THE MEDIA AND THE EUROPEAN COMMISSION S REPUBLIC OF MACEDONIA 2009 PROGRESS REPORT

Transcription

1 MEDIA MONITORING 2009 THE MEDIA AND THE EUROPEAN COMMISSION S REPUBLIC OF MACEDONIA 2009 PROGRESS REPORT DECEMBER 2009 Media Monitoring in Republic of Macedonia, 2009 / NGO Info-centre: Nikola Trimpare 18-1/ Skopje; te/fax: (02) ; (02) , contact@nvoinfocentar.org.mk; info@nvoinfocentar.org.mk; НВО Инфоцентар Извештај, ноември - декември 2007 страна 1 од 16

2 CONTENTS I. CONCLUSIONS 2 II. MEDIA 3 1. Quantitative Overview 3 2. The Media before and after the publication of the Progress Report 3 3. Recommendation Yes or No? 4 4. Recommendation or Conditioned Recommendation 5 5. Media For and Against the Referendum on the Name 5 6. Media Speculate on Dates 6 7. Does the Government have Negotiation Platform 6 8. The Media Analyze the Progress Report 7 9. Some Media Seek Responsibility, other Praise the Government Media pressure for solution to the naming dispute 8 III GOVERNMENT The Government before and after the publication of the Progress Report Fair Report and Responsibility Day of Publication - Historic day for VMRO-DMPNE's Government Government promises action plan Government and the name dispute hot-cold policy 11 IV POLITICAL PARTIES 12 V EXPERT COMMUNITY 13 VI MISTAKES 14 Monitoring of Media in Republic of Macedonia I

3 MEDIA MONITORING THE MEDIA AND THE EUROPEAN COMMISSION S REPUBLIC OF MACEDONIA 2009 PROGRESS REPORT The NGO Infocentre, in cooperation with the Macedonian Centre for European Training (MCET), implemented a programme for monitoring of media coverage of the European Commission s Republic of Macedonian 2009 Progress Report, in the period October 7 20, The monitoring programme was supported by the Foundation Open Society Institute Macedonia. The main goal of the programme was to analyze the quality of published information on the Progress report, as presented by the press, Government, political parties, members of diplomatic corps and expert community. The analyses includes the coverage in six daily newspapers (Utrinski vesnik; Dnevnik; Vest; Večer; Vreme; and Nova Makedonija) and the central news programmes aired on seven TV stations that broadcast nationally and over the satellite (A1 TV; Kanal 5 TV; Sitel TV; Telma TV; MTV 1; Alfa TV; and Alsat TV) 1. The monitoring doesn't include the media in the languages of non-majority communities because of the limited financial and human resources. The methodology shows the quality of the published information from the aspect of journalistic standards, whether the media/journalists used named sources, whether they consulted all stakeholders, the genres they used, the dominating genres, the treatment of facts and arguments. The methodology also allows to conduct analysis of the contents of the information on the European integrations presented not just by the media, but also by the Government, the political parties and the expert community. This monitoring programme analyzed the levels of understanding of the European Union and European integration processes, the use of terminology and language, as well as the emphasis the media put on certain aspects of the 2009 Progress Report and European integrations in general. 1 Central news programmes: А ; Kanal ; Sitel 18.00; Telma ; МТV ; Alpha and Alsat Monitoring of Media in Republic of Macedonia 1

4 I. CONCLUSIONS Compared to 2008, the media interest in the 2009 Progress Report almost doubled. The increased quantity of articles was accompanied by improved quality of reporting which had far less mistakes and misconceptions regarding European integrations. Therefore, we can conclude that the citizens received much more information on the main points listed in the Progress Report. This time, the media didn't restrict themselves to presenting the views and positions of Government representatives, the opposition and European institutions, but consulted a number of experts in various fields. They also analyzed and commented on the Report s contents and presented their own views of EC's remarks listed in the Report. The media adopted a much more proactive role and brought up many more topics for discussion related to the Progress Report than in Before the publication, the media engaged in predicting whether will it offer a recommendation for start of negotiationa and if it will be conditioned. After the publication of the Progress Report, the journalists were preoccupied with the actual meaning of the recommendation, the future steps that need to be made to ensure that Macedonia will get the date for start of negotiations in December, the possible impact that the naming dispute may have on the whole process, and analyses of individual segments of the Report (for instance, the benchmarks, human and minority rights, freedom of expression and freedom of media, economic criteria, energy policies, environmental protection). There was a notable willingness on the behalf of Government representatives to speak about and offer comments on the contents of the Report. This year, the Government had no doubts about the objectivity of the Report and EC's approach. In the period before the publication, it expected a reward for the huge effort invested in achievement of set criteria, and the Prime Minister demonstrated good will and preparedness to find solution for the naming dispute. After the publication of the 2009 Progress Report, Government representatives commented on the achieved progress in the completion of some benchmarks, but were notably silent on the naming dispute. The Government responded to the appeals from EU, its member-states, Macedonian and foreign experts and the media that the time is ripe to resolve the naming dispute, saying that the solution for the dispute is not a criteria that needs to be met to get the date for start of accession negotiations. The opposition greeted EC s recommendation and emphasize that it is a reward for all citizens of Macedonia. At the same time, the opposition parties and the parties from the Albanian political bloc in the Parliament emphasized that the recommendation by the European Commission without a start of negotiations date will not represent a success for Macedonia's European integrations in The leader of the leading opposition party SDSM offered a blanc support to the Government to resolve the naming dispute, provided that the solution doesn't threaten Macedonian national and linguistic identity. After the publication of the Progress Report, journalists brought up the question whether Macedonia has proper negotiation platform and administrative capacity to negotiate. The analysis shows that the citizens didn t get detailed information to be able to conclude that the Government has proper negotiation strategy and what such strategy would include; whether it has established negotiation teams and who was named into those teams. Those questions need to be further researched and investigated, especially in the contenct of EC's remark that Macedonia has weak administrative capacities in many areas. There were fewer mistakes in the reporting on the Progress Report compared to last year. We could point out at the following as the most serious mistakes: 1) the manner of decision making on EU expansion policies two-thirds majority or consensus; and 2) which institution decides on the EU expansion the media confuse the European Council, Council of Europe and EU Council. Monitoring of Media in Republic of Macedonia 2

