Teodor Baconschi, Romanian Minister of Foreign Affairs has recently made an official visit to Ukraine. He had meetings with Kostiantyn Hryshchenko, head of Ukraine’s Foreign Ministry and other Ukrainian top-ranking officials. Even with the tight schedule of meetings the head of the Romanian Foreign Ministry found time to give an exclusive interview to The Day, where he spoke about the goal of his visit and explained how theology helps him to be a successful diplomat.
“Well, first of all we shall take advantage of the political will of both sides to normalize and further develop our bilateral relations. Romania is part of the EU and NATO and a direct neighbor of Ukraine. So we have a lot of long-term, short-term, and medium projects to put in place. We need political dialogue, political consultations on European affairs and transborder economic projects. We need to open our societies to each other, to stimulate people-to-people contacts, business investments, energy interconnections. And also we look forward to using European funds in trilateral projects between Romania, Ukraine, and the Republic of Moldova.”
You mentioned that there are some obstacles or misunderstandings. What are they?
“Any problem should be tackled by political dialogue. We have the necessary instruments to solve any difficulty in the bilateral relations. Now we need to show more ambition and creativity in order to engage our two countries in a new historical chapter. We cannot change geography, we cannot change the past, but we can shape together a common future in this region.
“Today we have signed an agreement between the Ministries of Justice of our countries and an agreement of cooperation between the Ministries of Foreign Affairs. We are currently working on a wider range of official documents, meant to complete our legal framework. There is a Small Border Traffic Agreement, for instance, which is very important from the perspective of people-to-people contacts. A similar Agreement works very well with the Republic of Moldova. There are also some discussions on an agreement for the protection of the environment, on mutual assistance in case of natural disasters.”
You also mentioned the possibility of joint projects. Can you give some details on that?
“For instance, we envisage a mechanism of consultations between the two governments and foreign ministries.
“By the way, I am very grateful to Minister Kostiantyn Hryshchenko for his personal commitment to the improvement of our relations. He made an official visit to Bucharest in May this year, followed by my visit to Kyiv. I can say that we already enjoy a good dynamic, based on common perceptions about the evolutions in our region. Romania is a strong supporter of the European agenda of Ukraine, including the Association Agreement and Deep and Comprehensive Free Trade Agreement. We will remain committed to these objectives, because Ukraine is a European state in all respects.”
What about possible joint exploration of oil and gas in these regions or zones, which were disputable, but after the court regulated this question, can it be an opportunity for our countries to jointly explore the resources?
“We, as a founding member of BSEC (Black Sea Economic Cooperation), are very much in favor of cooperation among all the countries around the Black Sea. We think that we could also jointly explore the possibilities for cooperation in this energy sector. Energy security is a team sport.”
You said that your country would support the Ukrainian prospects. Does it mean that you support Ukraine’s aspiration to include this phrase in the preamble of the new Association Agreement?
“Certainly, we are in favor of quoting Article 49 of the Lisbon Treaty in the preamble of this Association Agreement. I mean, each European country, fulfilling all the criteria, deserves membership. Although we believe that this is the real vocation of Ukraine, the amplitude of the task should not be underestimated.”
And what do you think about Tymoshenko case, or as it is called by officials from other European countries, the selective persecution of the opposition in Ukraine? For I haven’t seen any statement from Romania, though we have heard statements from Berlin, Brussels, London. And what about your country? Does it see this as an obtacle for signing the Association Agreement?
“Well, we cannot deny that this specific trial has provoked very strong reaction from different capitals. We have in mind only the necessity of independent judiciary, and the importance for Ukraine to reform the judiciary and to guarantee a fair trial to each citizen, implementing gradually but fully at the end of the day the standards required by the rule of law. Nevertheless, I was told that the Ukrainian authorities took note of these reactions and there is also a possibility to change some legislation in order to avoid any risk to see this trial as an obstacle in Ukraine’s path to the European Union.”
And do you believe that putting this phrase into the preamble is possible before the initiating of the Agreement on December 19?
“We are targeting that timetable. We would like to see the Association Agreement finalized in December.”
And who will represent your country at the summit in Kyiv?
“We have not yet decided, but we are on board.”
I have seen an interview with your prime minister, and he said that your country is planning to join the Schengen zone next year as well as the eurozone. But he did not mention whether you are going to join the eurozone next year or later. Taking into consideration the current crisis in eurozone, Greece, debts, crisis, how did your country accept this situation and the opportunity to join the eurozone?
“Despite the negative impact of the economic crisis on our GDP, the Romanian government managed to preserve macroeconomic stability, accompanied by low inflation, and an investment-friendly flat tax po-licy. The level of our debt is low. All the conditions are met to envisage with prudent optimism a 1.5 percent growth of Romania’s GDP this year, with a slightly better perspective for the next. We maintain our aim to join the eurozone in 2015, convinced that the strength of the euro resides in the common political will of the 27 member states to make it safer and to avoid foreseeable risks.”
Concerning the Schengen zone, this year has seen an unprecedented decision of the Netherlands and Finland not to include your country in the Schengen zone. Your prime minister stated that your country had fulfilled all the requirements. The question is: how could small countries object to your decision to join, whereas it was supported by bigger countries?
