GREECE AT THE CROSS-ROADS
ATHENS, 10 march 1998
Athens has voiced its dissatisfaction over the rejection of its request to take part in the London meeting of the Contact Group, which examined the situation in Kosova. The Greek Government based its request on the fact that it is a routine president of the European Union whose presence in the region Athens considers a guarantee for peace.
Regardless that the rejection came from the British side, the Greeks think that behind the British stood the Americans who, as is known, have maintained a very severe stand towards Belgrade, whereas Greece has decidedly expressed itself against any sanction, as Greek Foreign Minister Theodoros Pankalos stated last Friday, after his meeting with the Serb officials in Belgrade, saying that ÏGreece will not agree to sanctionsÐ and that Ïthe method of threats and blackmail will not functionÐ.
Apart from a grudge on Washington¾s part (if Greek suppositions are true), the above declaration is in itself sufficient to show the whole picture of the Greek stand towards the tragic events in Kosova in the last ten days. For some time now Athens has lined up its stand towards Kosova with that of its partners in the European Union, that is, no change of borders, but only respect of the rights of Albanians. However, unlike its European partners, from the first day of the crisis to this day, Athens has also been denouncing the ÏterroristsÐ (meaning the Albanians) and, at the same time, the exercise of violence in the suppression of human rights (meaning the Serbs).
This stand indicates Athen¾s attempts to maintain an equidistance between the two sides, while simultaneously showing an inclination, no matter how slight, in favor of official Belgrade. A spokesman for the Greek Government has repeatedly declared that the question of Kosova is an Ïinternal affairÐ of Yugoslavia, regardless of the fact that, at the same time, Athens has conveyed to Belgrade its readiness to play host to an Albanian-Serb high level meeting, which in a way pulls this question out of the narrow Yugoslav context. For his part, Slobodan Milosevic rejected out of hand the proposal Theodoros Pankalos made to him on Friday, reaffirming his time-worn argument that the question of Kosova is an internal affair of Yugoslavia.
Unlike the Greek Government, the Greek press and electronic media of information ¾ or more precisely part of them ¾ have reflected with great objectiveness the latest events in Kosova and accused Slobodan Milosevic of being the cause of the bloodshed. The influential Athens newspaper ÏEleutherotypiaÐ goes even a step further when in an article of its Saturday ( March 3rd) issue severely criticises the Government for labeling the fighters of the Kosova Liberation Army as ÏterroristsÐ. The newspaper draws a parallel between them and the former fighters for the independence of Cyprus, the Palestinians or the Kurds who have also been called terrorists by the forces of a State which wanted to justify the bloody repression exercised against them.
The reactions of the press may also have played a role in a change in the program of President Mejdani¾s visit to Athens last Monday. Although this visit had been planned long ago, the question of Kosova stood at the top of the list of all the problems discussed on this occasion. True, Greek Prime-Minister Simitis re-affirmed Greece¾s known stand towards ÏterrorismÐ and Ïarmed violenceÐ , but, for the first time, called for extended autonomy for the region of Kosova. Only a day before the Vice-Minister of Foreign Affairs, George Papandreou, had declared that Greece was in favor of only partial autonomy for Kosova.
Another reminder which should be taken notice of is the protest demonstration organized by the Albanian emigrants in front of the Yugoslav Embassy in Athens. A demonstration in support of the demands of the Albanians of Kosova which not only was allowed by the Greek authorities, but also visibly amplified by the Greek mass media. Whether the two facts mentioned above indicate a change in Greece¾s stand, time will show. Greece had a wonderful chance to play an important role in contributing to the solution of the problem of Kosova, proceeding from its good relations with both Tirana and Belgrade. But it has seemingly left out of its plans the Albanian leaders of Kosova, who, hence, are bound to see with mistrust any initiative that comes from Athens. So the present Greek policy has still to pay a ransom for the outspoken pro-Serb policy of conservative Mitsotakis in the years 1991-1993, but also of the socialist government of Andreas Papandreou.
Yet, the present leaders who, nevertheless, are much more moderate than their predecessors, continue to hesitate at the cross-roads at a time when the greatest danger comes from the stubborness of Milosevic who has defied Greece over and over again. Hence, the exclusion of Greece from the Contact Group, more than with a grudge on Washington¾s part, may perhaps be better explained with the fact that the Great Powers do not think Greece can play an essential role in the solution of the problem of Kosova.