Frau Präsidentin, Herr Bundeskanzler, Herr Präsident des Europäischen Parlaments,
Excellencies, Colleagues, ladies and gentlemen,
It gives me great pleasure as a fairly new elected President of the Parliamentary Assembly to participate in this conference organised within the framework of the Austrian Chairmanship of the Committee of Ministers.
The question put, whether democratic Peace is an alternative, is unfortunately all the more relevant today in the light of events unfolding in Ukraine. When this conference was set up the title chosen was based on a more general academic approach. As a speaker today I have of course to refer to the crises, Ukraine and Russia being both member States of the Council of Europe.
Could we have avoided this crisis? Are the instruments at the disposal of the Council of Europe able to avoid such crisis?
Yes, as long as all member states respect their own commitments.
If, however, one member state unilaterally decides not to respect these aims and values, our instruments lose their efficiency.
The Council of Europe – established in 1949, is the oldest and largest European institution and unites 47 countries except Belarus. It was founded in the wake of the Second World War, by political leaders who shared the same firm resolve to prevent a reoccurrence of similar tragic conflicts.
From the very beginning as you know, our Organisation has been based on three pillars of fundamental human values - democracy, human rights and the rule of law - at the heart of Europe's future. The Council of Europe's standards are not, as often argued Western standards, but they are the standards of all member States. It is essential to understand that these values are not an aim in itself, but a means to ensure long-lasting peace and prosperity. By defending and promoting these values, the Council of Europe has contributed enormously to what Europe represents today – one of the most prosperous and democratically stable areas in the world.
But, here we touch upon the heart of the discussions today.
What we can learn from History – and especially from the aftermath of the First World War - is that it is not enough to win a battle. We must not only know how to negotiate Peace, but we must be able to maintain it.
"Ce n'est pas une paix, c'est un armistice de 20 ans". "This is not peace, it is an armistice for twenty years." This is how Maréchal Foch described the Versailles treaty at the end of World War One.
If you ‘negotiate' peace as they did in 1918 - excluding parties -, you end up with another war pending. This was the case with the Second World War.
The founders of the Council of Europe learned this lesson. They understood the need to cooperate, to sit down together and discuss. They agreed that some compromises would have to be made, but also agreed not to compromise on certain principles. Their brilliant idea was to unite friends and foes around a set of common values and principles, universal in nature, and then to apply them to every human being.
Enemies who had fought each other for decades and even centuries created a platform to defend peace together. Germany joined the Council of Europe as early as July 1950. Austria in April 1956. And today we can see how important it was and how important it still is.
Time has shown that besides "hard security" based on national defence and collective defence organisations, "soft security" has an important role to play in building long-lasting peace. This soft security is based largely on sharing, defending and promoting our common standards of human rights, the rule of law and democracy.
Yes, globally Europe is a continent of peace.
However, it is not always a smooth ride and not only the current events remind us.
In 1989 the Council of Europe had to face one of its greatest challenges: the fall of the Berlin wall which it successfully turned into an inspiration.
After the fall of the Berlin wall our Organisation played a major role in European affairs, assisting the countries of Central and Eastern Europe to set-up their democratic institutions and thereby stabilising Europe in the wake of its largest upheaval since 1945. In fact, it was in 1989 when "soft security" in Europe became more important than the "hard security" of the Cold War days.
The Council of Europe decided to open its doors to Central and Eastern European countries. There were two viewpoints at the time: take them in and help them develop Democracy or keep them outside until they have reached an acceptable standard. It was a delicate choice, but also a choice based on principle.
Questions such as whether Russia or other Central and Eastern European countries should be members of the Council of Europe, should in fact never have arisen as they are part of the Europe of values when they have chosen to respect the principles of human rights, democracy and the rule of law.
I believe the Council of Europe made the right choice in rapidly welcoming Central and Eastern European countries. It is far better to assist from the inside than to patronise from the outside. By choosing an inclusive approach it accompanied the democratic building process with the very aim of building a Europe without dividing lines.
This is based on our common standards and values.
But, is this sufficient to guarantee peace? Unfortunately not. However important common standards and values may be, they are not a miraculous solution which can prevent terrible events from occurring.
There is much instability (the Arab Spring) and even war (Syria) at our borders. Inside Europe, we have not succeeded in avoiding serious crises. The current tense events in Ukraine remind us that we cannot always prevent crises, some of them extremely serious. The dissolution of the Soviet Union was punctuated by conflicts and today we are witnessing further conflicts.
The Council of Europe has an important role to play: it has instruments which are relevant and which should be used to build or rebuild Democracy. Ukraine suffers from a deep-rooted mistrust in its institutions and above all from a lack of constitutional order that is able to guarantee the stability of these institutions. The Council of Europe and its Parliamentary Assembly are ready to offer every assistance to Ukraine to rebuild trust in its democratic institutions. This is the key to democratic peace to which we all aspire. I believe that Ukraine's internal crisis could possibly have been avoided if the stability of Ukraine's democratic institutions had already been completed.
For me it is essential to continue to communicate with all member States, in this case with Russia and Ukraine. That is why two weeks ago I had a long phone conversation with the President of the Russian Duma Sergey Naryshkin as well as with Ukrainian Verkhovna Rada President Oleksandr Turchinov. This approach of dialogue and power of diplomacy is supported by UN Secretary General Ban ki-Moon with whom I had a meeting a week ago. Next Friday I will be accompanied by the Presidential Committee of the Parliamentary Assembly to Kiev, to Donetsk and if possible to Crimea.
As far as the crisis between Ukraine and Russia is concerned, it is important to remember that there are rules, and that these rules need to be respected. Membership of the Council of Europe is based on commitments. Joining the Council of Europe is a choice, but being a member implies the respect of the rules of the house. These rules exclude recourse to threats, be they economic or the use of force.
Tomorrow we may well see Russia walk out of the Council of Europe, or the credentials of its parliamentary delegation to PACE may be challenged… What could be the consequences of this?
Are we heading towards yet another frozen conflict in Europe? Will Russia seek to expand its territory and or spheres of influence further? How can our soft security instruments protect our member states?
It is our duty to remind all our member states of the rules and to speak out over what is inacceptable. We want to do it in an open and frank discussion. The First World War taught us that imposing a solution is fatally flawed.
The fall of the Berlin Wall incited politicians and philosophers, as Francis Fukuyama, to proclaim the "End of History", or, rather, the end of the world order based on separation lines, mutual lack of trust and the geostrategic chess play despising the value of the individual. But the ongoing crisis in Ukraine clearly shows that while being idealistic in our wish to secure a Europe without dividing lines, we have to remain realistic. Our standards and values are never acquired once and for all. It is an ongoing daily quest.
Yes, we believe at the Council of Europe that democratic peace is an alternative. It is indispensable but not sufficient. You need a genuine Democracy respecting Human Rights and the Rule of law.
Vielen Dank