NGO INFO-CENTRE MACEDONIAN CENTRE FOR EUROPEAN EDUCATION

Monitoring of Media May 10th –July 28th 2011

Who will push forward the European agenda in Macedonia?

SKOPJE, October 2011

C O N T E N T S

1. INTRODUCTION 3

2. QUANTITATIVE OVERVIEW 3

3. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 4

4. ANALYSIS 6

4.1 Fair and Democratic Elections: Appeals and Expectations 6

4.2 EU Agenda in Political Parties’ Campaigns 7

4.3 Orban and the European Right in the Campaign Train 7

4.4 Sorensen Leaves 9

4.5 Visa Regime Returns? 9

4.6 The Name: Issue that can’t be Escaped 10

4.7 Evaluation of Election Process 11

4.8 The Polish Presidency 12

4.9 Diplomatic Activities 13

4.10 Expose 14

4.11 EU Remarks 14

2 Who will push forward the European agenda in Macedonia?

1. Introduction

The NGO Info-centre, in cooperation with the Macedonian Centre for European Training (MCET), continues its monitoring of quality of media coverage of the European integration processes in Macedonia in 2011. The monitoring programme is financially supported by the Foundation Open Society Institute Macedonia (FOSIM). This report covers the period from May 10 to July 28, 2011. The analyses includes the coverage in eight daily newspapers (Utrinski vesnik; Dnevnik; Vest; Večer; Vreme; Nova Makedonija, Špic and Koha) and the central news programmes aired on eight TV stations that broadcast nationally and over the satellite (A1 TV; Kanal 5 TV; Sitel TV; Telma TV; MTV 1; Alfa TV; Alsat TV and MTV2). It should be noted that the coverage in Vreme and Špic dailies concluded through July 2, 2011, and for A1 TV the monitoring was concluded on July 19, 2011, the respective dates of their termination. Also, Koha daily folded on July 2, 2011, which marked the end of monitoring of its reporting, and MTV2 broadcaster was monitored only during the Parliamentary Elections 2011, from May 10 to June 8, 2011. In terms of the methodology, we need to note that during the Parliamentary Elections (May 10-June 8, 2011), the coverage in the print and electronic media was monitored daily. In the period June 22 – July 28, 2011, the monitoring covered the print media editions on Tuesdays, Thursdays and Saturdays, and the broadcast media were monitored on Mondays, Wednesdays and Fridays. For technical reasons, we missed the central news programmes on AlsatM TV of June 3, 2011; Telma TV of June 22 and July 1, 2011; and MTV1 news programme of July 1, 2011.

2. Quantitative Overview

In the period covered by this monitoring, a total of 360 journalistic articles and stories were printed and aired by the monitored media. Of that total, 126 (40%) were published by the print media, and 191 (60%) were aired by the broadcast media. Number of articles published in the print media: - „Utrinski vesnik“ - 49 (15%); - “Večer” – 41 (13%) - “Dnevnik” – 29 (9%) - „Vreme” – 21 (7%) - „Nova Makedonija“ - 23 (7%); - "Koha“ – 15 (5%) - „Špic“ - 9 (3%); - “Vest” – 4 (1%)

3 Number of articles aired by the broadcast media: - MTV 1 – 26 (8%) - Kanal 5 TV – 25 (8%) - А1 TV - 19 (6%) - Sitel TV - 14 (4%) - Alpha TV – 14 (4%) - Alsat M TV - 13 (4%); - MTV 2 – 8 (3%) - Telma TV – 7 (2%)

Break-down per genre: - Reports – 223 (70%) - News – 35 (11%). - Statements – 32 (10%) - Commentaries – 20 (6%) - Interviews - 6 (2%) - Analyses – 1 (1%)

