Monitoring of Media January 1St – April 22Nd 2012

NGO INFO-CENTRE MACEDONIAN CENTRE FOR EUROPEAN EDUCATION

Monitoring of Media January 1st – April 22nd 2012

HIGH LEVEL MONEY – HIGH LEVEL DIALOG

SKOPJE, June 2012

TABLE OF CONTENTS

1. Introduction and Methodology 3

2. Quantitative Overview 3

3. Qualitative Overview 5

3.1 High Level Accession Dialogue 5

3.2 European Parliament Resolution 8

3.3 European Funds 9

3.4 Diplomatic and Lobbying Activities 11

3.4.1 Gjorge Ivanov 12

3.4.2 Nikola Poposki 13

4. Conclusions 15

1. Introduction and Methodology The NGO Infocentre, in cooperation with the Macedonian Centre for European Training (MCET), conducted monitoring of media coverage of the European integration processes in the Republic of Macedonia, in the period January 1 – April 22, under the auspices of the “Media Mirror” media monitoring programme. The monitoring programme is supported by the Foundation Open Society Institute Macedonia. The monitoring covered the reporting in seven daily newspapers (“Utrinski vesnik”; “Dnevnik”; “Vest”; “Večer”; “Nova Makedonija”, “Fokus” and “Den1”), the central news programmes aired on seven TV stations that broadcast nationally and over the satellite (Kanal 5 TV2; Sitel TV; Telma TV3; MTV14; Alfa TV; AlsatM TV and Vesti 24 TV5), and three news web portals - “Plusinfo”, “SkyMk” and “Kurir”. The monitoring covered the Monday, Wednesday and Friday editions of TV news and web portals’ reporting, and Tuesday, Thursday and Saturday editions of daily newspapers. The monitoring focused on the following journalistic genres: news, statements, reports, commentaries and interviews.

2. Quantitative Overview Between January 1 and April 22, 2012, the media coverage of the European integrations included a total of 654 reports and stories; 248 of them aired in TV news programmes (38%), 279 (43%) articles were published by the daily newspapers, and 126 articles (19%) were published on the internet portals. Table 1: Breakdown of television coverage, by broadcaster

No. of reports and Television broadcaster percentage of the total

24 Vesti 56 (9%)

МТВ1 47 (7%)

43 (7%) Sitel Kanal 5 32 (5%)

Alfa TV 27 (4%)

AlsatM 27 (4%)

Telma 17 (3%)

1 The “Den” daily newspaper was included in the monitoring starting on March 1, 2012 2 For technical reasons, the monitoring didn’t include the central news programme on February 20, 2012 3 For technical reasons, the monitoring didn’t include the central news programme on February 1 and February 20, 2012 4 For technical reasons, the monitoring didn’t include the central news programme on March 26 and March 28, 2012 5 For technical reasons, the monitoring didn’t include the central news programme on March 26 and March 28, 2012

Table 2: Breakdown of print media coverage, by newspaper

Daily newspaper No. of reports and percentage of the total

Nova Makedonija 58 (9%)

Utrinski vesnik 56 (9%)

Dnevnik 51 (8%)

Večer 42 (6%)

Fokus 38 (6%)

Vest 26 (4%)

Den 8 (1%)

Table 3: Breakdown of internet portal coverage, by portal

Web site No. of reports and percentage of the total

SkyMk 72 (11%)

Kurir 33 (5%)

Plusinfo 21 (3%)

Table 4: Breakdown of coverage per genre

Genre No. of reports and percentage of the total

Report 495 (75%)

News 85 (13%)

Statement 30 (5%)

Commentary 25 (4%)

Interview 19 (3%)

3. Qualitative Overview

3.1 High Level Accession Dialogue In the first quarter of 2012, the start of the High Level Accession Dialogue (HLAD) between Macedonia and the European Union was the topic that received greatest coverage and commentary.

