Toespraak van minister Timmermans bij de OVSE in Wenen

Toespraak | 11-07-2014

Thank you very much ambassador Greminger and thank you very much for inviting me to attend your session. I arrived here in an excellent mood this morning because it’s getting back to where I was in the mid 90’s and I have always enjoyed being here, but since you brought up the World Cup, you have certainly dented my good mood. And I tried to argue with the Argentinians unsuccessfully, that since they already have Messi, since they also have our Queen, since they even have the Pope, why do they want the World Cup ? But anyway, it’s too late. But I am absolutely convinced that they will get a threshing from the Germans on Sunday and I will certainly look forward to that.

I have to say, if I look at this organization and the affection I built up for this organization working for Max van der Stoel in the mid 90’s, that, if you look at Europe today, if you look at the world today, the need for the OSCE and its mission is back at the head of our agenda. Perhaps the OSCE had some difficult years in the past. We all know the tendency of member states to shop around in international organizations. The OSCE, for a number of years perhaps, was not on main street, but is now back on main street. And there are a number of reasons for this. First of all, and this is perhaps something that we will need to look into very closely in the next years, international affairs, politics, relations between nations are again dominated increasingly by morality, by ideas, by visions of society. The idea that ideology or morality has gone out of foreign policy because we all think alike, is something we need to get rid of, it is not the case. And the OSCE has its origins in error of huge confrontations between two ideologies, between two visions of society, between two visions of the world. And if we think back of those years, where the threat of war was real, where the ideological confrontation was worldwide, this organization found ways of discussing issues, of resolving issues, of looking for new ways out. And if we could do it in those years, there is no reason why we can’t do it today, no reason what so ever.

First of all, I believe that the idea of looking at the three different approaches is alive and kicking again. I think, if you want to look at security, you need to look at security issues, if you want to look at the relations between nations, you need to look at the economic issues and above all you need to look at the human dimension with remains a pivotal issue for all of us.

Turning to security: On a global level, it is unimaginable to me that there would be prolonged confrontation between Russia and the rest of the nations in Europe on security issues. We are in a bad place today because of Ukraine. But we do not need to be in a bad place tomorrow, the day after tomorrow, if you look at the global challenges we face all European nations basically have the same view of how the world issues should be handled. And we should not forget that there are powers in this world, just look at what is happening in the Sahel, look what is happening in the Middle East, look what is happening in Syria and Iraq, who have a fundamental hatred for how we live and how we want to organize our society’s. And when I say we, I mean everybody, every nation around this table. If we look closely, if we look long term, those are the real challenges we all face. That there are people who reject our way of life, people who want to attack our way of life and we need to defend that way of life, because it is so much stronger and so much more appealing than what they have to offer. But they will try and weaken us on this. And this affects every nation around this table.

Secondly: It was a rude awakening for all of us and it was to me personally unimaginable that a conflict on which strategic choices a nation would make in Europe, conflict between that nation and another nation would lead the other nation to the conclusion that it would be all right to simply steel part of that countries territory and incorporate it in its own territory.

I think what happened in the Crimea came as a shock to all of us, that even in this day and age, where one of the fundamental principles of this organization, even at the worst days of the cold war, was that we respected the borders of other nations. That this principle should be, so violently, be trampled upon today. And I can’t stress enough that this is a serious, serious blow to the fundamental principles of how we deal with each other in the OSCE area. And this needs to be redressed if you really want things to go forward in the future. I will add to that, as your chairman has said, I have been involved in the mid 90’s in the discussions in Crimea on the position of the Crimean Tatars. If you look at their history, you know, you’re humbled because they have suffered so much at the hands of cruel dictators through the ages. And I am afraid to say in my view, they are suffering again today, And I would urge the High Commissioner on National Minorities whose work I admire, to not forget about the position of the Crimean Tatars. And I would hope that at some stage, the OSCE observation mission can also be active in Crimea.

I have to add to that, that the situation in Ukraine is only possible today if you look at Eastern Ukraine, if you look at the frustration in a lot of the population in Ukraine, we have to be honest, this is only possible because for more than 20 years, the vast majority of Ukraine’s politicians was not interested in creating more wealth for the Ukrainian people, it was mainly interested in creating more wealth for themselves. And I believe that if there is support for a different way of doing business in Ukraine today or even going in other way, it is a result of deep felt frustration in last part of the population. The politicians did nothing for them, but only for themselves.

And I believe if Ukraine is to distance itself from that legacy, it needs to be done quickly and profoundly today. And I do salute president Porosjenko’s plans, because I believe he is the best hope Ukraine has today. It’s not just to resolve the issue with Russia but also to transform the country in a way that is I think possible. The example I use for my students and also in the Dutch Parliament, is to compare very briefly Ukraine to Poland.

The starting position of Ukraine and Poland 25 years ago, was not very different in terms of the level of economic development, at the level of the way people lived. I think Ukraine was even a bit ahead of Poland. Now look at the fundamental differences between those two countries. Simply because Poland made a very, very courageous choice in being transparent, in being accountable to its people, in being accountable to the international community in the way the country was run. That is how the risk of profound corruption was tackled, that is how the Rule of Law came about, that is how human rights got respected fully, that is how democracy was deeply implanted into the Polish society and in Poland today. And I could mention other Central European countries, but we just had a state visit to Poland, so that’s why I am thinking a lot about Poland. And by the way, my father as a child was liberated by Polish soldiers in The Netherlands, so there is a profound affection here.