3. Conclusions and Recommendations

Compared to previous years, the quality and the quantity of reporting on European integration processes in Macedonia has dropped dramatically in 2011. The citizens are provided very little information on the European integrations. In terms of the actual contents, the information mostly consists of statements by political figures on the Elections, the name- dispute, etc. Unlike previous years, the journalists and the media have neglected their pro-active role and report little on the key policies and reforms necessary for Macedonia's accession into the European Union. The trend dictated by the Government has been followed by the opposition, but also by the EU representatives themselves. The lack on information European integration is due, to an extenct, to the fact that several media outlets (A1 TV, Vreme, Špic and Koha e re dailies) that were active and staunch supporters of Macedonia's accession in the EU, folded their operations. We could expect that the dramatic drop of interest in European integrations by the media, but also by all relevant social and political factors, may result in a shift of the public opinion and growth of Euro-scepticism among Macedonian citizens. The European agenda had little presence in the Election 2011, moslty through statements by European diplomats on the need for fair, democratic and peaceful elections free of any violence. It seems that the direct participants in the Elections, both the government and the opposition, estimated that the European topics and issues won't bring them more voters. As

4 a result, European integrations were missing from their campaign speeches and rallies and were given only marginal and superficial place in party programmes and platforms. That limited presence of issues related to the European integrations in the Elections was a cause of concern, and it continued in the period after the ballot day and the moment the new Government was constituted. While the ruling coalition pushed the European agenda back as a secondary issue, the opposition, too, was not really loud to promote the topics of key importance for the European integrations in Macedonia. One characteristic of the period during and after the Elections was that even the representatives of the European Union and the European Commission hardly made an attempt to bring the Euro-agenda to the fore. It may be due to the fact that, over that period of time, there was no EU ambassador accredited to the Macedonia. There was, however, a notable presence of European representatives and officials who appeared in the role of supporters of individual political parties that ran in the elections, or of diplomatic representatives who repeated the message that Macedonia needs to hold immaculate and democratic elections. The journalists reporting on the European integrations have mostly reduced themselves to mere transmitters of statements and messages by local and foreign politicians. They lack the strength or, indeed, interest to push for a true and fundamental debate on European integrations. There were few analyses and commentary articles. The coverage was dominated by statements, news and reports. The European Commission will release the 2011 Progress Report on the Republic of Macedonia on October 12, 2011. In the previous years, there was a great, sustained and intensive interest by the journalists in the contents of the progress reports. For example, in 2010, the majority of the media detected, precisely and in much detail, the key issues, conclusions and recommendations of the 2010 Progress Report even before its official release by the European Commission (EC). In the effort to predict the contents of the 2010 Progress Report as closely as they could, the media consulted representatives of the government and the opposition, EU officials, representatives of the civil society and expert community. This year, at least before the release of the Progress Report (the results of the monitoring of the media coverage of the 2011 Progress Report will be published in the next Media Mirror report) the interest of the media has fallen significantly, although a number of journalists already detected the key notes and remarks of the European Commission – the freedom of speech and civil society, reforms of the public administration, the judiciary, the police force, etc. In view of the current trends, and having in mind the experiences of the past several years, we would recommend to the media and the journalists to reactivate themselves in the process of promotion of European integrations in Macedonia and to offer professional, analytical and in-depths reporting on that extremely important process to the citizens.

5 4. Analysis

4.1 Fair and Democratic Elections: Appeals and Expectations On the eve of the election campaign, the media reported on the joint statement issued by the chiefs of missions of EU, NATO, OSCE and the U.S., demanding from all responsible actors to ensure that the elections will meet the democratic standards and will be free of intimidation and violence.1 The media noted that the statement appealed to the “Government and other relevant institutions to ensure that the electoral process will win the confidence of all political parties and, above all, the citizens”.2 The media carried the statements by the new Rapporteur for Macedonia in the European Parliament, Richard Howitt, who said that the early Parliamentary Elections will be crucial for the integration processes in the country3 and an “important and urgent challenge” in which “your actions will be key for the European integrations in the country, at the same time demonstrating the dedication to the Copenhagen criteria”.4 Ambassador Peter Sorensen joined the appeals to the leaders to pay attention to their actions and behaviour, which would be followed closely by the international observers.5 The media carried the following statement by Sorensen: „We have the international observers and we will keep in constant communication with them to see what they have to say about the progress of the elections... This is like a football match – we will talk once it is over”.6 Encouragement and warnings arrived from all sides. The media carried the appeal by Jean Charles Gardetto, the head of the Delegation of the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe that followed the election campaign, who said that all political actors have huge responsibility in elections held in a multiethnic society.7 In the heated atmosphere, the media carried the warnings coming from diplomatic sources: “Your country is already falling behind in the implementation of the EU-agenda and, should ODIHR say after the elections that they didn’t meet the standards, it would mean a further fall behind on the road to the Union. Nobody wants for you to stay where you are, but to move forward”.8 Appeals for „peaceful and fair elections“ were made by Slovenian diplomat Roberto Batelli, the head of the OSCE Monitoring Mission9, and the media also reported the active engagement by Dutch ambassador Simone Filippini who met with the women from the Turk community in the region of Gostivar under the aupices of the “Fair Elections” campaign.10 Members of the Macedonian experts’ community reacted to the frequent appeals by foreign friends with their own criticism of the low level of political culture of the Macedonian political leaders: „I would find it humiliating if somebody came to me to tell me how I should behave, to instruct me what to do and what not to do” (Jove Kekenovski).11

