view the European Conference as an alternative to the accession negotiations and is keen that it should not slow them down. It does not see the Conference as an adequate vehicle for overcoming possible new divisions among the associated countries. It fears that the Conference could in fact serve as a means of putting back likely accession dates unless the agenda is strictly adhered to.

Hungary Hungary endorses the decisions taken at the Helsinki European Council to review the Conference. The European Conference, as a political forum for consultation on issues of common interest, should not be considered as a policy tool of the enlargement process, but rather as a forum for supporting European integration in order to avoid creating new divisions within Europe. As regards the objectives established by the Luxembourg European Council, Hungary attaches great importance to cooperation in the field of environmental protection, drug- trafficking and organised crime issues, fighting child pornography, trafficking in human beings and cooperation with all sub-regional initiatives and organisations. It believes that this cooperation should be stepped up in an efficient and organised manner. However, the Conference’s revised agenda should not overlap with that of other European organisations such as the Council of Europe or the OSCE. Hungary agrees with the Presidency conclusions Presidency issued following the Luxembourg European Council that the European Conference should bring together EU Member States and those European countries wishing to join the EU which share its values and internal and external objectives. As for the organisation and structure of the Conference, Hungary is impatient for it to be reformed in the light of the outcome and the experience of the early meetings.

16 PE 167.410/rév.1 Latvia Latvia regards the European Conference as an effective tool for developing a common dialogue and for the exchange of experience and information between existing and future Member States. The European Conference is an ideal opportunity to ensure that Latvia is prepared for its future EU work and is helping to resolve the current outstanding issues under the 2nd and 3rd pillars. To ensure the continuity of the Conference, Latvia sees a need to define precisely the scope of the issues to be discussed as well as the number of participants. Latvia envisages that the Conference will become a structure embracing both the Member States and the applicant states. As regards the scope of the Conference, Latvia takes the view that, given the increasingly important role of the common foreign and security policy, the structure and level of the Conference offer an opportunity to establish a productive dialogue between the Member States and the applicant countries and prepare future members for their role in EU policy-making. Latvia also notes that 3rd pillar issues have become an important part of the Conference agenda and believes that it would be useful to take the 3rd pillar into consideration in the future too. The right instruments need to be used to implement the decisions adopted. Such instruments already exist (e.g. the pre- accession pact group of experts) or are in the process of being jointly developed by the EU Member States and the applicant countries. Latvia sees the Conference at foreign ministers level as providing the appropriate level of cooperation and endowing the matters discussed with the appropriate political weight. As regards the organisation of the work, Latvia cooperation between the EU Member States and the applicant states in drawing up the Conference agenda is now considered a key principle. In Latvia’s opinion, a mechanism is needed to ensure that future Member States are involved in drawing up the Conference agenda and in the formulation and drafting of the important questions. Latvia believes that all countries that have shown an interest in participating in the Conference should be invited to take part as observers.

Lithuania The Lithuanian Government has expressed concern at the lack of preconditions for attending the Conference and doubts whether the Conference will in fact be able to respond to the real needs of the applicant countries. Lithuania points out that it supported the Luxembourg European Council decision on the Conference, within which participating countries would be able to strengthen cooperation in foreign policy and on other issues. Lastly, Lithuania shares the views expressed in the conclusions of the Helsinki European Council whereby the future of the European Conference could be reviewed in the light of future developments and the decisions taken in Helsinki on the accession process. Further consideration should be given to an exchange of views on issues relating to the next Intergovernmental Conference.

Malta Malta took part in the European Conference for the first time in July 1999. It considers the Conference to be beneficial in that it enables views to be exchanged at the highest level on international problems of common interest. The admission of Turkey as an applicant has changed the face of the European Conference. In view of this important development, Malta would like to see the European Conference as a vehicle for consultation with the applicant countries on matters regarding the future architecture of the European Union. There are two key issues in this regard: - the Intergovernmental Conference on institutional reform in accordance with Article 19 of the Conclusions of the Helsinki European Council; - a broader framework for the accession process and its future evolution.

