Papers

EuroMed II - The Malta Challenge

Speech by H.E. Mr. ALFRED ZARB - Ambassador and Director, Bilateral Relations, MFA, Malta

At the end of the first Ministerial meeting of the EuroMediterranean Conference in Barcelona, the Ministers were satisfied that, perhaps for the first time in the evolutionary history of the Mediterranean, they have been able to agree on an ambitious Declaration intended to carry forward a meaningful dialogue to usher an era of cooperation among the partners. The success of the conference, in political terms, was very much due to the political climate that reigned in the Mediterranean region at the time. It was a moment in time that could not be missed. In order to ensure continuity, the Ministers agreed to meet again during 'the first semester of 1997 in one of the twelve Mediterranean partners of the European Union to be determined through consultations.'

By January this year, the EuroMediterranean Committee for the Barcelona Process, meeting in Brussels had already agreed on the date for the meeting but could not as yet decide on the place where to hold the meeting. We were then ten weeks away from the 15 of April. A decision could not be delayed any longer. The Netherlands representative, chairing the meeting, put the question to the Mediterranean partners. The Algerian representative replied that the 12 Mediterranean partners agreed to have the meeting in Malta. The Chairman said that the 15 concurred with the venue. Malta was not a candidate but in response to the wish of the 26, the government of Malta accepted the holding of the Second Ministerial meeting in Malta on the 15 and 16 April 1997.

A few days later I was summoned to the Prime Minister's office for a meeting to discuss the organisation of this conference. In the end I was appointed Conference Director. It was an honour and a challenge of no small consequence.

Immediately my mind turned to the presence of the Foreign Ministers to be accompanied by hundreds of delegations, the numerous press - by themselves would represent a mammoth task for any country. The operation required fully functional conference facilities, a press centre, adequate and enough accommodation, unusual security arrangements, transport, hospitality, welfare and support services, working areas for delegates. The list was endless. I could hear the Prime Minister telling me that this was a unique occasion, important both for Malta and the process itself. He asked for a professional job aiming for excellence. He offered me his support and encouragement. I thanked him, the Deputy Prime Minister and all those around the table for the trust they have shown in me. I took my leave, walked to the Ministry, sat back in my chair and gazed at the Malta clock that hangs in my office. The only thing upper most in my mind was the time available: ten weeks!

The next morning I was at the office early, picking no more than a handful of officers to form part of my directorate. There were six of us plus my secretary. I explained that in the first week we had to plan the conference and the preceding senior officials meeting. The following six weeks were to be devoted to the finalization of plans, identification of services required, and procurements. In the remaining three weeks we had to see that everything was in place. |

To each of my assistants, I assigned a task. We were all very much conscious of the fact that during the conference proper we would be on our own. We had to do things right the first time! This meant dedication, concentration and long hours of hard work including weekend and public holidays. To this team and the supporting staff that were engaged later on I am very grateful.

Logistics did not present themselves well. The immediate problem was that the Mediterranean Conference Centre was booked solid throughout spring and an international conference was to be held there during the same week in April. With the help of Government we managed to free the centre. Most of the upper grade hotels in Malta in April were under restructuring and some of them were not operational. The situation was complicated further by the fact that April is the beginning of the tourist season in Malta and we had to go to great pains to secure enough rooms and the right amount of suites required for the conference. We had hoped to use three hotels. In the end we could not do with less than Eve which meant extending the use of other services like transport, support services and personnel. We had to provide the press with working facilities in the neighbourhood of the conference centre. The Police Academy, which is situated some two hundred meters from the Conference Centre, was vacated and its operation moved elsewhere for us to provide a press centre. Contact between the press and the delegation was also facilitated by the allocation of an area within the conference centre. We went to great lengths to ensure that delegations worked in a properly appointed atmosphere, felt comfortable throughout their stay and enjoyed our hospitality while they were here. In the end we found time to improve the individual offices and common spaces with original works of art generously provided by a large number of Maltese artists. We are proud of their support.

But for Malta the challenge did not stop here. Europe and the Mediterranean are two realities that feature very prominently in Malta's foreign policy aspirations. The EuroMediterranean process therefore is of direct interest to Malta. Hosting the Conference brought with it the added responsibility of a more direct involvement in the proceedings.