5 The detailed analysis of the monitoring will be published and presented to all relevant Macedonian and international institutions by the end of the first week of November II. MEDIA 1. Quantitative Overview Total number of published and aired articles Number of articles in print media: 143 (43,47%) - Utrinski vesnik 37 (11,25%) - Dnevnik 30 (9,12%) - Vreme 29 (8,81) - Nova Makedonija 22 (7.69%) - Večer 18 (5,47%) - Vest 7 (2,13%) Number of articles in broadcast media: 186 (57,53%) - МТВ1-38 (11,55 %); - Sitel TV - 33 (10,03%) - Kanal 5 TV 30 (9,12%) - А1-30 (9,12%); - Alsat TV 24 (7,29%) - Telma TV 17 (5,17%) - Alpha TV 14 (4,25%) In terms of the used genres, the break-down is as follows: - Reports 212 (64.44%) - Statements 49 (14,89%) - Interviews - 17 (5.17%) - Commentary/Reports 14 (4,25%) - Op-ed's - 14 (4.25%) - Commentaries 11 (3.34%) - Photo-news 5 (1,52%) - News 4 (1,21%) - Analyses 3 (0.91%) 2. The Media before and after the publication of the Progress Report This time, the media didn't restrict themselves to presenting the views and positions of Government representatives, the opposition and European institutions, but consulted a number of experts in various fields. They also analyzed and commented on the contents of the 2009 Progress Report and presented their own views of EC's remarks listed in the Report. The media adopted a much more proactive role and brought up many more topics for discussion related to the Progress Report than in Monitoring of Media in Republic of Macedonia 3

6 In the period before the publication of 2009 Progress Report, journalists engaged in predictions whether it will offer a negotiations for the start of negotiations and if en eventual recommendation will offer additional conditions that Macedonia has to meet. During the period covered by this report, the media covered and commented on the announced referendum on the name of the country, offered speculations related to the start of negotiations date and the possibility for Macedonia to get an exact date for EU membership. After the publication of the Progress Report, the journalists were preoccupied with the actual meaning of the recommendation, the future steps that need to be made to ensure that Macedonia will get the date for start of negotiations in December, and the impact that the naming dispute may have on the whole process. The media raised the issues of how prepared Macedonia is to start the negotiations, existence of proper negotiation platform, and analyzed individual segments of the Report (for instance, the benchmarks, human and minority rights, freedom of expression and freedom of media, economic criteria, energy policies, environmental protection). Both before and after the publication of the 2009 Progress Report, the media actively initiated a public debate on the naming dispute between the Republic of Macedonia and the Republic of Greece. 3. Recommendation Yes or No? The media presented the statement EU Ambassador to Macedonia Erwan Fouere gave in response to the speculation in some media that the 2009 Progress Report will not present recommendations to start the negotiations. European ambassador Erwan Fouere appealed yesterday for restraing from speculations on the report after media reports, one week before its publication, that it won t offer recommendation for start of negotiations. The ambassador is convinced that achieved progress will be validated". 2 Some media, on the other hand, reported that: The European Commission doesn t recommend a start of negotiations, but it leaves a possibility for the Council of MInister to decide to start the negotiation process, if it concluded that progress was achieved on the naming dispute". 3 Having in mind the obvious confusion over the fact that the Council of Ministers doesn't decide on the date for the start of the negotiations if the Progress Report doesn't list a recommendation, Fouere noted:...it is the European Commission that makes the recommendation, while the final decision is for the EU Council to make. 4 On the eve of the publication of the Progress Report, and according to information provided by Government representatives, the media reported: It is almost certain that the country will get a recommendation to start the negotiations, but not a date 5, i.e.: Today, Macedonia will get a positive report with recommendation to start the negotiations for EU membership. No date will be proposed. EC never proposes an actual date in its progress reports. That is the job for the Council of Ministers, the highest decision-making body of EU". 6 2 Vreme, October 9, А1, October 7, Nova Makedonija, October 9, Vreme, October 13, Dnevnik, October 14, 2009 Monitoring of Media in Republic of Macedonia 4

