CROATIAN REACTION TO LATEST REHN PROPOSAL ON

C O N F I D E N T I A L ZAGREB 000365 SIPDIS PASS TO EUR DAS JONES & DAS GARBER E.O. 12958: DECL: 06/16/2019 TAGS: PREL HR SI EUC SUBJECT: CROATIAN REACTION TO LATEST REHN PROPOSAL ON BORDER DISPUTE WITH SLOVENIA. REF: ZAGREB 281 Classified By: ROBERT A. BRADTKE, AMBASSADOR FOR REASONS 1.4 (b) and (d ) .1. (C) Reacting to the latest round of negotiations on the Croatian-Slovenian border dispute, Croatian officials have been publicly restrained, but privately pessimistic about the prospects for a breakthrough. Speaking after the June 15 negotiating session with Slovene Foreign Minister Zbogar and EC Commissioner Rehn, Croatian Foreign Minister Jandrokovic described the latest Rehn proposal on the border issues as featuring "creative thinking." In a June 16 briefing for members of the Zagreb diplomatic corps on a number of topics, MFA State Secretary Matkovic stressed Croatia's willingness to continue the dialogue with Rehn, and noted that Jandrokovic and Zbogar will meet with Rehn again on June 17. In a private conversation with the Ambassador afterwards, however, Matkovic said that Jandrokovic had been "disappointed" and "upset" by the revisions Rehn proposed to the version of his plan that Croatia had already accepted. ¶2. (C) In a separate conversation, Davor Stier, Foreign Policy Advisor to the Prime Minister, provided an equally negative view of the talks in Luxembourg. Stier said that Rehn's revised proposal contained several significant changes to his early text. In article 3, dealing with the "task" of the tribunal, there were now three subsections in the first paragraph, one dealing with demarcation of the border, a second dealing with the regime for use of the disputed maritime area, and a new, third section referring to Slovenia's "junction" rather than "contact" with international waters. In addition, the provisions dealing with the composition of the tribunal had changed. Croatia and Slovenia would still each select one panel member, but in case of disagreement over the remaining three, Rehn, not the President of the ICJ, would pick the remaining three, drawing upon lawyers and legal experts. ¶3. (C) Commenting on these changes, Stier said that they had "complicated" and "confused" the negotiation. For example, the meaning of the word "junction" was unclear, and open to various interpretations. Croatia, he said, had accepted the previous Rehn proposal "with difficulty," since it already represented a significant concession from Croatia's desire for the ICJ to determine the border. The latest proposal had "changed the balance," making it more difficult for Croatia. At the same time, Stier acknowledged that Rehn had rejected the Slovene proposal to determine the border line on the basis of fairness (ex aequa et bono),but opined that this would probably mean the Slovene government would also find the proposal unacceptable. ¶4. (C) While seeing little prospect that Rehn's efforts would prove successful, Stier maintained that there was still a "window of opportunity" for Croatia and Slovenia to reach an agreement on the documents submitted in Croatia's EU accession talks that Slovenia had considered prejudicial to the border issue. Prior to the European Council meeting later this week, Prime Minister Sanader would be in Brussels on June 18 for a meeting of leaders of the European Peoples' Parties, while Slovene Prime Minister Pahor would be there for meeting of European Social Democratic Parties. This, Stier said, would provide a possible opportunity for the two leaders to see whether a solution relating to the documents could be worked out. ¶5. (C) Comment. Even the EC Rep in Zagreb has acknowledged to us that the Croatians would find it difficult to accept the latest Rehn proposal, and suggested that some further change might be needed to make it more attractive to the Croatians. Given the fluid negotiating situation, we believe that our position should continue to be to support the Rehn process, without expressing our backing for the particular formula Rehn is proposing, as well reiterating our support for any solution upon which the two sides can agree. BRADTKE