The Slovakian Republic used to have rather cold relations with NATO and the EU. However, the Slovakian government managed to convince the population in the rationality of the country’s entry into the North Atlantic Alliance in quite a short period of time. The result of the active position of the Slovakian government and political elite was Slovakia’s simultaneous entry into NATO and the EU in 2004. How has Bratislava manage to reach such a success on the way to the Euroatlantic integration? What meaning had the entry into NATO and the EU club of countries for Slovakia and why did the country reject the idea of having neutral status? Which Slovakian experience may be useful for Ukraine which strives to integrate into the Euroatlantic structures? What is necessary to do for Ukraine in order to convince the old European states in the necessity of its obtaining the prospect of the EU membership? Could NATO enlargement to east be a possible threat to Russia? On these issues — in the exclusive interview, given to The Day by Diana STROFOVA, the State Secretary of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the Slovakian Republic, who took part in the International Conference entitled “New Ukraine in new Europe,” which took place last Friday in Kyiv.
— It is known that in history of your country there was quite a long period of time when relations between Slovak Republic, NATO and the EU were characterized more than cold. Only in 2004 your country simultaneously became member of North-Atlantic Treaty Organization and European Union. How did the leadership of your country manage to convince Slovaks on the necessity of joining NATO in rather short period of time? What incentives persuaded the people to accept such a crucial change of country’s course?
It is a very good question. First of all, I have to say that to bring public support in favour of our membership in the EU and NATO, although it might be a question for public, the political elite has to make its decision whether to support this idea or not. It is the most important because the politicians take the responsibility for their decisions and they are the owners of this idea and they are the carriers of all the positions they can make in the future. This was step number one to have the politicians made a great consensus on this issue.
The point number two is a comprehensive media strategy. The politicians together with leading personalities of all segments of cultural, economic, academic, sport and social life supported the idea by talking to people on different occasions at public events, sharing their opinions, and organizing activities and conferences similar to what we have had today. They spoke unilaterally, like one of the nation, and even under these circumstances it was not easy and took some time.
There is an opinion that the public should be informed before taking such a serious decision. Should a referendum be carried out on such questions as security? Or probably only the government should take such a decision?
I don’t oppose that it should be a public goal. But the responsibility lies with the politicians. That is why it has to be a political decision. But if you mean and if you would like to ask about referendum, we had ideas about having a referendum concerning joining NATO, but I think it would not be very helpful. Many people are still not aware of all consequences that come along with the decision.
What of your experience may be used in Ukraine, in current situation?
It’s very hard to say because even if we have something in common and we want to share our experience, we handled our change and our decision in different time, in different atmosphere in Europe and the world. Ukraine is even by the size a different country. But mentally we are very close to each other. Even our people were not very happy about NATO in the beginning. But it was the propaganda from the past that evoked this kind of ideas. Later, they adopted these ideas, because at that time, we already felt that the values and ideas of people living in the member states of the European Union and NATO were very similar to ours. And if we had the same values, if we had the same strategic security and economic goals, why not sit together at one desk? If we wanted to share the responsibility and our opinions on the questions of the world’s security like Iraq, or Afghanistan, or any other, it was important to join the club and raise our hands. And the EU and NATO desks were the desks were the decisions had been made. That is why, I think, in Ukraine, the public must understand that the same values are concerned. If you will ask your own people what their wishes are for the future, for their children, it will be the same wishes as of the citizens of the EU and NATO. Then let’s not forget about the NATO Membership Action Plan (MAP), which serves as a preparation project, which the country may use as a catalyser for them to prepare for the membership. And it may be very helpful for them. And through it they will even better understand what a membership in NATO means.
You said at the conference that the US proposed for Slovakia to share common values. And the Slovaks accepted them. Why Ukrainians are not ready to share the values common for NATO members?
It is not easy to evaluate why the Ukrainian citizens do not take them as their own. I will try to explain it using our experience again. Our people in the beginning were not fully identified with these ideas. Maybe, it was because they did not know the real issues, they did not know what it would bring. There came a representation from the European Union, they said that we had to fulfil the criteria. Then there came a representation from NATO and they said that they had some conditions — building-up a civic society, developed democracy, economic transformation that we had to go through. It meant for us a headache, because it meant a lot of changes in legislation, it meant a lot of sacrifices, lot of changes in the society as a whole. If you see that you have so much homework, then the idea does not look very attractive. It was the A, but you must say the B as well. You have to explain that this everything means your own reforms, reforms of your society, your country. It is the added value for your own people, because the society will move very fast forward and it will attract entrepreneurs, more possibilities of employment, which can bring a lot of investments, cooperation, developments in many fields and spheres of everyday life. This will happen only if you cooperate with each-other as partners and if you can guarantee to your partner that you are stable and that you don’t move other direction and they don’t think other direction than you do. So there must be a mutual understanding. And it is possible, only when you share the same values. And I am sure, you and your people do.
What is your opinion, why the members of Ukrainian political elite have different views on joining NATO, although they have the same view on joining the EU?