At the start of the reporting period, the media reported that Stefan Füle announced the start of the HLAD process for the coming spring at a meeting of the Stabilisation and Association Council6, and announced that the discussion will focus on the issues of “freedom of expression, rule of law, reforms of the public administration, electoral process and the fight against corruption”.7 The media carried Füle's views on the process: “This should provide new support to our relations and shall enhance our cooperation on the five priority areas that I mentioned. In one of those areas, the rule of law, we shall use the momentum created by the new proposal by the Commission on Chapters 23 and 24, referring to fundamental rights, the judiciary, justice, freedom and security and we can start the technical consultations referring to issues covered by those two important chapters”8 and the view of the Deputy Prime Minister for European Integrations Teuta Arifi: “We believe that this process, together with the high-level dialogue, offers a fine future for the relations between Macedonia and EU, which we shall witness this spring".9

The journalists’ comments ranged from the notion that the dialogue was "yet another semantic novelty used by EU in the case of Macedonia"10, to the comment that it was just a "mechanism intended to show that Macedonia's progress on the road to EU was not arrested", i.e. a "consolation formula that should replace the start of negotiations date".11 Some media saw the dialogue as “enhanced oversight and control over the most criticized policies in the country" and "institutionalised form of pressure"12.

The media also carried the comment by the Chairwoman of the National Council for European Integrations Radmila Šekerinska: “The HLAD is a dialogue that should lead to resolution of the problems aimed to prevent Macedonia from deviating from the European train. That is not a monitoring or a scanning process, having in mind that the scanning is not done on political level but is conducted by the technical services and offices".13 Prime Minister Nikola Gruevski offered his own views on the dialogue: “The country practically receives a higher level treatment, makes a step forward. Although Greece blocks us from starting official negotiations, which we really deserve, this is, nevertheless, a step forward".14 The Secretariat for European Affairs (SEA) holds similar opinions and commented that the

6 MTV1, January 24, 2012 7 Plusinfo.mk, January 24, 2012 8 Sky.mk, January 24, 2012 9 Večer, January 25, 2012 10 Nova Makedonija, January 26, 2012 11 Vest, January 25, 2012 12 Utrinski vesnik, 13 Fokus daily January 26, 2012 14 Kurir, February 17, 2012

5 dialogue was “a sign that Brussels seeks a way to push the screening process in Macedonia quietly forward”15, i.e. an “informal and yet substantial dialogue that will first open Chapters 23 and 24, on internal affairs, the judiciary, media, fight against corruption and elections”16 and which will “bypass the blockade and shorten the period of the negotiations for membership”.17 The media carried other comments coming from SEA: “Clearly, we have a problem, but the process of EU accession is not a process that will conclude immediately, even if we resolved the name-dispute tomorrow. We therefore sought a possible form and, although we don’t name it as such, this is really a screening process”18, as well as the opinions of unnamed sources in the Government who noted that: “This is not the same form of negotiations that applied to the other countries, but in reality, this dialogue is replacement for the commonly used form”.19

The general public was also informed by, again, unnamed sources in SEA, that the dialogue was launched on an initiative of the Macedonian Government which sought "a creative approach from EU to Macedonia, i.e. a revival of the process to allow the country to move forward".20 Regarding the topics that will be discussed, the pro-Government media reported that the first meeting, on March 15, will “first open the Chapters 23 and 24, referring to internal affairs, the judiciary, the media and the elections”21, and the whole process means that “Macedonia does actually, albeit informally, open the most difficult Chapters 23 and 24”.22

The media reported that the dialogue will be led by Nikola Gruevski and Stefan Füle.23 At the same time, the media covered the visit by Deputy Prime Minister Teuta Arifi to Brussels, where she discussed "the next steps in terms of fulfilment of criteria", and discussed the reform action plan for Macedonia with the Director-General of the Directorate General for Enlargement Stefano Sannino.24 Again, the media reported that the dialogue was, in fact, “a screening process that will formally not be considered or named as such”.25

On the eve of the opening of HLAD process, the media reminded the public that in addition to "the rule of law, freedom of expression and freedom of press, reforms of electoral system and public administration", the ethnically motivated incidents that took place in the country will be added as a priority topic of discussion.26 Some commentators noted that the HLAD process was announced by Jose Barroso as early as March 2011 and asked: “Is Füle coming in an impossible mission to reason with the whole Government, and especially Prime Minister Gruevski and get them back on track? Is he truly honest, or is that just a mere

