Identifier
Created
Classification
Origin
09BUDAPEST867
2009-12-04 11:20:00
CONFIDENTIAL
Embassy Budapest
Cable title:
HUNGARY SUPPORTING MACEDONIA'S EU MEMBERSHIP
how-toVZCZCXRO7579 PP RUEHAG RUEHKW RUEHROV RUEHSL RUEHSR DE RUEHUP #0867 3381120 ZNY CCCCC ZZH P 041120Z DEC 09 FM AMEMBASSY BUDAPEST TO RUEHC/SECSTATE WASHDC PRIORITY 4724 INFO RUCNMUC/EU CANDIDATE STATES COLLECTIVE PRIORITY RUCNMEM/EU MEMBER STATES COLLECTIVE PRIORITY
C O N F I D E N T I A L BUDAPEST 000867
SIPDIS
DEPARTMENT FOR EUR/SCE PAUL PFEUFFER AND JERRY ISMAIL, AND
EUR/CE JAMIE MOORE.
E.O. 12958: DECL: 12/02/2014
TAGS: PREL EU GR MK HU
SUBJECT: HUNGARY SUPPORTING MACEDONIA'S EU MEMBERSHIP
REF: SECSTATE 117721
Classified By: Political Officer Jon Martinson, reasons 1.4 (b,d)
C O N F I D E N T I A L BUDAPEST 000867
SIPDIS
DEPARTMENT FOR EUR/SCE PAUL PFEUFFER AND JERRY ISMAIL, AND
EUR/CE JAMIE MOORE.
E.O. 12958: DECL: 12/02/2014
TAGS: PREL EU GR MK HU
SUBJECT: HUNGARY SUPPORTING MACEDONIA'S EU MEMBERSHIP
REF: SECSTATE 117721
Classified By: Political Officer Jon Martinson, reasons 1.4 (b,d)
1. (C) PolOff discussed reftel demarche December 3, with the
MFA's Deputy Department Head for Southeastern Europe, Laszlo
Markusz, and Macedonian Desk Officer Maria Csicsko. Agreeing
that Macedonia has made significant strides in preparation
for EU membership, Markusz first underscored Hungary's
strategic interest in stability in the Balkans and the GOH's
full support for Western Balkan integration. Noting that
last week he reviewed a draft text prepared for the upcoming
EU meeting on December 10, he commented that the text
contained no mention of Macedonia. He explained that the
Swedish presidency is concerned about early release of
language referencing Macedonian due to Greek sensitivities.
Markusz said that Sweden still has not decided if the text
will be an agenda item at the Foreign Ministers' meetings on
December 7-8, or at the December 10 EU Council meeting, and
he expressed concern that there is still no prepared text to
discuss.
2. (C) Continuing, Markusz outlined two possible scenarios.
The "most probable" will be text that establishes the March
2010 Council meeting as the time when a date will be set for
Macedonia's accession. A less likely, but more negative
possibility, would be a decision to establish no accession
date until the name issue is resolved. On the name issue,
Markusz stated that there needs to be a compromise worked out
on a bi-lateral basis, similar to the steps that Croatia and
Slovenia recently decided on to resolve their border dispute
issue.
3. (C) Responding as to who within the EU may be supportive
of establishing a date for Macedonia's accession, Csicsko
mentioned the Baltics, Austria, and the Visegrad Four as
likely strong supporters.
LEVINE
SIPDIS
DEPARTMENT FOR EUR/SCE PAUL PFEUFFER AND JERRY ISMAIL, AND
EUR/CE JAMIE MOORE.
E.O. 12958: DECL: 12/02/2014
TAGS: PREL EU GR MK HU
SUBJECT: HUNGARY SUPPORTING MACEDONIA'S EU MEMBERSHIP
REF: SECSTATE 117721
Classified By: Political Officer Jon Martinson, reasons 1.4 (b,d)
1. (C) PolOff discussed reftel demarche December 3, with the
MFA's Deputy Department Head for Southeastern Europe, Laszlo
Markusz, and Macedonian Desk Officer Maria Csicsko. Agreeing
that Macedonia has made significant strides in preparation
for EU membership, Markusz first underscored Hungary's
strategic interest in stability in the Balkans and the GOH's
full support for Western Balkan integration. Noting that
last week he reviewed a draft text prepared for the upcoming
EU meeting on December 10, he commented that the text
contained no mention of Macedonia. He explained that the
Swedish presidency is concerned about early release of
language referencing Macedonian due to Greek sensitivities.
Markusz said that Sweden still has not decided if the text
will be an agenda item at the Foreign Ministers' meetings on
December 7-8, or at the December 10 EU Council meeting, and
he expressed concern that there is still no prepared text to
discuss.
2. (C) Continuing, Markusz outlined two possible scenarios.
The "most probable" will be text that establishes the March
2010 Council meeting as the time when a date will be set for
Macedonia's accession. A less likely, but more negative
possibility, would be a decision to establish no accession
date until the name issue is resolved. On the name issue,
Markusz stated that there needs to be a compromise worked out
on a bi-lateral basis, similar to the steps that Croatia and
Slovenia recently decided on to resolve their border dispute
issue.
3. (C) Responding as to who within the EU may be supportive
of establishing a date for Macedonia's accession, Csicsko
mentioned the Baltics, Austria, and the Visegrad Four as
likely strong supporters.
LEVINE