The Adriatic part of Croatia is extremely important to us economically, if not the most important. For Croatia, it is important how it is perceived in Alexandria, Malta, and Barcelona, and not just in London, Innsbruck, or Frankfurt.
The idea of establishing a Mediterranean Union was launched by Nicolas Sarkozy. He primarily wanted to create a political structure outside the EU from Mediterranean countries, which would be loosely connected to the EU, with the aim of creating a common market and planning development. He also wanted to turn the Mediterranean into an interest zone of the EU, with France playing a key role, and to offer Turkey a political structure outside the EU as a permanent or temporary substitute for EU membership.
Mediterranean countries
21 countries on three continents
Spain • France • Monaco • Italy • Malta • Slovenia • Croatia • Bosnia and Herzegovina • Montenegro • Albania • Greece • Turkey • Cyprus • Syria • Lebanon • Israel • Egypt • Libya • Tunisia • Algeria • Morocco
Six more countries
Andorra • Jordan • Portugal • San Marino • Serbia • Vatican
(not on the Mediterranean coast, but often considered Mediterranean countries in a broader sense)
Special areas
British Overseas Territory Gibraltar • Spanish enclaves Ceuta and Melilla and nearby islands • British military bases Akrotiri and Dhekelia in Cyprus • Palestinian territories
Sarkozy’s, in principle, good initiative faced resistance within the EU as it was perceived as an attempt for France to impose itself as an ‘interface’ for the entire EU towards the Mediterranean. Another (significantly larger) problem was the existing but dormant Barcelona Process that the EU envisioned and started back in 1995 as a framework for Euro-Mediterranean dialogue.
Therefore, after long deliberation, the European Commission (EC) decided on May 14, 2008, to take matters into its own hands, and Sarkozy’s initiative evolved into an EU project. Thus, at the meeting of heads of state or government of Mediterranean countries in Paris on July 13, 2008, the Barcelona Process: Union for the Mediterranean (UfM) was established. It does not only include Mediterranean countries, as Sarkozy envisioned, but consists of all current EU members (EU27) as well as Mauritania, Morocco, Algeria, Tunisia, Libya, Egypt, Jordan, the Palestinian Authority, Israel, Syria, Turkey, Albania, and Croatia, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Montenegro, and Monaco. The final declaration of the Paris meeting provided for meetings at the level of heads of state or government at least once a year. Also, the Union for the Mediterranean will have a dual presidency for a term of two years. The EU is represented by the presiding country (in this case, France), and Egypt was chosen as co-chair on behalf of the other Mediterranean countries. Furthermore, the declaration listed a number of common development priorities for Mediterranean countries – e.g., maritime highways, protection of drinking water, prevention of Mediterranean pollution, solar energy, etc.
At the meeting of foreign ministers of the member countries of the Union for the Mediterranean in Marseille on November 3 and 4, 2008, the powers of the Secretariat were defined to formalize and expedite the work of the Union as much as possible, and Barcelona was chosen as the seat of the Secretariat. The Secretary-General is not yet known, but the deputy secretaries will be from Greece, Italy, Malta, and Israel and the Palestinian Authority. The choice of Israel in the secretariat was not accidental, but compensated for the consent of the Israelis to participate in the Arab League as a full member (but without voting rights). The participation of the Palestinians in the Secretariat is obviously an additional compensation for the Arab countries.
The Union for the Mediterranean is, therefore, an official foreign policy project of the EU, and no longer just the vision of Nicolas Sarkozy, nor is it merely a matter of France itself! The reasons for Sarkozy’s and France’s significant engagement as the EU presidency are very clear. Namely, according to the law of connected vessels, the EU cannot afford to have a politically and economically unstable zone on its southern shores, as this instability from the Mediterranean will sooner or later spill over and reflect on the stability of the EU itself, either through migrants, loss of markets, difficulties in maritime traffic, or investment risks. Simply put, if the EU wants to develop at the same pace as before, it must take responsibility for the development of the Mediterranean. And this is neither the job of the USA nor Russia!