15 Dnevnik, March 3, 2012 16 Nova Makedonija, March 3, 2012 17 Vest, March 3, 2012 18 Večer, March 3, 2012 19 Nova Makedonija, March 6, 2012 20 Telma TV, March 2, 2012 21 Kurir, March 2, 2012 22 Sitel TV, March 2, 2012 23 Plusinfo.mk, March 2, 2012 24 Telma TV, March 2, 2012 25 Alfa TV, March 2, 2012 26 Fokus, March 15, 2012

6 declaration, that Macedonia will join EU sooner or later”.27 The media reported that the dialogue was debated at the National Council for European Integrations (NCEI).28

After the opening of the HLAD process and the Füle-Gruevski meeting, the media reported that they discussed the “freedom of the media, rule of law, reforms of the administration, electoral reforms and strengthening of the market economy”, and also carried Füle’s announcement that he planned to visit Skopje again in May of this year.29 The media reported that a number of experts asked the Government to appoint a chief negotiator: “The pre-accession dialogue is an opportunity to train the future negotiators that will defend Macedonia’s positions in Brussels”.30 At the same time, the media carried the reassurances offered by the Prime Minister Gruevski that 880 civil servants from Government institutions were ready and prepared to negotiate with the Union.31

The media reported that a 33-member delegation from Macedonia participated, in observing role, in the technical dialogue that was part of the screening process on Chapters 23 and 24 between Montenegro and EU.32 Some media interpreted the participation of the Macedonian delegation as proof that “Macedonia informally started the negotiations with EU and should use the creative high-level dialogue to deliver good results in the reforms related to the most-sensitive Chapters 23 and 24”.33 The media reported that the technical dialogue also involved a delegation from Serbia and made the analogy to Macedonian HLAD: “The newly created High-Level Accession Dialogue is becoming a reality for our neighbours to the north, too”.34 After the closing of the technical dialogue, and invoking expert opinions, the media commented that Macedonian representatives were “very active and showed that they have progressed the farthest in the analysis of the European law, having in mind the fact that they were working on that for a long time”.35 The media also raised the question why the Macedonian delegation was the only one without an official head of the delegation, provoking the reaction from Deputy PM Arifi: “This dialogue is led at a technical level and we don’t want to add a political dimension to it”.36

A number of media misinterpreted the participation of the Macedonian delegation as observer of the technical dialogue within the screening process on Chapters 23 and 24 in Montenegro and presented it as "an informal start of negotiations", in spite of the fact that the official conclusions of the dialogue are quite clear that “in terms of the rule of law, the country participated as observer in the screening on Chapters 23 and 24 in Brussels”.37

Near the end of the period covered by this report, the media reported that the Minister of Foreign Affairs Nikola Poposki held a briefing for the ambassadors of EU member-states in

27 Fokus, March 15, 2012 28 Telma TV, March 14, 2012 29 Alsat TV, March 16, 2012 30 Vesti 24 TV, March 16, 2012 31 Nova Makedonija, March 20, 2012 32 Sitel TV, March 28, 2012 33 Večer, March 29, 2012 34 Kanal 5 TV, March 28, 2012 35 Dnevnik, April 5, 2012 36 Vesti 24 TV, March 28, 2012 37 http://www.sep.gov.mk/content/Dokumenti/MK/Conclusions%20mk.pdf

Macedonia to introduce them to the activities implemented under the HLAD process.38 In the briefing, he demanded “that the negotiations for EU membership start as soon as possible”, and the media also carried the statement by Greek ambassador Papadopoulu: “This was an ordinary briefing on the HLAD. The Minister informed us about the progress made ahead of Füle’s visit on May 7”.39 At the same time, invoking sources in SEA, the media reported that “an operational roadmap with timeframe” was prepared for the goals of the dialogue and needed to be adopted by the Government.40