17 PE 167.410/rév.1 Poland The Polish Government is conscious of the need for dialogue between all the countries applying for membership of the Union and thus supports the idea of the European Conference. It nonetheless stresses that it sees the Conference as a separate entity from the accession negotiations themselves which must be treated as such.

Romania In Romania’s view, the European Conference is a useful framework for multilateral political dialogue between the EU Member States and the applicant countries. It provides an opportunity for an open exchange of views on current pan-European issues. It would be in the interests of all participants for Turkey to take part in the dialogue. Romania believes that at present the decision to halt this form of dialogue is unwise. The European Conference could represent a forum for debate on various crises. However, as regards the organisation of the Conference’s work, the timetable of meetings could be more flexible and speaking time longer.

Slovenia The Slovenian Government welcomes all the initiatives making up the Pre-Accession Strategy and it therefore welcomes the idea of the European Conference. It views it as a means of providing the whole process of enlargement with the necessary transparency, objectivity and flexibility.

Slovakia The Slovak Republic believes that the 3rd pillar of the EU comprises a number of issues which, if they are to be resolved, call for the coordination of the actions of all European countries. It thus sees the European Conference as an appropriate forum for discussing and tackling the problems of justice and home affairs. In an informal document published in October 1999, the Slovak Republic presented its comments on the Tampere summit and proposed using the European Conference to step up the joint measures taken by its members with a view to fighting organised crime at a multilateral level. In Slovakia’s view, the following issues pertaining to justice and home affairs are of key importance: - the establishment of a common right of asylum to put an end to ‘asylum shopping’ - the more effective management of migration flows and the prevention of all forms of trafficking in human beings; this should be done by framing a policy on visas and false documents in close cooperation with the countries of origin and transit - effective monitoring of the future external borders of the EU calls for closer cooperation and mutual assistance between the border control departments of Member States; applicant countries should also take part in these operations as soon as possible.

18 PE 167.410/rév.1 IV. THE TURKEY ISSUE

Turkey was invited to the Conference despite the fact that it had not been included in the accession process launched in Luxembourg on 12 and 13 December 1997. Disappointed by the EU's policy towards it, Turkey declined the invitation of the European Council and did not attend the inaugural session in London on 12 March 1999. At the end of this meeting, many countries expressed regret at Turkey’s absence and stressed the need for the Conference to remain open to it. Many, including France, Spain, Belgium, Denmark, the United Kingdom and Austria, saw the Conference as a way of safeguarding EU-Turkey relations. The German Government, however, wondered if the European Conference was the best way of including Turkey in the enlargement process. However, after the London Conference Mr Kohl also expressed regret at Turkey’s absence. Greece, too, was hostile to Turkey’s participation, maintaining that paragraphs 4, 5 and 6 of the Luxembourg Conclusions imposed binding conditions. In the end Turkey held firm and also refused to participate in the subsequent European Conference meetings.

Nevertheless, some headway has since been made, thanks in part to the parliamentary elections in Turkey in April 1999 and the determination of the new government under Mr Ecevit to pursue substantial reform; moreover, the humanitarian aid granted in the wake of the August earthquake in Izmit considerably improved Turkey’s relations with Greece and the European Union. In its report on Turkey of 13 October 1999, the Commission recommended that Turkey be treated on an equal footing with other applicants, though accession negotiations were not yet to be opened. The Helsinki European Council took a number of decisions which will now allow Turkey to be considered an applicant country which can join the Union on the basis of the same criteria as those applying to other applicant countries. Under the current European strategy, both Turkey and the other applicant countries will benefit from a pre-accession strategy aimed at encouraging and supporting their reforms. Turkey will also have the option of participating in Community programmes, of being involved in Community bodies and of taking part in meetings organised between the applicant countries and the EU as part of the accession process. An accession partnership will be established on the basis of the conclusions of the previous European Council meetings. The Helsinki summit nevertheless stated that negotiations could only begin when Turkey had met the Copenhagen criteria.