1 Kanal 5 TV, May 13, 2011 2 Nova Makedonija, May 14, 2011 3 MTV1, May 14, 2011 4 Kanal 5 TV, May 11, 2011 5 Kanal 5 TV, May 18, 2011 6 Alsat TV, May 11, 2011 7 Večer, May 20, 2011 8 Dnevnik, May 31, 2011 9 Koha, June 2, 2011 10 Utrinski vesnik, June 3, 2011 11 Alsat TV, May 13, 2011

6 4.2 EU Agenda in Political Parties’ Campaigns During the election campaign, the media carried the messages of political parties referring to their views and visions of European integrations in Macedonia. The most direct and concrete on the need for quick solution of the dispute with Greece with a view on membership in EU and NATO was the leader of VMRO-NP Ljubčo Georgievski.12 The media dedicated a lot of attention to the speech by Ali Ahmeti who said, at one campaign rally, that the state doesn’t need monuments but a fast-track integration into EU and NATO: “Not all politicians can muster the courage to make big decisions. Great politicians make big decisions and this is not a time for mutual provocations, but for us to sit down and resolve the problems ahead. We need to solve the name-dispute so Macedonia can join NATO and start negotiations with EU, for tomorrow may be too late”.13 The media carried the remarks by the opposition party SDSM that, as far as the EU agenda was concerned “Macedonia is stuck in one place, while everybody around runs ahead14”, and their promises of quick accession of Macedonia into NATO: “The new government will put Macedonia back on the fast-track to both NATO and EU. We need EU and NATO now, so we can raise the standard of living and attract new investments”.15 The media also carried the criticism of SDSM’s candidate for the office of the prime minister Radmila Šekerinska over the unused IPA funds, which she blamed on the “bad administration, which is politically dominated and lacks professionalism, but also the lack of interest by the Government, having in mind that European money have to be spend under the strict rules and supervision by the EC, and will be used for the very specific purpose for which they were approved”.16 The media also reported the change of SDSM’s position on the eventual referendum on the name of the country, as the party’s contribution to the effort to terminate the “harmful process of the so-called antiquisation”.17 The leader of the DPA party Menduh Thaqi also attacked the main competition in DUI as the main culprits for the lagging Euro-agenda, noting that “Macedonia will never join NATO and EU because those in power don’t respect the citizens”.18 Some media reported the news that the United for Macedonia party stands for “accelerated entry into EU and NATO”19, and some media space was given to Živko Jankulovski from the PODEM party: “It is the highest time for Macedonia to jump on the European train, to overcome the 20-year long crisis and to secure the future and prospects for the youth of the country”.20

4.3 Orban and the European Right in the Campaign Train During the period covered by this report, many politicians from the European right travelled to Macedonia, to meet with the leaders of the ruling VMRO-DPMNE party and given them their support. The greatest attention was given to the visit by the Prime Minister Viktor Orban of Hungary, at the time holding the EU Presidency. The media carried Orban’s statement after

