Identifier
Created
Classification
Origin
08ZAGREB834
2008-12-08 12:51:00
CONFIDENTIAL//NOFORN
Embassy Zagreb
Cable title:  

CROATIA FEARS SLOVENIA WILL BLOCK EU ACCESSION

Tags:  PREL EUC HR SI 
pdf how-to read a cable
VZCZCXRO0803
PP RUEHFL RUEHKW RUEHLA RUEHNP RUEHROV RUEHSR
DE RUEHVB #0834/01 3431251
ZNY CCCCC ZZH
P 081251Z DEC 08
FM AMEMBASSY ZAGREB
TO RUEHC/SECSTATE WASHDC PRIORITY 8828
INFO RUEHZL/EUROPEAN POLITICAL COLLECTIVE PRIORITY
C O N F I D E N T I A L SECTION 01 OF 02 ZAGREB 000834 

SIPDIS
NOFORN

DEPT FOR EUR/CE AND EUR/SCE

E.O. 12958: DECL: 01/01/2018
TAGS: PREL EUC HR SI
SUBJECT: CROATIA FEARS SLOVENIA WILL BLOCK EU ACCESSION
PROGRESS UNTIL AGREEMENT ON BILATERAL BORDER ISSUES

REF: A. LJUBLJANA 537

B. LJUBLJANA 536

C. LJUBLJANA 515

D. ZAGREB 785

E. ZAGREB 762

F. ZAGREB 734

Classified By: Rick Holtzapple, POL/ECON, Reason 1.4 B/D

C O N F I D E N T I A L SECTION 01 OF 02 ZAGREB 000834

SIPDIS
NOFORN

DEPT FOR EUR/CE AND EUR/SCE

E.O. 12958: DECL: 01/01/2018
TAGS: PREL EUC HR SI
SUBJECT: CROATIA FEARS SLOVENIA WILL BLOCK EU ACCESSION
PROGRESS UNTIL AGREEMENT ON BILATERAL BORDER ISSUES

REF: A. LJUBLJANA 537

B. LJUBLJANA 536

C. LJUBLJANA 515

D. ZAGREB 785

E. ZAGREB 762

F. ZAGREB 734

Classified By: Rick Holtzapple, POL/ECON, Reason 1.4 B/D


1. (SBU) SUMMARY: Croatian officials say they are
increasingly concerned that Slovenia will be unwilling to
compromise on a French-brokered statement clarifying that
nothing in Croatia's EU accession negotiations could
prejudice the outcome of Croatia and Slovenia's bilateral
border disputes. Croatia anxiously awaits the outcome of
discussions in Brussels on December 4 and 5 to see if the
French EU Presidency can craft language that would convince
Ljubljana to lift its holds on several negotiating chapters
prior to the next scheduled EU-Croatian negotiating session
on December 19. END SUMMARY


2. (C/NF) As reported reftels, Slovenia has placed a "hold"
on the opening of several chapters in Croatia's EU
negotiations because of Croatia's alleged inclusion of
material that was prejudicial to the ongoing border dispute.
A French-brokered solution reportedly involves the EU and
Croatia exchanging letters expressing that the material
submitted by Croatia during its EU negotiations was in no way
intended to be prejudicial vis-Q-vis the ongoing border
dispute. However, in a December 4 meeting with the
Ambassador, MFA State Secretary Davor Bozinovic expressed
concern that this compromise would not persuade Ljubljana to
lift its hold on the subject chapters. MFA DG for Europe
Neven Pelicaric raised similar concerns with POLCOUNS on the
same day. Bozinovic's version of developments mirrored
closely that reported by Embassy Ljubljana in REF A: the
French had proposed a text, Slovenia had proposed amendments
to that text, and the French had rejected the majority of
those amendments. According to Pelicaric, the French had
told the GoC that the EU could not accept the Slovene
proposals, much less Croatia, and had refused to even show
Croatia the text of the Slovene changes.


3. (C/NF) The Croatians said that they had received reports
of a somewhat contentious COREPER meeting at the EU in
Brussels on December 3, where the French had attempted to

force Slovenia to accept an only slightly amended statement,
but that the Slovene PermRep had refused. The Croatians were
told the negotiations continued in Brussels during December
4, with a special COREPER meeting possible, with the Croatia
text as the sole agenda item, on December 5.


4. (C/NF) The GoC contends that there is no prejudicial
material in its negotiating positions, and says it would
happily accept the last version of the French language it has
seen. Croatian officials insist that their package includes
no maps or references with any direct implication on border
issues. The Slovene objections, the Croatians say, are based
on a scenario that includes checking every law or government
decision that is referenced in a negotiating position, as
well as any associated action plans or implementing
provisions; finding provisions in those laws or decisions, or
maps associated with them, that might be construed as
implying a certain disposition of the border issue; and then
insisting that those original laws or decisions had to be
amended before the negotiating position would be acceptable.
An Italian diplomat (protect) corroborates this, telling us
that the Slovenes drilled down into every aspect of the
negotiating package and had found some instances where such a
connection could be made. He added that, if Italy had wanted
to, it could have performed a similar operation and found
some concerns. But, he said, Rome would never engage in such
an exercise because of its support of the broader project of
EU enlargement.


5. (C/NF) Both Bozinovic and Pelicaric confirmed REF A report
that the initial meeting between FM Jandrokovic and new
Slovene FM Zbogar in Brussels on the margins of the NATO
Ministerial earlier this week had gone well. Pelicaric said
they felt that Zbogar had been sincere when he said that the
Slovene amendments to the French text would be
non-controversial, and had been surprised when the French
viewed them differently. But given Slovenia's unreadiness to
accept a compromise text, both Pelicaric and Bozinovic said
they were beginning to wonder whether Slovenia would ever
accept Croatia's EU membership pending concessions by Zagreb
over the border issue. These suspicions are shared by some
others as well. A UK diplomat (protect) has also suggested
that it appears increasingly likely that Slovenia may indeed

ZAGREB 00000834 002 OF 002


be willing to keep keep Croatia out of the EU unless Zagreb
gives in on the border dispute, particularly Piran Bay.


6. (C) COMMENT: Last week's visit to Zagreb by Slovenian
President Danilo Turk and Foreign Minister Samuel Zgobar had
raised Croatian hopes that Croatian-Slovenian relations were
to improve. Croatian media largely characterized the visit
as positive one that could diffuse tensions between the two
neighbors. This week's developments, therefore, come as an
unwelcome setback. Without a doubt, if Slovenia does indeed
maintain the blockade on Croatia's EU negotiations later this
month, then Croatia-Slovenia relations will suffer. We agree
with Embassy Ljubljana's view in REF A that a face-saving
solution based on the French proposal is the most likely way
out of the immediate impasse. Over the longer term, the
parties had agreed in 2007 to refer the border dispute to
international arbitration, which would have the positive
effect of removing this bilateral issue from the EU process
entirely. Unfortunately, that process also appears (REF F)
to have stalled over the details. END COMMENT
BRADTKE