3.2 European Parliament Resolution The monitoring period coincided with the process in the European Parliament (EP) for adoption of the Resolution on the 2011 Progress Report on Macedonia. The media reported the messages of support by Richard Howitt, Special Rapporteur on Macedonia: “The existing status quo is unsatisfactory. The accession of the country is in the interest of Great Britain, of the whole European Union and Greece”.41 The media covered the debate on the draft- resolution of EP’s Foreign Affairs Commission and presented the arguments of the MEPs: “The time is passing by and nothing changes. I believe that we should not be held hostages to this bilateral issue" (Christian Wigenin) 42. The media reported that 164 amendments were proposed and that “the Greeks and the Bulgarians joined forces at the European Parliament in the work on the amendments on the Progress Report with the aim to significantly change the positive essence of the proposed text".43 Later, the media reported that the draft- Resolution was adopted and counted “21 compromise solutions and close to 60 amendments to the text”.44 In terms of its contents, the media focused on the recommendation “to determine the date for start of negotiations with Macedonia as soon as possible”45, and also paid great attention to the segment in which the European Parliament called for “respect of the ruling of the International Court of Justice and for the EU Council to set the start of negotiations date without further delay”.46 The media also reported that the draft-resolution noted the “lamentation over the omission of the adjective... and that several amendments that use the adjective ‘Macedonian’ passed the vote”.47 Some media carried the views of MEP Jelko Kacin: “Belgrade and Prishtina/Priština are almost at war, but they achieved the dialogue and resolved the dispute, so Kosovo can join international organisations. Macedonia and Greece are not prepared to do the same. Therefore, I call on the Macedonian side to find a name that would unblock the process”.48

On the eve of EP’s plenary session on the Resolution, the media reported the meeting that Rapporteur Howitt had with Deputy PM Arifi, in which they discussed the issue of “the opening of Chapters 23 and 24”.49 The media also reported that the draft-resolution

38 Sky.mk, April 20, 2012 39 Vesti 24 TV, April 20, 2012 40 Alfa TV, April 20, 2012 41 Sky.mk, January 22, 2012 42 Sitel TV, January 23, 2012 43 Alfa TV, January 21, 2012 44 Alfa TV, January 24, 2012 45 Alsat TV, January 24, 2012 46 Sitel TV, January 24, 2012 47 Utrinski vesnik, January 25, 2012 48 Vesti 24 TV, January 24, 2012 49 МТV1, February 20, 2012

8 contained a demand related to the process of lustration, encouraging “the Government to complete the much delayed release of the names of agents tied to secret services of former Yugoslavia”.50 The media announced that on March 6, special rapporteur Howitt planned a debate at the European Parliament, on the topic “How to Make 2012 a Success Year”, with participation of European Commissioner Füle.51 At the same time, Howitt’s statement on the ruling of the International Court of Justice reverberated in the public: “Absolutely, the EU, all international actors and, I would add, all EU member-states needs to respect the Hague ruling”.52

The media reported that the Resolution was adopted in an plenary session in Strassbourg, with a large majority and that it demanded from the “European Council to set the start of negotiations date for the country as soon as possible”.53 Regarding the contents of the Resolution, the media reported that the adjective Macedonian “managed to survive”54, and that the inability of the Council to set the negotiation date “caused a legitimate frustration and discontent in the public opinion in the country”.55 The media commented that there was a “fierce” debate between Bulgarian and Greek MEPs and all other MEPs56, with several Greek MEPs demanding for the amendment that praised the success of Macedonian basketball team in the European Championship to be deleted.57 The media reported that Nicolai Wammen, Danish Minister of European Affairs was present in the session and announced that Denmark intended to “honour the promise and put the issue of the start of negotiations on the agenda of the Council of EU before the end of the Danish presidency”58 and presented his own opinion of the name-dispute: “To maintain good neighbourly relations means that it is of essence to find a mutually acceptable solution under the patronage of the UN”.59

3.3 European Funds During the period covered by this monitoring, the media dedicated unusually high number of reports and stories related to the European Union funds available for Macedonia.

At the beginning, the media covered the British-Macedonian Business Forum, held under the patronage of the British Embassy60, which discussed a possible British assistance in access and user of funds.61

The media also covered the concluding conference of EU funded project “Strengthening Capacities of Association of Employers on the Road to EU”62, and they also raised the issue

50 Dnevnik, February 28, 2012 51 MTV1, February 29, 2012 52 Sitel TV, February 29, 2012 53 Kanal 5 TV, March 14, 2012 54 MTV1, March 14, 2012 55 Kurir, March 14, 2012 56 Sitel TV, March 14, 2012 57 Nova Makedonija, March 15, 2012 58 Večer, March 15, 2012 59 Telma TV, March 14, 2012 60 MTV1, February 6, 2012 61 Vesti 24 TV, February 6, 2012 62 Sky.mk, February 20, 2012