12 Koha, May 11, 2011 13 Utrinski vesnik, June 3, 2011 14 Dnevnik, May 25, 2011 15 Vreme, May 21, 2011 16 Utrinski vesnik, June 1, 2011 17 Dnevnik, May 19, 2011 18 Dnevnik, June 1, 2011 19 Utrinski vesnik, June 3, 2011 20 Utrinski vesnik, June 3, 2011

7 his meeting with PM Nikola Gruevski: “It is not my job to be biased in terms of Macedonia’s bilateral relations. I have the task to represent the interests of Europe, and they are for Macedonia to join the Union as soon as possible“.21Some media noted that Orban never mentioned the name dispute directly.22 The audiences were informed about his visit to the Business Forum of the Macedonian Chamber of Commerce23, where he praised the reforms in the country: “Should we view the tax system, the reforms of the judiciary and the administration, we may conclude that Macedonia is well ahead in terms of the criteria and, provided with an opportunity to start the negotiations and with free hands, could make even quicker and faster progress”.24 The media were mostly interested in Orban’s open support for the ruling VMRO-DPMNE party: “I would come to a campaign rally, if invited”.25 A number of media did note the, earlier this year, Orban was subject to strong criticism in the EU over the controversial Hungarian media law26, while other media used very strong and direct language in the headlines of their reports: “Autocrat Orban takes part in Gruevski’s Campaign?”.27 The media also covered the visit by Slovenian MEP Lojze Peterle, who met with Vice- Prime Minister Vasko Naumovski and the President of Macedonia Gjorgji Ivanov28, and VMRO-DPMNE’s guest, MEP Bernd Posselt also praised the campaign: “I believe the campaign is very good, democratic, and the country is well on the path of European manners”.29 Slovenian MEP Milan Zver also stood in defence of the ruling party: “The early elections may turn even negative for the EU accession process if they are won by a political option that is less successful in the implementation of the reforms than the incumbent Government”.30 The media reported that Swedish MEPs Ana Ibrisagić31 and Anna Walburga Von Habsburg arrived to Macedonia in support of VMRO-DPMNE. Von Habsburg called for support for VMRO-DPMNE as “the only party that has proven itself in front of Europe, has the support and is well engaged on the European issues”.32 The media also covered the “day of the opposition in Brussels”, the meetings Radmila Šekerinska and Stevo Pendarovski held with Commissioner Stefan Füle, and Ljube Boškovski’s meeting with Christian Hedberg.33 According to Šekerinska, “positions of Skopje and Brussels are identical - without European prospects and without membership in NATO, Macedonia will list only failures, both politically and economically".34 The media also carried Boškovski’s comments on his meeting: “Hedberg was interested in the positions of the political parties that are not supported by the media controlled by the Government. We noted that we expect that A1 TV, as and independent media, may be the sole media to cover our campaign activities".35

21 Alsat TV, May 12, 2011 22 Alfa TV, May 12, 2011 23 Alsat TV, May 12, 2011 24 MTV1, May 12, 2011 25 Telma TV, May 12, 2011 26 А1 TV, May 12, 2011 27 Vreme, May 13, 2011 28 MTV2, May 19, 2011 29 Sitel TV, May 29, 2011 30 Koha, June 4, 2011 31 Dnevnik, May 21, 2011 32 Dnevnik, May 26, 2011 33 Alsat TV, May 12, 2011 34 А1 TV, May 13, 2011 35 Vreme, May 13, 2011

8 4.4 Sorensen Leaves At the peak of the election campaign, the media reported that, just three month spent in Macedonia, the EU High Representative for Foreign Affairs and Security Catherine Ashton, appointed European ambassador Peter Sorenson for the position of EU ambassador to Bosnia and Herzegovina.36 The media carried the following explanation: “Peter Sorensen possesses an unique experience in Bosnia and Herzegovina and the wider region of the Balkans. In my view, there is nobody more qualified to take over this expanded role of the Head of the Delegation”.37 The media consulted professional diplomats who noted that such a move "leaves bad impression about the way EU conducts its foreign policies”38, and for other diplomats, it proved that “Ashton makes ad hoc decisions for Macedonia, instead of taking a long term planning and systemic approach".39