In its resolution on the Helsinki European Council, the European Parliament noted the decision to consider Turkey an applicant country and reiterated that negotiations could not be opened as Turkey fell well short of meeting the political criteria laid down in Copenhagen. Parliament also hopes that the granting of applicant status to Turkey will prompt it to undertake the much-needed reforms with regard to democracy, the rule of law and respect for human rights and minorities, particularly as regards the settlement of the Kurdish issue, and has urged the Grand National Assembly to abolish the death penalty without delay.

There are therefore no further obstacles preventing Turkey from participating in the European Conference. As the Commission recently stated, it is to be hoped that Turkey will from now on participate in the Conference and become a full and active member, thus enabling the Conference to function as intended.

***

19 PE 167.410/rév.1 For further information please contact: Mr José Javier FERNÁNDEZ FERNÁNDEZ, Coordinator of the Task-Force on Enlargement, European Parliament, DG IV, International and Constitutional Affairs Division, Luxembourg, Tel.: (352) 4300 22758 / Fax: (352) 4300 29027 (Luxembourg) Tel.: (33) 3.88.17.44.08 / Fax: (33) 3.88.17.90.59 (Strasbourg) e-mail: [email protected]

20 PE 167.410/rév.1 ANNEX

INAUGURAL MEETING OF THE EUROPEAN CONFERENCE, LONDON, 12 MARCH 1998 - CHAIRMAN'S CONCLUSIONS -

The first meeting of the European Conference on 12 March 1998 marks the beginning of a new era in European cooperation.

Today's successful inauguration of the European Conference gives expression to the historic decision taken by the European Council at its meeting in Luxembourg on 12-13 December 1997 launching the comprehensive, inclusive and ongoing process of European Union enlargement. Its purpose is to bring together the Member States of the EU and the European States aspiring to accede to the Union; sharing its values and objectives, accepting the criteria and subscribing to the principles set out in Luxembourg. The Conference of course remains open to all countries that have been invited to participate.

For over 40 years the European Community and now the European Union has acted as a beacon of hope to all those wanting to see an end to the rivalries which have proved so destructive throughout this century. It has shaped an era of unprecedented peace and prosperity for its members.

The historic changes our generation has witnessed offer us the chance, through the enlargement of the European Union, to spread these benefits to a wider Europe; to speed up and complete the process of reconciliation; to entrench stability and prosperity across our continent.

We want to ensure that Europe develops for the benefit of all its citizens as a stable area where democracy, good governance, respect for human rights and the rule of law and freedom of expression go hand in hand with sustainable economic growth.

The Conference adds a new dimension to our efforts. It provides a unique forum for direct and informal exchanges at the highest level. It is an inclusive and overarching framework within which we can build on the broad range of our existing, successful joint activities.

It symbolises our determination to work together and responds to the growing range of problems which can only be tackled successfully through joint endeavour.

We have therefore agreed that, in the first instance, we shall address:

Transnational Organised Crime: we are determined to continue our efforts to combat the scourge of organised crime, in particular the drugs trade, trafficking in human beings and terrorism. This demands a coordinated, international response. We agree that the UK Presidency will urgently convene experts from the countries in the European Conference who will, with the European Commission, quickly consider the problems linked to organised crime and trafficking of drugs. The recommendations of this group will be submitted to the Conference within 12 months.

21 PE 167.410/rév.1 The Environment: we affirm our determination to work actively to improve environmental protection and to promote sustainable development.

Foreign and Security Policy: we believe that our interests on issues of foreign and security policy will increasingly converge. We shall deepen and extend our coordination and cooperation, so strengthening Europe's voice and values in the world.

Economic Competitiveness: we shall exchange information on economic and social policies, and how best to strengthen the competitiveness of our economies, including by equipping people with the skills needed to exploit 21st century opportunities, and to foster employment.

Regional Cooperation: we welcome the new range of regional cooperation programmes; and shall aim to ensure their momentum and coherence.

In these ways we shall together address common challenges. The process, started in London in 1998, recognises - and celebrates - the links which bind all our countries, and which we pledge to deepen and strengthen, in the interests of all our peoples. We look forward to meeting annually at Heads of State/Government level, as agreed in Luxembourg.

22 PE 167.410/rév.1