It’s hard to say even about the decision on which direction Ukraine should go. It has to be taken here by the society, by the public, politicians like I said in the start. We cannot press you, we can only advise you and tell you our own success story, which happened. And maybe through this attract you to some way which may be very important for the future of your country. Why the politicians are not common in their mind, it happened because of the political struggle, but they had to understand, if they don’t reach consensus on this problem, people won’t. If they want to help the development of their country, they have to do even this kind of acceptance and understanding.
What is your attitude to a possible neutral status of Ukraine, which is supported by a number of Ukrainian politicians?
Neutrality... When Slovakia was thinking about its own way, again there were people speaking about the possibility for Slovakia to be neutral, so I know how such discussion can go on. First of all, if you want to think about being neutral, you have to ask yourself some crucial questions. And these questions sound like: Are you able to ensure to the international society that you have the same values, because if you do, you may think of the similar ideas like Austrians and some of the Northern countries of the European Union, which are not members of NATO, but share with NATO many common values, and they guarantee their security and share the responsibilities in the security in the world. It is the first. The second, even more important what you have to be aware of is, that for being a neutral, you need a lot of resources. Because being a member within one community, within one family, it is also about sharing the resources and responsibilities. If you are alone and neutral, you have to do everything by yourself. When we answered these questions to ourselves, we saw that it was not an option for Slovakia to become neutral.
Considering current topic for Ukraine, will Slovakia support inclusion of the points concerning the perspective of Ukrainian membership in the EU into the new enhanced agreement on partnership and cooperation?
You know that Slovakia has its own priorities as the state and it has been incorporated into the Manifesto of the Government. We also have the priorities of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, where the assistance to Ukraine is one of the points. It is very hard to say if we want to be some kind of advocate. It has to be first the country that has to go through the whole reform process to get ready for the EU membership and to make the other European states understand that it’s very natural to be together. But of course Slovakia will always be happy and prepared to assist you in this.
What should Ukraine do in order to convince the old EU members of the necessity of giving the perspective of Ukrainian membership in the EU?
You know, today, Ukraine is considered as a partner, as one the the European Neighbourhood Policy countries, in such a view. But as some of the ambassadors accredited to Ukraine today mentioned, Ukraine is on a good track to develop democratic civic society, working economic market and set up working criteria which will meet the requirements of the European Union. So, that is why, I would recommend that you should do your sacrifice and start the reforms.
You should also show your patience, will, and credibility, sustainability, and stability of the political institutions as well as the whole society. And also for Europeans, partners in NATO, it is very important to feel that the country which wants to join the structures is predictable in what it plans or undertakes.
What is your opinion, is the Ukrainian conditions predictable?
First find the political consensus and the consensus of the society.
What is your attitude to the deployment of the US Missile Defense elements on the territory of the Czech Republic and Poland?
This is a question, a very serious question, but I think, it will be an easy answer. We see the issue as a NATO member, that there is a very serious threat in the world, the most terrible — the threat of terrorism, which is very unpredictable. Here we have development of nuclear weapons in some parts of the world, which are still not under control, if I could say so. Even the society of NATO has to think about possible situations that may happen. It is one of the reasons why such bilateral agreements are concluded. We are respecting it, because it is on behalf of the whole security in our region.
Do you see in this deployment a threat to Russia as Russia claimed?
No, I think, this could also help Russian side. It will help the whole democratic world with Russia included. We have to find a solution, common shelter for the safety in this region.
And what is your opinion, what would you say about the speech delivered by the Russian President at the Munich Conference?
You know, Russia is a sovereign country and we take it in this way. The intentions of Russia have very similar goals when talking about security challenges. That is why we understand that Mr. Putin, if he is speaking, he is speaking with the intention to bring the two parts together. We do not want to see, and do not see and do not explain his speech as a sort of start of the Cold War. Absolutely not. But for us, it is very important to find the right words in the dialogue between the two parts of the world, western and eastern.
But he said that enlargement of NATO is the threat to Russia.
We don’t see it as a threat. Even Russia claimed years ago, some time ago, that they are seeking partnership with NATO and NATO countries, and I think with these intentions they cooperate with them. And that is why I don’t perceive enlargement of NATO to the east as a threat.
I have heard that in Ukraine, there are some euro-romantics and euro-pragmatics. How would you comment on this? What would you wish to both of them?
Patience is what I wish to both of them, the romantics will be inpatient, the pragmatics will be too realistic, and even a little bit sceptic. The whole integration process is very long, and it can bring to people frustration. So, patience and sustainability of the progress you achieve, is what I would wish them. Because once in the future we will not only be as friend, as neighbouring countries, but also as the partners at one desk.
It would be nice if the industrial elite in the country realized that the European integration and NATO is also their interest, and this would help a lot in spreading the information and changing the atmosphere in the country. This was exactly the case of Slovakia, when in some moment the people running business in Slovakia realized that it is better for them to be a part of Europe. This is the key moment.