4.5 Visa Regime Returns? During the period covered by this monitoring report, the attention of the media was preoccupied with the initiative coming from Denmark and Belgium for suspension of the visa- waiver regime, with mention of the possibility for EU to introduce a temporary suspension last June.40 The media carried the warnings issued by MEP Tanja Fajon: “It is realistic to expect from the Council of Ministers and the EU to define a mechanism for temporary termination of the visa liberalisation in June”.41 At the same time, the media reported the activities of Macedonian institutions aimed to reduce the abuses, such as the changes of the Criminal Code, the return of 350 potential asylum seekers from the border crossings and creation of special teams of investigators for prevention of abuses of visa waiver regime.42 The media also reported that Minister of Interior Gordana Jankulovska and the Head of the Secretariat of European Affairs Vasko Naumovski distributed fliers with information on the visa liberalisation terms to the citizens that left Macedonia at the Tabanovce border crossing.43 Some media noted that travel agencies protected by the government were involved in the abuses of the visa regime.44 The media also carried the views presented by SDSM representatives who noted that, for years, “the Government took no action whatsoever", although the problem of growing number of asylum seekers "has started practically with the introduction of the visa waiver regime”.45 The position of the former Vice-Prime Minister for European Integrations Ivica Bocevski noted: “This whole process is connected to the organized crime, with involvement of criminal bosses and criminal underground, and is organized by criminal tourist and travel agencies”. 46 In that context, the media carried the consoling statements by MEP Doris Pack, who noted that there was a possibility for return of the visas if all measures for restriction of numbers of immigrants47 are exhausted and, at the same time, encouraged the Government to dedicate more effort to educate the population

36 MTV2, May 30, 2011 37 Utrinski vesnik, May 31, 2011 38 Dnevnik, May 31, 2011 39 Dnevnik, June 1, 2011 40 Vreme, May 13, 2011 41 Koha, May 18, 2011 42 Koha, May 19, 2011 43 MTV1, May 22, 2011 44 Vreme, May 19, 2011 45 А1 TV, May 22, 2011 46 Alfa TV, May 26, 2011 47 МТV2, May 27, 2011

9 about the terms and conditions of the visa liberalisation.48 After the elections, the media reported of dropping number of Macedonian asylum seekers in Germany49, and a growing numbers of citizens the weren't allowed to leave the country at the border crossings.50

4.6 The Name: Issue that can’t be Escaped Before and during the election campaign, the issue of the name dispute was rarely brought up and exploited by the political parties. The media carried the positive view of the Foreign Minister Antonio Milošoski regarding the appeal by UN Secretary General Ban Ki- Moon to President Ivanov to initiate a negotiations meeting after the elections.51 The media commented on Ki-Moon’s recommendations with a dose of doubt that anything could change during an election, noting the experiences from past election cycles.52 The media also commented on the views of the political parties of the Albanians, concluding that their declarations for fast membership into NATO and EU are not backed up with actual and concrete deadlines and activities.53 The media also carried the analyses of the Greek media that the solution for the name dispute is practically inexistent in VMRO-DPMNE's and SDSM's election platforms.54 After the elections, the name dispute emerged as a burning issue with the „landing“ of the controversial monument to the „Warrior on a Horse", in down-town Skopje. The press carried the reaction of Greek foreign minister (Stavros) Lambrinidis, who accused Macedonian government of "irredentism and lack of understanding of the very point of European integrations”55, and they mentioned a “Greek offensive” in the European Union, where MEP Marilena Koppa wrote a letter to the European Commission demanding that the issue of the monument is raised with Macedonian authorities immediately.56 Also, the public was informed about the great attention that the unveiling of the monument created among leading global news agencies, like France Presse, the Associated Press and the Reuters.57 The media also paid great attention to the tenth meeting between prime ministers of Macedonia and Greece, Nikola Gruevski and Georgios Papandreou. The latter said after the meeting: “We have no intention to participate in such a mobile communication on the name- issue. It is time for true negotiations and Greece is prepared, provided there is a will for that on the other side”.58 The media also carried analytical views that, due to the general lack of progress and constant provocations, the Greek authorities sees such meetings as unnecessary and useless59, with mention of "nervous tones" dominating the meeting.60 Gruevski didn't talk to the media after the meeting, but the press carried the statement issued by the Government Cabinet which described the meeting as “part of continued Macedonia-Greek dialogue”.61 During that period, the media reported on Hillary Clinton's visit to Athens, where she reiterated the position that the solution for the name-dispute is a