7 4. Recommendation or Conditioned Recommendation One week before the publication of the 2009 Progress Report, some media reported, invoking sources in the European diplomatic corps: "Macedonia likely will get conditioned recommendation to start the negotiations in the coming EC report 7. Some media even reported on the possible formulation of the conditioned recommendation: Two scenarios are possible regarding the formulation of recommendation. The first, the country could be conditioned with good neighbourly relations, the second is to get a direct recommendation to solve the dispute with Greece, as condition for the start of negotiations 8, i.e.: The solution for the naming dispute will be listed as condition, likely phrased as good neighbourly relations 9.Such reports in the media are based, in our view, to the fact that some media lack proper knowledge of the structure of the Progress Report, which lists recommendations for good neighbourly relations and the solution for the naming dispute with Greece as standard content present in all past Progress Reports, in the section on regional cooperation, which is an integral part of political criteria. Therefore the problem for some media to realize that, if a recommendation is offered in the Progress Report, it would not be logical to condition it, having in mind that good neighbourly relations and the naming dispute are already part of the recommendations that EU expects to be taken into consideration. 5. Media For and Against the Referendum on the Name A significant portion of the coverage subject to monitorin in the period before the publication of the 2009 Progress Report were related to the announced referendum on the name of the country and the possible phrasing of the referendum question. Different media had different approach to this issues. Some media close to the ruling coalition presented their proposals on the process of negotiations with Greece and openly promoted the need for a referendum: Macedonia and Greece are negotiating the naming dispute for 13 years now and there are no guarantees if they may conclude them in three months, or three years, for that matter. The crucial issue is for our neighbours to the South to state clearly which name they would find acceptable. The Macedonian side has to do that same thing, and finally, if a concensus is reached, the citizens should give their view on the matter in a referendum. The Greek position doesn t depend on Macedonia, therefore, it is important for Athenc to come forward with a position first. 10 A number of media speculated that the referendum is a done deal: There will be a referendum on the name. The Government insists on a referendum and the international community has already accepted that 11, going to the extent that they offer a possible referendum question: The eventual referendum question, once an agreement with Greece is reached, would be "Do you support our entry into EU and NATO with the name Northern Republic of Macedonia?" 12 Some media presented the reaction of Ljubomir Frčkoski to the presented possible question: The Government has obviously made some promises to somebody and now they put them to the test with the alleged referendum question, which is not all that bad, really. Nonetheless, they show that their statements insistingon the two-names formula is little more than common wheeling-dealing. Since they discuss only an agreement on the name, the question of the guarantees for the language and the identity remains open". 13 Other media also commented Vest daily s article on the referendum question: It could wake up the radical forces among Macedonians who can respond to Vest s' article with their own version of the question: Do you agree to give up on the age-old, Biblical name 7 А1, October 8, Vreme, October 9, Dnevnik, October 9, Večer, October 9, Vest, October 9, Vest, October 9, Dnevnik, October 9, 2009 Monitoring of Media in Republic of Macedonia 5