The Adriatic needs a common navigation control system
The issue of marine protection is also very important. Most Mediterranean countries have declared economic zones to regulate fishing. Pollution of the Mediterranean from land and sea is already regulated by the Barcelona Convention from 1995 with its protocols – which, however, only apply to Mediterranean countries, i.e., not to other EU states! All Adriatic countries (especially Italy!) need to apply its protocols for protecting the sea from land-based pollution. Within the EU, the Horizon 2020 project has been launched to eliminate sources of Mediterranean pollution from land and sea by 2020. For years, I have advocated that the Adriatic be declared a Particularly Sensitive Sea Area (PSSA) in accordance with the rules of the International Maritime Organization, or for the Mediterranean a specially protected area (MSPA) according to the Barcelona Convention. The Adriatic also needs a common navigation control system like Canada has for the Gulf and the St. Lawrence River, along with a connected search and rescue system.
The Union for the Mediterranean has started seriously. Seven ministerial meetings of various sectors have already been held, and for 2009, as many as 15 ministerial meetings of all sectors are planned to realize major Mediterranean projects: protection of drinking water, energy, especially solar energy, creating a Mediterranean free trade area, connecting major ports, and strengthening road, rail, and maritime traffic, marine ecology, tourism, and telecommunications, as well as forming a higher education and scientific network. Each of these projects will be generously funded by the EU.
I believe that Croatia simply cannot miss this opportunity. Because for Croatia, as for all EU members, the Union for the Mediterranean will be the only framework for cooperation with Mediterranean countries, which are our natural environment and greatest competition. Therefore, it is good to participate in creating this framework, considering our traditionally good relations with Mediterranean countries. Moreover, since Split did not become the seat of the UfM Secretariat, it should at least be nominated as the seat for one of the projects.
In a series of topics, our initiative and vision for solutions are expected. Global warming will have the most severe consequences in Mediterranean countries – primarily, we will be affected by the disappearance of drinking water and the threat to biodiversity in the sea and on land. The projects proposed by the EC for the UfM also include water resource management. We currently have large reserves of drinking water. However, the protection of groundwater is negligible. And if we do not have ecological protection of the Adriatic, we do not have the conditions for obtaining water through desalination, while we have been decades behind Israel in irrigation. Perhaps it is therefore necessary to create a Mediterranean Center for Drinking Water Resources and a center for irrigation planning – at least for the exchange of experiences. The consequences of warming are drought and numerous fires – like the fire in Kornati or Greece last year, all of which indicates that cooperation among Mediterranean countries is necessary in natural disasters. The Mediterranean is also a very active seismic area – earthquakes are frequent, and the EU is already financing the establishment of a tsunami early warning system in the Mediterranean.
On the southern and southeastern side of the Mediterranean are fossil fuel-producing countries, while on the northern side are the largest consumers, i.e., shipping routes for tankers intersect with oil and gas pipelines in the Mediterranean. The Mediterranean is an extremely busy sea. Since Croatia is a maritime country, our interest lies here. Croatia needs to offer its ports in the planned system of maritime highways, i.e., connecting Mediterranean ports with ro-ro ships. Also, following the example of the American Container Security Initiative, it should propose the establishment of a Mediterranean Container Traffic Control System – because we want the Mediterranean to be safe from maritime terrorism and illegal arms transport.
One of the goals of the UfM will certainly be the creation of a Mediterranean energy market, so I believe that this will finally clarify the directions for energy and oil/gas corridors. On the other hand, the EC considers one of the goals of the UfM to be the promotion of solar power plants – Dalmatia is ideal for this. However, it is absurd that we have almost no producers of renewable sources, so it would be good for Croatia to propose the establishment of a special Fund for this purpose at the Mediterranean level!
Countries on the southern and southeastern sides of the Mediterranean are the largest source of illegal migrants to the EU. There is also a significant imbalance in the scientific and university network. The ultimate goal of the UfM is also a common trade zone and cooperation among chambers of commerce. Nevertheless, the key task of the UfM should be the preservation of the cultural and natural heritage of the Mediterranean, which cannot be compared to anything else in the world. Regardless, the most important consequence of Croatia’s membership in the UfM is that the Government (I hope) will finally understand that Croatia is actually a Mediterranean country and that the Adriatic part of Croatia is extremely important to us economically, if not the most important. That is, it is important for Croatia how we are perceived in Alexandria, Malta, and Barcelona, and not just how we are seen in London, Innsbruck, or Frankfurt. If we succeed in this, the relationship towards the ZERP and fishermen, towards tourism, shipyards, ports, shipowners, and generally towards the development of the Adriatic part of Croatia will be far better.