48 Koha, May 28, 2011 49 Večer, June 23, 2011 50 Večer, June 30, 2011 51 МТV1, May 11, 2011 52 Nova Makedonija, May 11, 2011 53 Koha, May 25, 2011 54 Utrinski vesnik, May 31, 2011 55 Alfa TV, June 22, 2011 56 А1 TV, June 22, 2011 57 Nova Makedonija, June 23, 2011 58 Vreme, June 25, 2011 59 Dnevnik, June 25, 2011 60 Alsat TV, May 24, 2011 61 Špic, June 15, 2011

10 condition for EU membership62, a statement that was interpreted as a "cold shower" for the Macedonian Government with a message that “the ball is now in the yard of the Prime Minister of Macedonia".63

4.7 Evaluation of Election Process Immediately after the unofficial results of the parties' campaign headquarters were released, the leaders of the opposition came forward with concession statements and congratulated the winner VMRO-DPMNE. The greatest attention of the media caused the statement by Branko Crvenkovski: “I would like to congratulate Mr. Gruevski on the election results. The people are always right, even when they make a mistake". 64 The media reported the initial comments by OSCE and ODIHR describing the Elections as "peaceful, transparent and competitive", and also carried the statement by Roberto Batelli, the Special Coordinator of OSCE Monitoring Mission: “These Elections placed the cornerstone of the stable and democratic future".65 The media also reported the initial preliminary remarks by the European Commission: "From the information that we have so far, the ballot day was marked by political maturity, high turnout and good participation by the political parties”.66 The media reported that the most positive aspect for the European observers was the huge voter turnout.67 The public was also informed about the recommendations made by Doris Pack, who expressed her hopes that "after the elections, the dialogue between the future government and opposition will be reestablished and the debate and discussion will be easier“. MEP Tanja Fajon joined in, noting that Macedonia needs a step forward and that Brussels and Strassbourg expect the “October report by the European Commission to be critical”.68 Catherine Ashton and Stefan Füle came forward with a joint statement noting that the Elections were competitive, transparent and well organized, and praising the high voter turnout: “We appeal to the Government to implement the recommendations of the OSCE and ODIHR monitoring mission. As a country candidate for EU membership, the state haas to focus on the coming chances and challenges. The new Government needs to implement the reforms necessary for the state's progress towards the Union, and the opposition should make its constructive contribution. We emphasize the importance of the Government taking the steps to ensure good neighbourly relations". A number of media reported on those parts of ODIHR report that “expressed concerns over impartiality of the media, changes of Electoral Code just before the election, how updated the voter lists were, and the insufficient separation of the ruling party from the state during the campaign", but also lists the intimidation of the public administration.69 The media also carried President Ivanov’s remarks on the Election process. According to Ivanov, it was democracy that won the elections: “After these elections, clearly we already have a stable democratic system and regularity of elections in Macedonia has been closed

62 Večer, July 23, 2011 63 Utrinski vesnik, July 21, 2011 64 МТV1, June 6, 2011 65 Kanal 5 TV, June 6, 2011 66 МТV1, June 6, 2011 67 Večer, June 7, 2011 68 Vreme, June 7, 2011 69 Utrinski vesnik, June 7, 2011

11 as an issue".70 A number of experts were consulted for their opinions, like professor Dimitar Mirčev, who noted that "there were indications that we meet EU's political criteria, a fact that would lead to us getter the recommendation to start negotiations come next fall.71 Of course, experts and journalists also offered their own comments and opinions on the Election results. According to Ljupčo Popovski, the Elections proved that “Gruevski and the average Macedonian remain strong partners impervious to accusations, affairs, the poverty, and the fact that the Balkans’ train to EU and NATO is just about to get derailed".72 According to Petar Arsovski, “there is no much of an analysis to be made. Simply put, the voters believe that the policies of VMRO-DPMNE are better than SDSM's policies".73 For Sašo Ordanovski, two most important moments of these elections were the fact that “SDSM managed to double the number of its MPs in little over six months’ time, while VMRO- DPMNE trounced and routed its competition on the right”.74