9 of underused programmes “Youth in Action” and “Lifelong Learning”, with special emphasis on the schools.63

The media covered the meeting of the leaderships of chambers of commerce of Macedonia and Kosovo, which discussed the possibility for joint participation in “European-funded projects”64, and that the meeting resulted with the concrete proposal to “create a working body, on government level, to coordinate the activities”.65 The media carried the appeals from the Economic Chamber of Macedonia to the Government to get more interested in EU funds, noting that the Government “is not active enough regarding the EU programme for the infrastructure”66, and the demand from the state “to get in line with European Union’s strategy for connected Europe, that will be realized in the period 2014-2020”.67

The media covered the IPARD programme which, in spite of being greatly underused due to “complicated procedure, small number of measures and tough criteria”, is very much “interesting for the food processing sector, to complete the equipment base, expand facilities and capacities, and in farming sector”.68 In that context, the media presented the assurances offered by Agriculture Minister Ljupčo Dimovski that “an IPARD Guillotine” will be implemented to simplify application procedures.69

The media also covered the start of a “project to strengthen the Balkan network of public prosecutors”, which will provide a venue in which prosecutors from EU member-states to work on organized crime and corruption and white collar crime (financial and economic) in Macedonia.70 Later, the media reported that the Office of Public Prosecution will equip and prepare itself for the reforms of criminal procedures through the IPA 2009 programme, through the project “Support to implementation of reforms of criminal justice system in Macedonia”.71

The media presented the findings of the survey conducted by the Economic Chamber of Macedonia which showed that there was limited interest among Macedonian companies to use European funds72, and that such shortcomings can be overcome with creation of a National Guarantee Fund: “Macedonia needs to create a National Guarantee Fund that will issue guarantees as insurance for the obligatory collateral and allow the companies to access the loan facilities of the commercial banks and thus secure the deposit for co-financing and application for EU programmes” (Stojmirka Tasevska) 73. At the same time, the media reported on a similar survey conducted by MCET, which points out at an absence of “systemic, institutional support by the state”74, at the need to “create a special fund for co-

63 Dnevnik, February 23, 2012 64 Dnevnik, February 25, 2012 65 Nova Makedonija, February 25, 2012 66 Vesti 24 TV, February 27, 2012 67 Alsat TV, February 27, 2012 68 MTV1, February 29, 2012 69 Sitel TV, February 29, 2012 70 Nova Makedonija, March 3, 2012 71 Vest, March 22, 2012 72 Kanal 5 TV, March 5, 2012 73 Vesti 24 TV, March 5, 2012 74 Vesti 24 TV, March 5, 2012

10 financing of European projects”75 and “adopt a national development strategy”, especially in terms of use of funds from the Community Programmes, in addition to the IPA funds.76 Later, the media reported that Minister of Economy Valjon Saraqini announced that his Ministry will organise training for companies how to apply for funding.77

The media paid great attention to the speech that Lidija Dimova, MCET Executive Director gave in the European Parliament on the design of the new IPA programme for the period 2014-2020. Some media reported that she asked “from EU to terminate the IPA funding and budget support for Macedonia” and commented that “the ‘Sorosoid’ (Note: the “Sorosoid” is a pejorative term used as an insult against civil society activists and actors who are presumably financed by George Soros) Dimova is spitting on Macedonia”.78 Some journalists attacked Dimova for claiming, in her speech at the EP, that the state “lacks programme for national development”79, and others noted that “it was unfathomable why they invited Dimova to today’s meeting, instead of an official representative of Macedonia charged with this sector”.80 Several media reported that Dimova received death-threats on her Facebook profile from Irina Gelevska, journalist at MRTV: “God will punish you for your treason, and only for a commie like you that fears no God can not care”.81

3.4 Diplomatic and Lobbying Activities During the period covered by this monitoring, the media dedicated their attention to the diplomatic activities of Macedonian state leadership. At the beginning of the period covered by this report, the media covered the meeting of PM Gruevski with the Deputy U.S. State Secretary Philip Reeker82, and the meeting the leader of DUI (the Democratic Union for Integration party) Ali Ahmeti with U.S. Ambassador to Macedonia Paul Wohlers. In both meetings, Macedonian representatives asked for American support at the coming NATO summit in Chicago.83 In that context, the media announced that Macedonian emissaries will undertake an intensive lobbying campaign in the U.S. Congress.84