8 Macedonia and Macedonias to join EU and NATO, a temporary associations 14. Other media saw the referendum as an attempt by the Government to find an alibi for its efforts to avoid accountability: The referendum is an instrument that should absolve the Government from its responsibility for the eventual change of the name that will be used internationally. It could also easily turn into an instrument that will cement our relations with Greece, will further deteriorate the international position of the country and complicate relations between political actors. 15 The media also presented Government s positions on the matter: Our programme clearly defines that if mutually acceptable solution is found, a referendum will be held, and the final decision will be made by all citizens together. Nonetheless, once we reach that stage, the citizens will be fully informed about all details of the agreement, what will it mean for Macedonia, so that they can make their mind regarding the decision that needs to be made Media Speculate on Dates Some media published an information, based on sources in Brussels, that if Macedonia gets a recommendation, it could start the accession negotiations in May 2010: According to the expectations, the date will be given to Macedonia during the Spanish presidency, at the Summit on the Balkans that Spain plans for May Having in mind that foreigners expect from the country to solve the dispute with Greece before that, they are convinced that May 2010 will be a good time to determine the date for the start of negotiations for EU membership" 17. The media also opened a debate on whether it was possible, according to EU practices, to be given specific schedule regarding the accession that would list the ultimate date for full membersip. As a result, some media believe that:... there is an option for Macedonia to get on the fast track negotiations with EU, and even demand guarantees in terms of exact date for accession (whenever that may be). The goal is to avoid Greek blockade of each and every chapter of negotiations with EU. 18 The betterinformed journalists commented:... only people that know nothing about European integration prcesses can demand guaranteed date for EU membership, since nothing of the kind was ever given. The deadlines could be guessed approximately, based on the experiences of countries that completed the negotiations. The process takes four to five years to complete. Still, it is impossible to make exact prediction on its lenght in advance Does the Government have Negotiation Platform Whether the Government had proper negotiationg platform was one of the key questions raised by the media after the publication of the positive Progress Report. We could conclude that, thanks to sub-par efforts by journalists to investigate the matter and to limited access to information in Government institutions, citizens were not provided will argumented and well-explicated response. Vasko Naumovski, the Deputy Prime Minister charged with European Integrations, gave a statement clearly intended to convince the public that Macedonia has the capacity to start the negotiations: The European Commission surely took that aspect into consideration when preparing the Report. EC would not recommend start of negotiations if it wasn t convinced that a state is prepared to engage in negotiations. 20. Other Government officials, like Dragan Tilev for instance, tried to convince the citizens that: The Government has already adopted a platform for 14 Večer, October 9, Utrinski vesnik, October 10, Vest, October 9, Vreme, October 13, Vest, October 9, Dnevnik, October 9, А1, October 14, 2009 Monitoring of Media in Republic of Macedonia 6

9 preparation of negotiations, which lists a number of issues that need further discussion on Government level". 21 We believe this is one of the key matters that the media need to focus on, investigage and report, while the Government should be open with information on the negotiation platform, the composition of negotiation teams, their capacity and activities. 8. The Media Analyze the Progress Report Unlike 2008, when the media purely quoted certain parts of the Progress Report related, above all, to the progress achieved in the meeting of benchmarks and praises for the good remarks EC gave to the economic criteria and there were no efforts for indepth analysis of the great number of noted problems, this year the majority of the media engaged in serious analyses and commented relevant sections fo the 2009 Progress Report. One novelty, for example, was the fact that the media analyzed and commented on the part of the Progress Report that offers disastrous remarks on the situation in the media market and in the area of freedom of expression in general. Therefore, the media concluded that: The strongest criticism of the Government of Macedonia, and the governments in the region in general, referred to their pressure on the media. The freedom of the media is generally perceive as being under threat and urgent action is required in that area". 22 The media also commented that: It is serious and crude circumvention of the law is the simultaneous ownership of private TV stations and newspapers, and the state does nothing to eliminate this illegal concentration of ownership, thus promoting and assisting unfair competition. 23. Some media analyzed the remarks in the section on political criteria, with emphasis on problems related to freedom of expression, for example, the violently interrupted student protest in the main square in Skopje and debate of the Citizens for European Macedonia movement's debate in Struga. A number of media also commented the remark on Government activities related to the 'antiquisation': Macedonia got an F on the subject of anti-discrimination politicies; there is the curiousity that EC noted the bad example of Government deciding to rename the Skopje Airport into "Alexandre of Macedon", demanding restraint from similar actions. 24 Unlike last year, the media were much more interested in analysis of the negative remarks EC listed in the section on economic criteria. Some media commented critically on the remarks referring to regulatory bodies: "There was noted political influence on independent regulatory bodies" 25 ; public procurement procedures, judiciary and business:...the functioning of market economy is impeded by slow judicial system and weak capacities of supervisory and regulatory agencies. Corruption remains wide-spread in all economic areas, and not enough attention is paid to possible conflicts of interests in public procurement procedures"; 26 the power distribution sector, i.e. the dispute between ELEM and EVN companies; the Law on Energy; Social dialogue, etc. 9. Some Media Seek Responsibility, other Praise the Government Journalists in some media openly demanded for Government to be held accountable for the fact that the recommendation to start accession negotiations comes full four years since the country got the status of candidate for membership, asking: If that was all we needed to do to get a positive report, why did we lose three whole years? Will Gruevski accept the responsibility? Will it be told clear that, in spite of the impression of total commitment to European tasks that the open sessions of the Government were designed 21 Alpha, October 15, Utrinski vesnik, October 15, Utrinski vesnik, October 15, Monitoring of Media in Republic of Macedonia 7