4.8 The Polish Presidency During the period covered by this monitoring, Poland took over the EU Presidency from Hungary. In that context, Hungarian Ambassador to Macedonia Ferenz Kekeszi stirred quite an interest in the media when he explained that Hungary backing Macedonia "worked in the best interest of Macedonia, but also of all EU member states75" and noted that his country "managed to focus Brussels' attention to the Macedonian case".76 At the same time, the media carried Kekeszi's view that the name dispute needs to be resolved as soon as possible77, while some media noted the unfulfilled promises by Hungarian PM Orban that Macedonia and the start of the negotiations will be kept high on the European agenda.78 The media covered the support that the European Parliament secured for the Polish Presidency programme that makes the enlargement, competitiveness, energy security and food safety its priorities.79 Great attention was dedicated to the encouraging words of Polish ambassador to Macedonia Karol Bahura, who maintained that the enlargement was on the top of the Polish agenda80 and claimed: “it is not matter if, but when will Macedonia join EU”81. Bahura noted the need to continue with the reforms, with a metaphorical recommendation: “If negotiations with Brussels are not officially opened, it doesn’t mean reforms should stop. If the door is closed, try getting in through the window“.82 Some media noted that the President of Poland never mentioned the Western Balkans in his address at the ceremony for takeover of the EU Presidency83, and also carried the message by Jose Barroso that EU has to continue the enlargement process.84

70 МТV1, June 6, 2011 71 МТV1, June 6, 2011 72 Utrinski vesnik, June 7, 2011 73 Utrinski vesnik, June 7, 2011 74 Utrinski vesnik, June 7, 2011 75 Telma TV, June 27, 2011 76 Sitel TV, June 27, 2011 77 Alsat TV, June 27, 2011 78 Alfa TV, June 27, 2011 79 Večer, June 28, 2011 80 Nova Makedonija, July 2, 2011 81 Večer, July 2, 2011 82 Nova Makedonija, June 28, 2011 83 Alfa TV, July 6, 2011 84 Kanal 5 TV, July 6, 2011

12 4.9 Diplomatic Activities Before the new Government was voted in, the media registered a series of diplomatic activities by Macedonian officials. All media covered President Ivanov's address at the "Facing the Future" conference in Israel, held under the patronage of President Shimon Peres85, where Ivanov called for a new impulse in EU enlargement, greater openness and European integration.86 The President also attracted the media attention as an organizer of the 3rd Regional Leaders' Meeting in Ohrid, with the presidents of Albania, Kosovo and Montenegro.87 The media reported his convictions that the countries represented in the summit “share the European values and an identical vision of the future”, which is possible only through “an intensive bilateral cooperation, but also, and most importantly, through regional cooperation”.88 The media announced PM Gruevski's visit to Brussels during the session of the European Council, and they focused on the information that he will ask Orban to help promote Macedonia to the meeting's agenda.89 Gruevski's meeting with EU Enlargement Commissioner was covered. After the meeting, Füle emphasized, in a written statement, that for Macedonia to keep the recommendation to start negotiations, it would need to implement the necessary reforms of the public administration, the judiciary, as well as the fight against corruption and the freedom of expression.90 EC President Barosso sent similar messages, saying that “without monitoring of the reform process, the hope for membership can’t be sustained".91 At the same time, the media reported the participation of foreign minister Milošoski at the Forum of EU and Western Balkans foreign ministers in Luxemburg. The public was informed about Milošoski's informal meeting with the new Greek foreign minister Lambrinidis, and that the two scheduled a new meeting, at the Southeast Europe Summit in Budva.92 Later, it was reported that the meeting was cancelled.93 Milošoski said at the Budva summit that the principle of good neighbourly relations as an EU membership criteria should also apply to the member-states.94 The media covered Gruevski’s trip to Prague, where Macedonia took over the presidency of the Roma Decade from the Czech Republic.95 The biggest attention in the media caused PM Gruevski’s meeting with the founder of the Open Society Foundation George Soros, with Soros offering Gruevski support for faster and easier access to EU funds on issues related to the social inclusion of the Roma and the Roma Decade. According to reports, they agreed to continue the communication on operational level.96