Poland today is I think the most incredible example of a nation that was able to transform itself with outside help, but mainly because the people supported that idea. And I see no reason why this could not happen in Ukraine in the next 20 years as well. And I see no reason why there should be a threat to Ukraine’s neighbours. Poland today is a threat to no one. The result of what happened in Poland is that Poland for the first time in its history has no discussions about its borders, that nobody else but Poland’s people decide about its faith. And I don’t see why this should be withheld from the Ukrainian people. I also believe that the relationship between Russian and other European nations, Russia and all the nations around this table, be they in Central Asia or across the Atlantic, is of the essence for peace and security in the future. And I believe we stand before a fundamental choice, but a choice that cannot be made in the rest of Europe, the choice can only be made in Moscow. Moscow stands for a fundamental choice if it wants to be part of this developing global community that is based on the Rule of Law, on the respect for human rights, on democracy or it that wants to make a choice that is different and that will lead to confrontation with, what I think a confrontation that will weaken all of us, all of us, given the global challenges we face. And my appeal to the Russian Federation is, as a country where I lived and worked, as a country which I have seen go through incredible, the difficult transformation in the early 90’s, incredible challenges were faced.

I know the Russian people can do incredible things if they put their minds to it. But let’s understand that we are one community and Russia deserves to be part of that community, deserves not to be told how to organize itself, that’s entirely up to the Russian people. But strategic choices will have strategic consequences. And my country and other nations in NATO will stand firm for the security in territorial integrity and freedom of all NATO members regardless of what happens. So the confrontation can happen, it’s not because we want it, we’d like to avoid it, but we will not cave in to confrontation if that is the course Russia wishes to choose. And I believe, and this takes me to the economic volley, I believe there is a scope for a fundamental linkage of the economy of the rest of Europe with the Russian economy. Just look at the energy sector, energy is a huge potentially strong subject for interlinking between Russia and the rest of Europe. And I think we should use that opportunity to create mutually beneficial situations. That means that some European nations need to diminish their dependency on a single provider of energy. And it also means that other European nations need to provide that to these European nations. But it also means that structurally there can be a strong energy relationship, and the OSCE can contribute to that idea with other players in that field. And I believe reviving the second dimension for this would be a good idea.

On security, we were most successful in disarmament, talks at the heights of the Cold War, so there is no contradiction in putting disarmament higher on the agenda if there is political tension. And I would strongly argue that it is high time that we started talking about disarmament again also in this organization. It is very necessary to do so because I believe more transparency, less spending on weaponry that is outdated and related to the Cold War, more cooperation in terms of the challenges that we see worldwide is what we need. And I believe we need less nuclear weapons, we need less troupes that are linked with the Cold War, we need more transparency on what we are doing in the military field, we need more transparency about the development of new weapons. I think this is something the OSCE can contribute to as well.

And finally, from my part, the human dimension. It is not my intention as the Minister of Foreign Affairs of the Netherlands to lecture other people on morality or on human rights. But it is my obligation as Minister to point every state around this table to their obligations they entered into willingly, with their own sovereignty, ratified by their National Parliaments. And if I ask for respect of human rights, it is not because I believe other nations should do what we do, it is because I believe nations should do what they promised to do, what they engaged to do, what they lawfully went into. And I think that looking at our societies, we talked about the outside world, the temptation of fleeing into radical nationalism, into singling out groups in our society and giving them the blame for everything that went wrong, this temptation is back in Europe. It is one of the darkest sides of European history that whenever there is a crisis, whenever we’re in trouble, we don’t look at ourselves, we go looking for other people to blame, in our society and in other societies. So I am extremely worried about the fact that anti-Semitism is on the rise again in Europe. One would have imagined that this ghost of the past would have gone forever, but it’s back. I am extremely worried about Islamophobia in many of our societies, I’m extremely worried about the way we treat Roma and Synthi in many of our societies, I am extremely worried about using old symbols and old languages, I follow the news everywhere, referring to ages past of confrontation and dictatorship in Europe. And I’m extremely worried, ladies and gentlemen, about the way we treat sexual minorities in Europe as well. I am not arguing, and I had this discussion with my friend Sergei Lavrov many times, I’m not arguing that every nation should be have Gay Prides or to allow a gay marriage that’s not what we’re saying, this is something, you know, if I had gone to my grandparents 40 years ago and told them in 35 years’ time the Netherlands will have gay marriages, they would probably have called medical assistance to lock me up somewhere, because this was unimaginable in The Netherlands at the time. Now it is supported by 90 % of the Dutch population. I’m not saying this needs to be done in all nations, not saying we are imposing our values, but I do believe that every person in the OSCE area has the right for her or his rights to be respected on the basis of the agreements all of you went into. And I believe there is no more room for singling out gay people and blaming them for moral deprivation or for weakening the moral vibe of a country. There is no proof of any of this happening, I believe personal choices of people, the orientation they choose, should be left to them and should be respected by the State.

Ladies and gentlemen, I have been speaking too long, I’m sorry about that, but I want to finish with one remark: I strongly believe in this organization’s mission, I strongly believe in the future of all nations around this table talking to each other about problems, being open about their challenges, being open about their disagreements, but also understanding that only in the cooperative way we will be able to deliver this world into the hands of our children and grandchildren in a better state then it is today. And a new confrontation in Europe between nations that need each other in the future would be a great, great disservice to those of us who think that their children and grandchildren deserve a better world. Thank you very much.