The media reported that Greek Deputy Prime Minister Theodoros Pangalos responded to the initiative to meet with Macedonian Deputy PM Arifi and invited her to visit Athens on January 25.85 The media reported that Arifi used the meeting to extend an invitation to Greek Prime Minister Lukas Papadimos for a meeting with his Macedonian counterpart Gruevski.86

The media announced Gruevski’s trip to Germany to meet with Chancellor Angela Merkel, to discuss “the possibility for Macedonia to be accepted for NATO membership at the next summit in Chicago”87, and the “economic cooperation between the two countries”.

75 Utrinski vesnik, March 6, 2012 76 Fokus, March 6, 2012 77 Alsat TV, April 9, 2012 78 Kurir, April 11, 2012 79 MTV1, April 11, 2012 80 Sitel TV, April 11, 2012 81 Fokus, April 17, 2012 82 Kanal 5 TV, January 12, 2012 83 Alsat TV М, January 12, 2012 84 Dnevnik, January 12, 2012 85 Večer, January 24, 2012 86 Večer, January 26, 2012 87 Kanal 5 TV, February 10, 2012

88 After the meeting, some journalists commented that what happened was “the Berlin fiasco”89, and that “Merkel delivered her steely message” and “although directly acknowledged the decision of the Hague Court and the obligation of Greece to respect that ruling, in the proverbially cold German way stated that it won’t open any doors in Chicago for us”.90 Such comments were attacked by other media which held the opinion that Merkel's messages were directed to both sides in the dispute: “Those who look at it through the lens of expertise shall note that Germany suggested that we resolve the name-dispute and, more importantly, that the resolution should be found in a European manner, which implies that an active role needs to be taken by both sides in the negotiations. 91 Similarly, some journalists interpreted Merkel’s messages as a proof that “Macedonia is still in the field of view of German foreign policy”.92 At the same time, the media reported that Greek PM Papadimos accepted Gruevski’s invitation for a meeting.93

The media also covered the activities of the Chaiman of Parliamentary Foreign Affairs Commission Antonio Milošoski. They covered his participation in the conference of foreign policy and foreign affairs committees’ chairpersons in Copenhagen94, and the letters hw wrote to all chairpersons of foreign policy committees asking them to lobby in the EU Council to adopt a decision to set the date for start of negotiations for Macedonia.95 Some media were critical in their treatment of those activities, commenting that “the government writes letters that return unread”.96

3.4.1 Gjorge Ivanov The media reported that President of Macedonia Gjorge Ivanov sent a letter to the President of Serbia Boris Tadić to congratulate Serbia's receiving the status of country candidate for EU membership.97 The media also carried excerpts from the letter the Ivanov sent to Herman Van Rompuy, to congratulate on his re-election to the office of President of European Council: “We believe it is the highest time for negotiations to start. Everybody would benefit from the process: Ourselves, our neighbour, but also the greater region”.98

The media covered Ivanov's visit to Vienna, where he met with Austrian President Heinz Fischer99 and asked that bilateral disputes are not used as an obstacle to European integrations: “If it was possible for problematic relations and unresolved bilateral disputes between Serbia and Kosovo and the Slovenian-Croatian dispute over the maritime borders to be excluded and not present obstacles for EU membership, the same rule should apply to the Greek-Macedonian dispute over the name of the country".100 The media presented Fischer’s message that: “Nobody else but Macedonia and Greece themselves can resolve this issue.