10 to create, the Brussels agenda was not the agenda of this Government until last summer? 27 Other media, in the context of whether EC's recommendation means a praise for the continuing reforms implemented by the Government or it was a result it had to deliver three years ago, offered different comments and half-truths: It was a difficult year. For three years in a row we got positive reports. This is the third one. Gruevski s Government can brag about that it has worked well for three years and got good remarks from the Europeans. However, we had a difficult year. We had elections during which the opposition claimed Macedonia was politically isolated, that this was an anti-european Government, that we lead anti-european lives and we would be punished with the EU report come Autumn. We weren t punished. We were rewarded, all of us, not just the Government, having in mind that over 90% of the citizens of Macedonia support the path to the European Union Media pressure for solution to the naming dispute In the period before and after the publication of the 2009 Progress Report, the media dedicated extensive coverage to the naming dispute. The media reported intensively on statements and messages given by representatives of the international community, especially EU represenatives, analyzed and commented on the influence of the naming dispute on the recommendation to give Macedonia the date for the start of membership negotiations, and openly advocated a solution of the dispute in the interest of the European future for Macedonia: The tone in which the Expansion Commissioner Ollie Rehn presented the news on the recommendation means nothing else but a call to the Macedonian Government to solve the dispute with Greece quickly. Renh himselve said it directly that the recommendation is a stimulus and encouragement for the Government in Skopje to make a compromise. He said that he hoped the authorities in Skopje will pay attention to the message of the European Commission. That is, undoubtedly, the strongest and most direct message Brussels sent so far. That message deserves a response from the Macedonian Governmnet. 29 The analysis of the media coverage allows us to say, with great certainty, that the media and the journalists were the only ones that initiated a debate on the naming dispute, and ensured that the citizens should get more information about the views and positions of various political factors in Macedonia and in EU, in spite of the limited amount of official information on the proceeding of the negotiations on the name and what, in fact, was being negotiated. In the period before the publication of the 2009 Progress Report, the naming dispute was often mentioned as one of the reasons why Macedonia might not get the recommendation to start the accession negotiations and that the unresolved disputed could, at the least, result in Macedonia getting a conditioned recommendation. During the period covered by this analysis, some media also concluded that Government s positions on the bilateral dispute with Greece is starting to soften a bit: There are other symptoms pointing out that the Government is easing up in its unrelenting fight for the name" and that it seeks ways to present it to the citizens at minimal damage for its ratings". 30 To support such conclusions, some media presented statements by Government officials, the most impressive being the statement by PM Gruevski: The dispute over our constitutional name Greece imposed on us, as absurd as it is, needs to be solved. We are prepared to sit down with our neighbours and open the issues, talk and seek solutions. As politicians, I and the Greek prime minister share the obligation to seek solution. We are prepared to work intensively to find that solution and we will enter the process constructively". 31 Those members of the expert community close to the opposition Sitel, October 14, Utrinski vesnik, October 15, Utrinski vesnik, October 10, Dnevnik, October 13, 2009 Monitoring of Media in Republic of Macedonia 8

11 saw this statement as a sign that the Government was changing its position on the name. Stevo Pendarovski, who was an advisor to former president Branko Crvenkovski: "Using that wording means that the Prime Minister is giving, for the first time, a personal dimension to his engagement in the negotiations and accepts greater responsibility for the outcome. Of course, all of this is valid if Gruevski wasn't just bluffing. In the past, he never said "I, alway used we, Macedonia, the Government, VMRO-DPMNE. 32 Although EC's recommendation to start negotiations wasn t accepted as total certainty before the publication of the Progress Report, Ambassador Fourer repeated constantly, on whether the naming dispute would have any impact on the date, that:... the decisions of the European Council are reached by consensus and, in that regard, we encourage both sides of the dispute to try and find mutually acceptable solution. We believe that, with the latest developments in Greece, a new situation has appeared and initiative that will be used by both sides to find a satisfactory solution". 33 After the publication fo the 2009 Progress Report, once it was certain that Macedonia got the recommendation to start the accession negotiations, the media focused on the possible influence the naming dispute and the activities of the Government regarding good neighbourly relations could have on Macedonia gettin the start of negotiations date in the coming December session of the EU Council. The media pointed out that the negotiation date will depend on Government s steps to intensify the negotiations on the naming dispute and pointed out that the giving up of the antiquity story would play an important role in the improvement of neighbourly relations: We got the recommendation to start negotiations, that one is certain. There is the important note, however, that the recommendation and the start of the negotiations, they all depend on whether Macedonia will manage to present European manners in resolution of neighbourly relations over the next two months. The minimum that is expected from us, from the Government to be specific, is to bid farewell and leave Alexander and his Bucephalus to the history, together with other unnecessary issues that public money are being spent on. 34 During the period covered by this report, the media presented statements by European representatives in the country. Among them, most active was EU Ambassador Fouere, who emphasized: "Instead of speculating what might happen come December, I will repeat that the solution to the dispute is of essence and we need to focus all energy to resolve that issue. We support all efforts directed at negotiations and we hope solution will be found before the December session of the Council" 35. Swedish Ambassador to Macedonia Lars Freden also noted: "The name issues is not a condition for accession into the Union, but it will clearly provide a far more positive climate to continue the European integrations process. You need a consensus to get a positive decision for Macedonia on December 7 and 8 that is a political fact" 36. The statement given by Ollie Rehn in a press-conference in Brussels, on October 14, referred directly to the fact that Macedonia has to get seriously engaged to find a solutions for the naming dispute with Greece. His statement, given after the publication of the 2009 Progress Report and the recommendation to start accession negotiations, was carried by all media: I trust that the government in Skopje will take this as a very strong encouragement to finally settle the name issue. I would underline that good neighbourly relations and the solution for the name dispute are crucial. More crucial and more urgent than at any time in the past". 37 The statement by EC President Jose Manuel Barroso, directed at the Governments in Skopje and Athens, carried by the broadcast media, carried the same message: "We encourage the two countries to do everything in their power to solve the problem, as soon as possible, to increase the mutual confidence. To make life more easier for all of us that want to see your country as EU member state. I want to encourage the Government in Skopje to make an effort, and the 32 Vreme, October 14, Telma, October 7, А1, October 13, МТV1, October 15, Monitoring of Media in Republic of Macedonia 9