85 Dnevnik, June 23, 2011 86 Kanal 5 TV, June 22, 2011 87 А1 TV, July 11, 2011 88 Koha, July 12, 2011 89 Večer, June 22, 2011 90 А1 TV, June 24, 2011 91 Alfa TV, June 24, 2011 92 Večer, June 22, 2011 93 Dnevnik, June 30, 2011 94 Nova Makedonija, June 30, 2011 95 Dnevnik, June 28, 2011 96 Utrinski vesnik, June 28, 2011

13 4.10 Expose The media covered PM Gruevski’s expose in which he promised that the realisation of the programme of the new Government in the four-year term will make Macedonia a modern European country97, and that integration of EU and NATO remains one of the top five priorities in the new term in office.98 The media were mostly interested in the professional profile of the new foreign minister Nikola Popovski99 and Government's economic platform and policies.100 The media also reported Gruevski’s position on the name, as presented in his expose: “The Government shall not accept any changes in the Constitution in order to change the constitutional name of the Republic of Macedonia. We shall not accept any ideas or proposals that would threaten the Macedonian national identity and the special nature of Macedonian nation and language. We shall not allow any solution imposed by Greece to be accepted without Macedonian citizens saying their position at a referendum. At that, the majority of the citizens that will vote in the referendum will have to agree with Gruevski's possible solution for the name-dispute".101

4.11 EU Remarks After the Elections, the media secured space for the critical remarks issued by the civil society representatives regarding the situation with the democracy in the country, which largely coincide and correspond to the remarks coming from Brussels. The media presented the view of the Helsinki Committee of Human Rights that "poverty, disregard for basic human rights, the rule of law, freedom of expression, fight against discrimination are all points that were never truly at the top Of the agenda of the political leadership”.102 According to Osman Kadriu, Helsinki Committee President, “even if the name dispute was resolved, the fight against organized crime and the corruption will present an obstacle for the accession to EU and NATO”. He also attacked the practice of spectacular arrests and police raids and actions conducted without proper investigation and evidence.103 However, for the most of the summer, the situation in the media remained the leading topic of debate. The media carried the reactions of the Macedonian Institute for the Media (MIM) and Association of Journalists' of Macedonia (ZNM) that the proposed changes in the Broadcasting Law were adopted without proper public debate and without clear purpose.104 The expert community, too, had some remarks over the "intent to abandon the concept of the Broadcasting Council as a small expert body". Criticism over “attempts to strangle media freedoms” came from MEP Jelko Kacin105, and the media also reported the concerns over the freedom of the media expressed by French ambassador Jean-Claude Schlumberger, who noted that “plurality of opinion and criticism of government are fundamental for the functioning of the democracy, for proper informing of the citizens and, by extension, for improvement of their living conditions”.106 The media also reported the visit by Stefano Sannino, Deputy Director-General of the European Union’s Directorate General for Enlargement, and his meetings with several

97 Dnevnik, July 28, 2011 98 Nova Makedonija, July 28, 2011 99 Nova Makedonija, July 28, 2011 100 Večer, July 28, 2011 101 Vest, July 28, 2011 102 Nova Makedonija, June 25, 2011 103 Vreme, June 25, 2011 104 Utrinski vesnik, July 14, 2011 105 А1 TV, July 19, 2011 106 А1 TV, July 8, 2011

14 political figures. 107 Sannino presented Government representatives with EU’s main remarks and objections on the reforms of public administration, the judiciary, the fight against corruption and situation with freedom of speech108, and he gave a positive review of the successfully conducted early Parliamentary Elections.109

107 А1 TV, July 27, 2011 108 Utrinski vesnik, July 28, 2011 109 Večer, July 28, 2011

15