88 Dnevnik, February 14, 2012 89 Fokus, February 16, 2012 90 Utrinski vesnik, February 16, 2012 91 Nova Makedonija, February 16, 2012 92 Večer, February 16, 2012 93 Sky.mk, February 15, 2012 94 Kurir, March 12, 2012 95 Sky.mk, February 15, 2012 96 Alfa TV, February 15, 2012 97 Večer, February 3, 2012 98 Sky.mk, March 2, 2012 99 Sky.mk, March 2, 2012 100 Kanal 5 TV, March 2, 2012

However, there is a great interest that it was resolved correctly, with a fair solution, having in mind that it is an obstacle to some important decisions that have to be made in Europe".101 During the visit, Ivanov was inaugurated the Protector of European Academy of Arts and Sciences.102

The media also covered Ivanov’s meeting with the President of Montenegro Filip Vujanović103. However, the greatest attention and commentary was dedicated to his appearance in the reception given by the Greek Liaison Office in Skopje on the National Day of Greece.104

3.4.2 Nikola Poposki Foreign Minister Nikola Poposki was by far the most present figure in the media. At the beginning of the period covered by this monitoring report, the media covered his diplomatic tour of the Baltic republics - Estonia105, Latvia106 and Lithuania107, and the support he was given by his colleagues from the Baltic republics. The media also carried the proposal by Latvian Minister of Foreign Affairs Edgars Rinkëvičs for “parallel negotiations, i.e. the negotiations for EU membership and negotiations with Greece on the name-dispute”.108 The media covered Poposki’s visit to Strasbourg, where he held a series of meetings with several MEPs and demanded “open support to intensify the activities on the road towards EU integration for Macedonia”109 and his meeting with Jean-David Levitte, foreign policy advisor of President of France Nicolas Sarkozy, in which he “presented the legal aspects of the ruling of the International Court in the Hague and the expectations that that important argument will be appropriately accepted and supported by EU and NATO member-states".110

Poposki organized a briefing session for Macedonian journalists111, in which he emphasized that Macedonia expects from "Greece to be constructive and to overcome its past record of obstinacy”112, reminding the media that “there is not a single valid argument why we should not join NATO, since we have a very clear situation in terms of the criteria that we have met".113 The most interesting message carried by the media from Poposki’s briefing is that “the NATO Summit is not our key time point of reference".114 Only a handful of media were critical of that approach of the Foreign Minister: “Contrary to the statements given by majority of international actors, the head of Macedonian diplomacy Nikola Poposki, too, can’t find a valid argument why Macedonia can’t join NATO and start the negotiations with the EU... In the range from mild accusations to mild hints, he reprimanded Athens that it

101 MTV1, March 2, 2012 102 Sitel TV, March 2, 2012 103 Sky.mk, March 16, 2012 104 Utrinski vesnik, March 29, 2012 105 Sky.mk, February 8, 2012 106 Vesti 24 TV, February 10, 2012 107 Sitel TV, February 27, 2012 108 Sky.mk, February 10, 2012 109 Kurir, February 15, 2012 110 Utrinski vesnik, February 28, 2012 111 Sitel TV, March 5, 2012 112 Telma TV, March 5, 2012 113 MTV1, March 5, 2012 114 Večer, March 6, 2012

13 continues to came forward with a legal analysis of the Hague ruling and that, with its policies, it practically suspends the Interim Agreement".115

The media covered Poposki’s other diplomatic activities, including the working meeting with the ambassadors of EU member-states in which he called for “strict adherence to the merit system of evaluation”.116 Later, the media covered his visit to Denmark, the country presiding with the European Union, where he met the Danish Minister of European Affairs Nicolai Wammen117. Also in Denmark, a conference on Macedonian Euro-Atlantic prospects were held, and Poposki called for a start of membership negotiations: “The start of the negotiations can only provide additional assistance for solution of the name-dispute”.118 The media also reported on a possible visit with his Greek counterpart Stavros Dimas119, which they characterized as “uncertain” until the last possible moment.120 The media did report that the meeting took place, after all121, and named it the "silent meeting", "outside the view of the media"122, and the Ministry of Foreign Affairs claimed that the meeting discussed "regional cooperation, including the context of the presidency of the Cooperation Process in Southeast Europe, which Macedonia will take over from Serbia in June 2012".123

The media reported on the visit by Janosz Martony, Hungarian Foreign Minister124, who presented his view on the name-dispute in the meeting he had with Poposki: “We wouldn’t interfere in the issue of solution of the name-dispute. Personally, I am convinced that it would be logical for the two sides to reach a mutually acceptable solution”.125 Some media interpreted Martony’s view as an argument that “Hungary, too, realises how powerful Greece is and now has to downsize its positions on Macedonian integrations".126