12 other side should do the same, so that solution is found for that problem in the spirit of good neighbourly relations and, of course, in the European spirit of solidarity". 38 Greek Government representatives remained firm on the position that Macedonia can't expect the start of negoatiation date in the EU Council session if there was no solution to the name dispute. The Greek Deputy Foreign Minister Dimitris Droutsas said: All countries need to be prepared and meet the required criteria. In the case of the Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, it means a solution for the name dispute. That is the condition and the Greek position has been known and clear, just as the national line in the sand is known and clear. 39 III GOVERNMENT 1. The Government before and after the publication of the Progress Report Compared to 2008, the Government was much more open with statements and comments on the contents of the 2009 Progress Report. Another difference compared to last year was that this year, the Government had no doubts about the objectivity of the Report and EC's approach. In the period before the publication, it expected a reward for the huge effort invested in achievement of set criteria. Deputy Prime Minister in charge of European Integrations Vasko Naumovski completely accepted the responsibility for the outcome of the Progress Report, and the Prime Minister demonstrated good will and preparedness to find solution for the naming dispute. After the publication of the 2009 Progress Report, Government representatives commented on the achieved progress in the completion of some benchmarks, promised to prepare an action plan to deal with the remarks and problematic areas in the Report, but were notably silent on the naming dispute. The Government responded to the appeals from EU, its member-states, Macedonian and foreign experts and the media that the time is ripe to resolve the naming dispute, saying that the solution for the dispute is not a criteria that needs to be met to get the date for start of accession negotiations. 2. Fair Report and Responsibility Prior to the publication of the 2009 Progress Report, Government officials mostly expected for their efforts to meet the criteria to be rewarded. Also, unlike last year, they expectef from EC to prepare a fair report. From this vantage point, we could conclude that last year's suspicions regarding the objectivity of the EC and the Report was due to the fact that the Government was quite aware that it hadn't focused, in three years, on the European agenda and that the 2008 Progress Report will be the third negative report in a row. This year, PM Gruevski said It is not for me to give remarks on the report. That is for European Commission to do. I am here, together with my colleagues, to achieve all those points in order to improve the life of the citizens. I can just say that I did everything in my power and hope that the Report will evaluate those efforts fairly" 40. Deputy PM Naumovski was similarly convinced that EC should reward the efforts of the past three or four months of the year with a recommendation to start accession negotistions: We did everything and we expect from EC to give its assessment of Macedonia's progress. I take the responsibility as a part of the Macedonian team. However, if we get a positive report, I will also take the credit. 41 We should also note that the media seemed to forget last year s positions of the Government and failed to ask its officials what was the reason for the changed opinion on objectivity and principles adopted by EC. 38 Kanal 5, October 15, Vreme, October 14, Vreme, October 9, 2009 Monitoring of Media in Republic of Macedonia 10