“Indeed, joining the Schengen area was a provision of our Accession Treaty, and the Accession Treaty of Romania was ratified by parliaments of all the member states. Not without a huge effort, we managed to fulfill all the technical criteria, as certified by several official verification missions. An overwhelming majority in the European Parliament supported our candidature and the majority of member states, starting with France and Germany, is in favor of a two-step accession scenario. Our dialogue with the Dutch government continues and we hope to identify a solution during the next European Council in December. Everybody in the European Union should accept the need to play by the rules.”
Many experts, not only Ukrai-nian ones, say that gas interests and pragmatism rather than European values have prevailed in the European policy over the past few years. An example of this is launching of the Nord Stream gas pipeline, as well as the rapprochement between Germany and Russia, etc. How does your country view this game of Europe?
“We need values if we want Europe as a functional establishment and political organization. But nevertheless, we also need pragmatism. In terms of energy security planning, Romania is supporting the Southern corridor. This means, first of all, Nabucco, but also PEOP, and we have also concluded an agreement with Azerbaijan, Georgia, and Hungary for the transportation of gas from Azerbaijan, through Georgia to the port of Constanta, through LNG terminal, and AGRI has also inte-rested other partners in our region, Serbia for instance, and I know that even Ukraine should be or could be interested in that. So, through our dialogue we can share these projects and put them into practice.”
In your opinion, as regards to values, does Europe need any new leaders who could show how to solve the problem, because the problem keeps Europe from following the EU’s foundation principles.
“Well, the Lisbon Treaty was negotiated for 10 years. But now it is a living reality, we have new institutions, including the European External Action Service, and we have all the necessary legislation to keep up moving Europe. And what is important, is not to go back to nationalistic policy and to understand our common destiny, our common responsibility, and to avoid at the same time some errors made in the recent past. We need a better control of the public deficit of each member state. But maybe it is too early to envisage the perspective of changing the current treaties.”
Anyway, does your country support the idea of Europe’s becoming more federalist?
“This is a theoretical discussion so far, although it was the vision of the founding fathers, the idea of having a common market and a common currency, connected to a political vision on the common destiny of the member states. And I think that this might be a possibility for the evolution of the project.”
Tell about your country’s vision of the situation with Transnistria and of how the transit conflict should be resolved? Some Russian mass media say that your country is interested in getting back Moldova and leaving Transnistria out.
“We would like to see the Republic of Moldova getting closer to the EU, we are helping them in this lo-gic, and we are advocating for the European perspective of the Republic of Moldova in Brussels and all the other capitals of the member states. When it comes to the Transnistrian conflict, we would like to see concrete outcomes from the 5+2 official resuming of the negotiations. This is the right format, and we also need guarantees on the territorial integrity and sovereignty of the Republic of Moldova. It is a frozen conflict, a relic of the Cold War, a headache for the whole region, and an anachronism. So we need to go further, and we are encouraging not only the 5+2 discussions, but also the direct dialog between Chisinau and Tiraspol.”
I have heard that an official in your country blamed Ukraine for trying to “Moldovize” the Romanians living in Ukraine.
“We see the Romanian community in Ukraine as a bridge between our two countries. They must certainly express in their daily life a total loyalty to Ukraine as an independent state. But nevertheless, we would like to see Ukraine getting closer to the European standards, to the legal framework and recommendations of the Council of Europe, protecting the Romanian minority’s right to preserve its identity, language and tradition, as it is the case with the Ukrainian minority in Romania. So the situation of the Romanian minority in Ukraine and of the Ukrainian minority in Romania is a very important element of our dialogue. Currently, we are looking forward to resuming working sessions of the Intergovernmental Commission dealing with minorities’ issues. We have provided to the Ukrainian minority in Romania the right to be represented automatically in the parliament. Their activities are financed by the public budget, they have Ukrainian schools. We can improve some aspects here and there, but there is a lot of goodwill and openness. Again, we should see the two communities as a bridge connecting our countries.”
Concerning this building of anti-missile barriers on your territory, what were the reasons of your country, because we know the Russian reaction, it’s against everything when there were similar cases in Poland or the Czech Republic.
“To sign the agreement of missile defense between Romania and the United States in Washington was a decision of two sovereign states and two strong allies within the North Atlantic Alliance. This is purely defensive, we are open to transparent dialogue on that, and this is our contribution to what is supposed to become NATO missions, covering the totality of Europe by this anti-missile shield and not meant in any way to obstacle the strategic dialogue between the Euro-Atlantic community and the Russian Federation.”
You graduated from a theological university, why have you become a diplomat?
“Centuries ago Talleyrand was in the same situation. But this was my choice for my initial education under communist rule. Then I made a Ph.D. in Sorbonne, in Paris. I’m an author, but also a career diplomat with a strong experience as I was ambassador of my country to the Holy Sea, to Lisbon, to Paris, state secretary in the Ministry of Foreign Affairs. It is the normal course of my diplomatic career.”
Did theology help you to be a successful diplomat, or not?
“I think so, because my background helped me to understand the authentic rules of the European culture and heritage, and this continuously helps me a lot in my current work.”