In the end of the period covered by this report, the media covered the meeting Poposki had with his the Polish Ambassador to Macedonia Przemysław Czyż127, the visit to Prague and the meeting with his Czech counterpart Karel Schwarzenberg128, as well as the meeting with the head of British diplomacy William Hague in London.129

115 Utrinski vesnik, March 6, 2012 116 Plusinfo.mk, March 5, 2012 117 Kurir, March 21, 2012 118 Kurir, March 21, 2012 119 Kanal 5 TV, March 21, 2012 120 Alfa TV, March 21, 2012 121 Utrinski vesnik, March 24, 2012 122 Alfa TV, March 23, 2012 123 Kurir, March 23, 2012 124 Nova Makedonija, April 3, 2012 125 Dnevnik, April 3, 2012 126 Kanal 5 TV, April 2, 2012 127 Kurir, March 30, 2012 128 Sky.mk, March 30, 2012 129 Nova Makedonija, March 27, 2012

4. Conclusions In the period January – April 2012, the media dedicated most intensive coverage to the High-Level Accession Dialogue between Macedonia and the European Union. The majority of the media actively defended the agenda of the Government, which wanted to present the dialogue as a major step forward in terms of European integrations for Macedonia. Most media didn’t raise the issue why the dialogue waited until this spring to be opened, although the President of the European Commission Barosso announced the start for last autumn, and transmitted, without any criticism, Government's interpretations that the whole process was launched on initiative of the Government of Macedonia.

The media missed the opportunity to inform the public that most of the issues discussed under the auspices of the dialogue were part of the priorities listed in the Accession Partnership of 2008.

The majority of the media, presenting the statements by Government representatives, and above all the statements by PM Gruevski and Deputy Prime Minister for European Integrations Arifi, insisted that the High-Level Accession Dialogue marks the start of negotiations for EU membership. Unfortunately, almost nobody in the monitored media offered analysis that would debunk and disclose such manipulations by the Government. There are two possible reasons for such an approach applied by the media towards this issue: 1) either the interest of the media to follow the policies of the Government related to the European integrations process has seriously waned; or 2) the journalists lack proper understanding of the essential differences between the two processes. In any case, it is the citizens that emerged as the biggest losers in the situation, being denied from the possibility to be informed in-depth that the Accession dialogue doesn't mean, in any way or fashion, opening of any chapters and start of membership negotiations. Quite to the contrary, it is just a framework that would allow for proper monitoring of the progress and reforms in the five target areas130, which are an integral part of the political criteria. Until the state reaches the proper level of progress and reforms necessary to fully meet the political criteria, it won't be possible to start the membership negotiations.

During the period covered by this monitoring, compared to 2011, there was a notable increase of the volume of coverage, newspaper articles and TV stories dedicated to the European Union funding for Macedonia. As a result of the media interest to cover several events that took part during this period, related to the promotion of different programmes and projects financed by the EU, the citizens were presented with information about the existence of a number of programmes funded through EU Community Programmes and through the IPA programme. However, it is noticeable that the reporting was reduced to mere following of event, without indepth analysis or commentary by the journalists, which points out at the absence of capacity in the media for indepth understanding and following of the different types of programmes and financial instruments and facilities offered by EU in Macedonia.

130 Freedom of expression, rule of law, reforms of the public administration, electoral reforms and strengthening of the market economy.

The media paid great attention to the speech that Lidija Dimova, MCET Executive Director gave in the European Parliament on the design of the new IPA programme for the period 2014-2020. Some media reported that she asked “from EU to terminate the IPA funding and budget support for Macedonia” and commented that “the ‘Sorosoid’ Dimova is spitting on Macedonia”. Most media didn’t carry Dimova’s speech in the European Parliament, nor did they publish any statement or comment that she may have on the matter. Therefore, the public was denied the opportunity to see the actual contents of Dimova's address and hear her argument. The fact that the journalists' coverage didn’t cover all involved parties in the matter and that they failed to observe the proper professional journalistic standards, raises the suspicion that those media were led by intention to misinform, mislead and manipulate the public opinion on the true contents of Dimova's speech at the European Parliament.

Just as in previous monitoring reports on media coverage of European integrations, we can conclude that, in the first quarter of 2012, the journalists continue to act as mere transmitters of the statements of political figures related to European integration processes, while the proper analytical approach is almost completely inexistent.