13 3. Day of Publication - Historic day for VMRO-DMPNE's Government The bulk of the coverage related to the 2009 Progress Report was published on the day the Report was reseased and in the several following days. The media carried huge numbers of statements by all political actors in the country and EU officials. Still, in terms of numbers, statements by Government officials led the way. They all agreed that October 14, 2009 was a historic day for Macedonia: This is a historic day for the Republic of Macedonia and its citizens. This day is a result of the past efforts of the Government, the citizens, all political actors, associations in Macedonia and of the efforts of our friends in the international community. We greet the opinion of the European Commission and all its efforts to support us in the implementation of reforms. 42 On the day of publication of the Progress Report, PM Gruevski said:...we reached a historic moment when the European Union officially admitted that Macedonia achieved all standards and reforms, completed the modernisation process that was necessary for the European Union to recommend the start of the negotiations". 43 In his address to the Prime Minister and other Government officials on the presentation of the 2009 Progress Report, Ambassador Fouere said: All political parties and actors in the Government and the opposition share the credit, proving that cooperation leads to success. The credit should be given also to the representatives of the civil society that managed to reach thousands of citizens and point out the areas that Government needed to focus and and work" Government promises action plan After the publication of the Progress Report, the Government promised to prepare an action plan to overcome the negative remarks and noted problems: We put all weaknesses that need to be improved upon in a table and an action plan, that will be presented to the Government and to Brussels, will help us to resolve those issues, improve on them and move forward step by step". 45, i.e.: He (the Prime Minister) noted that the Report would be a sign-post for the Government, pointing at future steps and reforms that need to be implemented. 46 Justice minister Mihajlo Manevsi said: We are prepared for future successful steps to upgrade the system for fight against organized crime and corruption, and to ensure an independent and efficient judiciary that will function to guarantee the freedoms and rights of citizens" 47. Interior minister Gordana Jankulovska didn't hide her satisfaction with the recommendation: The Progress Report fully reflects the real situation in Macedonia and is the most positive report so far" Government and the name dispute hot-cold policy One of the brightest spots in the analyses of the contents for this monitoring programme came before the publication of the Progress Report, referred to the declarative indisputable (from this vantage point, we should say virtual) willingness by Prime Minister Gruevski to deal with the name dispute. On the eve of the publication of the Progress Report, in his speech on the celebration of October 11, National Uprising Day, he said: The dispute over our constitutional name Greece imposed on us, as absurd as it is, needs to be solved. We are prepared to sit down with our neighbours and open the issues, talk and seek solutions. As politicians, I and the Greek prime minister share the 42 Vest, October 15, Sitel, October 14, Kanal 5, October 14, Telma, October 19, Nova Makedonija, October 15, Nova Makedonija, October 15, МТV 1, October 16, 2009 Monitoring of Media in Republic of Macedonia 11

14 obligation to seek solution. We are prepared to work intensively to find that solution and we will enter the process constructively". 49 We could now conclude that Gruevski s message came at the right moment when EU needed some positive signal or at least declarative will by the Government to resolve the dispute, with the goal to secure the positive report and EC s recommendation that the Government could later use as an alibi for its absolute lack of interest to resolve the name dispute and convince us that: we did our share of the job. That view was publicly confirmed immediately after the publication of the 2009 Progress Report, when Government official either completely ignored the dispute or noted that it wasn t one of the conditions to start accession negotiations. Deputy PM for European Integrations Vasko Naumovski believes that the the message presented by Commissioner Olli Rehn that the name dispute was of essence didn't mean the start of negotiation date was conditioned with its solution" 50. IV POLITICAL PARTIES Representatives of the ruling VMRO-DPMNE used the publication of the 2009 Progress Report to reiterate that it was a historic event for the state and to convince the public that the positive report was proof that Macedonia did its homework well, that the power is held by a pro-european Government, regardless of opposition accusations claiming otherwise. Silvana Boneva, the Coordinator of VMRO-DPMNE s Parliamentary Club said: This is a historic day for the Republic of Macedonia. We would like to share the joy with all citizens, and to express our gratitude to the European Commission that validated the efforts of all state institutions and the progress of reforms implemented in Macedonia. It is a great impulse for us, giving us the energy to continue forward. 51 Petar Pop Arsov, Chairman of Parliamentary Committee for European Integrations, said: This Report is a confirmation of the achievements of our state, as opposed to the pessimistic statements by some opposition politicians about alleged "vulgarisation" of reforms and positive projects implemented by the Government over the past two years. This report also dismisses all claims that Macedonia was allegedly isolated internationally". 52 The MPs from the opposition SDSM party noted that the recommendation without a set date means that, in practical terms, Macedonia has not made progress in the European integrations in 2009:...but a recommendation without a negotiation date could only offer solace, but should not be considered success for Macedonia. Come tomorrow, we have to focus on the December session of the European Council, which is the only institution that can set the date for the start of negotiations. Without the date, Macedonia is at about the same exact place it was in SDSM also greeted the fact that the European Commission paid greater attention to the European future for Macedonian citizens. The Vice-President of the party Gordan Georgiev said: The statement by Commissioner Olli Rehn makes it clear that the European Commision has raised the name dispute to the highest possible level. There is little doubt that there is direct connection between the setting of the negotiation date and the solution for the name dispute." 54 According to Georgiev: This was the turning point for the future of Macedonia and we expect from the Government of Nikola Gruevski and VMRO-DPMNE is up to the job. It is the highest time for Nikola Gruevski to step forward, face the citizens, open his cards and present his future moves. SDSM is prepared to cellebrate together with VMRO-DPMNE when Macedonia gets the negotiation date Dnevnik, October 13, Alsat, October 15, Utrinski vesnik, October 15, МТV 1, October 15, Telma, October 13, Večer, October 15, 2009 Monitoring of Media in Republic of Macedonia 12