Our reading of the Barcelona Declaration goes beyond the official rhetoric. In our mind the process is couched in terms relating to the human dimension - the human aspect of understanding and cooperation. It is intended to widen the scope of cooperation, and dialogue which in addition to Governments, involves Parliamentarians, NGOs and the professionals. To the Malta Government the three partnerships, as they are aptly called, provide for an open dialogue at the different levels of Government and society. The intention is to get to the root of problems as they present themselves within different perspectives, with the aim of seeking permanent and equitable solutions. The key to the whole exercise is the creation of an area of shared prosperity within the scope of the three partnerships together. The endeavour calls for the development of confidence building measures, not restricted to security considerations, but intended to sustain an everlasting collaboration based on understanding, leading to peace and stability in the wider EuroMediterranean region.

To quote the Deputy Prime Minister, Dr George W. Vella, "the process in which we are engaged is seen to be reaching out to all members of our societies - the individual citizens of Europe and of the Mediterranean - in terms of its meaning and relevance of their daily lives."

In accepting the concept of free trade, CSBMs and the elaboration of a Charter for Peace and Stability, he spoke of the different ills with which society, in the Mediterranean, today is beleaguered "the economic and social conditions determining and in many instances constraining their lives, the dislocations arising from internal political and other upheavals, the structural deficiencies in regional transport and communications and the fears and concerns generated by such bewildering new phenomena as drug trafficking, money laundering, arms trading, illegal migration, terrorism and environmental degradation."

The premise of the Maltese intervention was aimed at the social factors that are found in the third partnership. We must begin at the beginning with the restoration of the human dignity through basic needs like education, health and social well being. In truth all else will not materialise fast enough unless the process is seen to provide the ingredients that are required for society to grow and prosper. It was here that the Deputy Prime Minister proposed a number of ideas dealing with health, education and banking. In order to promote better understanding among peoples and nations he referred to the need of a parliamentary dialogue for the region. We are pleased that all these initiatives now feature in the calendar of events of EuroMediterranean activities.

The twenty seven partners too had to live up to the Malta challenge. It is important to keep in mind that the political backdrop in the Mediterranean has changed since Barcelona. In April 1997 the climate was not as forthcoming. The partners however succeeded in keeping the dialogue going even if punctuated with political pronouncements and a slow pace of progress. This in itself has to be seen in a positive vein, in the sense that notwithstanding the disparaging positions that some delegations felt they had to take, at no time was there any inclination to abort the process.

Seen against this background therefore, the Malta meeting attained the desired goal. In itself the meeting fulfilled the provisions of the Barcelona Declaration thereby endorsing the continuity of the process. It meant that the partners irrespective of the many problems, had put their faith in the EuroMediterranean process. In their conclusions, the Ministers confirmed the political premise and in relation to the work carried out during the first eighteen months of the process, they proposed further and intensified action in the appropriate sectors of the three partnerships. They have qualified certain provisions of direct interest to a number of Mediterranean partners, and have improved the work of the coordinating bodies of the process. Moreover the thrust of the Malta conclusions was directed towards the implementation of recommendations proposed during the thematic ministerial meetings.

On the margins of the Malta Conference, other activities were taking place. Jordan and the EU initialed their bilateral agreement. Representatives from Turkey and Greece met and agreed to meet again. President Arafat and Foreign Minister David Levi had a meeting at the Phoenicia.

If we take the political yardstick we cannot but qualify the Malta Ministerial meeting as a success. This has to be seen in terms of the furtherance of activities that are taking shape. I can only translate the work carried forward on different themes since the Malta meeting, as registering practical progress. Have we done enough'? The answer is def~nitely no but we are going in the right direction and I am sure that in adapting a right, cautious and optimistic approach throwing in a lot of understanding for good measure the process is bound to succeed. We do falter every now and then but I am convinced that in the long run better counsel will prevail.

A few weeks ago the partners also agreed to hold a review Ministerial meeting scheduled to take place in Rome next year. I can only see this as a one time affair. The purpose for the meeting can only serve to make up for time lost at this early: therefore see this meeting as a renewal of our faith in the process and for the right emphasis to be laid on speciflc points listed in the Malta conclusions. The aim of the mid term meeting should not be to rewrite the conclusions but to give priority and dynamism to those areas considered necessary to carry forward the work proposed particularly in the second and third partnerships. After all it is not what we put down on paper that will carry the day but the resolve of those present to work together, notwithstanding their present individual difficulties, to bring our aspirations to fruition. We have to look at the process as complimentary and not a substitute to on-going peace processes in the region. The EuroMediterranean process is meant to generate trust through cooperative action in a way to overcome the futility of prejudice and hate that has accumulated over the centuries.

TOP