15 After the publication of the Progress Report, SDSM offered a blanc support to the Government to resolve the naming dispute. President Crvenkovski said: You defend the national identity, get firm guarantees about the Macedonian name of the language and the people, and we will accept everything you find acceptable as a compromise, we will support it, and we will do it in advance" 56. Tito Petkovski, the leader of NSDP political party had this to say to Gruevski: Well, Mr. Prime Minister, we call you to join, as soon as possible, the ranks of traitors, foreign lackeys, the dark forces you called us, to give Macedonia to EU together 57. Xhevat Ademi, MP for DUI said on the daz of publication of the Progress Report: The credit for the positive report doesn't go to a single political institution or group, but to all citizens of Macedonia" 58. V EXPERT COMMUNITY Compared to 2008, this year the media consluted many more foreign and local experts in different fields. The majority of experts commented on the predicted contents of the Progress Report: The next report of the European Commission will be positive in part, negative in part, and will certainly offer a number of remarks on the reforms Macedonia failed to implement, suggested by the Commission in the previous report. I want to say that over the past year, there was no systemic work to implement the reforms that Macedonia needed to start the negotiations. All work was done in the past two or three months. (Bujar Sinani, Professor at SEE University). 59 Experts and analysts also commented on the name dispute: We got the 10 th and most importnat benchmark in the efforts to get the start of negotiations date. It is out in the open you may not reach a compromise, but it means you will never join Europe. (Stevo Pendarovski) 60, its influence on the start of negotations date, and the positions on the issue held by Greek and Macedonian governmentes: Candidate-countries and applicants need to understand one thing EU can t solve their problems. EU can provide technical assistance to present the good experiences. Nobody will solve your problems. Candidate-countries, just like the old member-states, need to solve the problems on their own" (Peter Goldsmith, European Institute of Public Administration) 61. Some experts analyzed the significance and the importance of the lawsuit Macedonian filed at the International Court of Justice in the Hague, noting that political problem couldn't be solved with legal remedy : The dispute between Macedonia and Greece is rather sensitive and should be resolved with lawsuits, but with mutual agreement that will be satisfactory to both sides" (Ibrahim Mehmeti). 62 Regarding the negotiating platform and negotiating capacities, some experts convinced the public that Macedonia was prepared to start the accession negotiations: We absolutely have the capacity, we are prepared, have trained people, experts and personnel for the negotiations. What we need to do now is to implement the strategy for negotiations on the 35 areas here, at home (Dimitar Mirčev) Sitel, October 19, А1, October 17, Alsat, October 9, Alpha, October 15, Kanal 5, October 15, Vreme, October 10, Kanal 5, October 14, 2009 Monitoring of Media in Republic of Macedonia 13

16 VI MISTAKES Compared to 2008, there were much fewer mistakes in the reporting on the Progress Report. Nonetheless, because of the importance of clear and precise information for the public, we will list the mistakes that need to be avoided in the future. 1. In several articles, reporters didn t made the distinction between the recommendation to start accession negotiations and the date for start of negotiations. Still, some journalists were aware that we expect from EC to make recommendation to start the accession negotiations, while the date is to be determined bz the EU Council of Ministers: It is almost certain that Macedonia will get the recommendation to start negotiations, but not a date" 64, and "...the Commission will likely recommend the opening of accession negotiations between EU and Macedonia, but not a concrete date because of 'possible political influence of the name dispute with Greece'" Journalists also made mistakes on the manner of decision making in EU related to expansion policies. Some media reported, mistakenly, that the Council of Ministers will need a two-thirds majority, having in mind that on expansion matters, the Council votes by consensus, i.e. unanimously: The active lobbying of memberstates to secure two-thirds support and start of negotiations date in the December session of the Council of Ministers started yesterday. 66, or The decision is adopted with qualified majority, meaning that Greece has minimal, but not impossible chance to block Macedonia 67. and "Over the time until the December session of the EU Council, we need to lobby the member-states to secure twothirds support for the decision to set the start of negotiations date The media were often confused about the actual name of the institution that will make the decition on the date, and instead of Council of Ministers or EU Council, reported that the decision will be made by the European Council: The European Council will decide in December whether the country will be conditioned to solve the name dispute to start the negotiations" The media also mistook the number of chapters that need to be negotiated, and instead of the 35 chapters, often offered different figures: If the decision passes in the Council, the date will be determined on the same da, and from that moment on, Macedonian Government will start negotiations with EU on the 33 chapters Vreme, October 13, Nova Makedonija, October 14, Nova Makedonija, October 15, А1,October 12, А1, October 14, Kanal 5, October 12, А1, October 12, 2009 Monitoring of Media in Republic of Macedonia 14