Saturday, 22nd March 2008
Partnership for Peace
Membership 'will not impinge on neutrality'
The government's decision to apply to re-join the Partnership for Peace (PfP) was in Malta's best interest and would not impinge in any way on the country's neutrality, Foreign Minister Tonio Borg said yesterday.
The PfP is a programme of bilateral cooperation between individual partner countries and Nato. It allows partner countries to build up an individual relationship with Nato, choosing their own priorities for cooperation.
Malta had already joined the PfP in 1995 but membership was withdrawn by the Labour government when it was elected in 1996. Speaking to The Times, Dr Borg explained that, since then, Malta has lost out on training for the Armed Forces of Malta, given its natural insularity as an army of a small country.
The reactivation of Malta's membership was Prime Minister Lawrence Gonzi's proposal, Dr Borg said. He said there were a number of reasons for the decision, including the gaining of access to certain documents and participation in debates within the European Union.
"We have been experiencing difficulties within the organs of the European Union concerning the debates relating to defence and sometimes even foreign policy because of our non-membership of the Partnership for Peace. This is why all neutral countries in the EU joined the PfP, with the exception of Malta and Cyprus. Malta was finding it difficult to obtain Nato documents on defence matters and it is important for Malta to participate fully in all meetings and get access to all documents," he said.
"Moreover, it is an excellent opportunity for the AFM to be outward-looking in training and joint exercises and will diminish the natural insularity of an armed force of a small country. These were the two main reasons why the government saw it important and in the country's best interest to reactivate Malta's PfP membership."
Dr Borg said that since the last time Malta was a member, even Switzerland, the most neutral country in the world, joined the PfP.
He explained that each member drafts its own individual programme. "We will not be involved in military operations. We will be involved in training, in joint exercises, humanitarian aid, exercises in search and rescue areas, and management of crisis in natural disasters. These are very similar to the programme which we had drafted and agreed to way back in 1995."
Asked about the timing of such a decision, Dr Borg said there will be a summit in April during which Malta's application will be considered.
"The decision to reactivate Malta's membership will not impinge in any way on the country's neutrality, especially since Switzerland and Russia are also members of the PfP. It is in Malta's interest to join because we felt that we now have a better atmosphere as EU member states to discuss certain matters and we thought it was stupid that our non-membership should be such an obstacle especially in view of the procedural difficulties we were encountering."
Contacted for the Labour Party's reaction to the decision, acting leader Charles Mangion said the opposition was completely unaware of the government's intention to reactivate Malta's membership, saying this lack of consultation seemed to be the government's new way of conducting politics.
"The government did not inform us about the implications of PfP membership and there was no parliamentary debate on the matter. Since the Labour government pulled Malta out in 1996, we have never heard anything about it. The Nationalist Party did not include this in its electoral manifesto, not even as part of its foreign policy. The implications and the long-term effects this will have on our country are important for us to know. We believe it compromises Malta's neutrality as enshrined in the Constitution," he said.
Dr Mangion said the MLP did not agree with Malta's PfP membership and this was not "on the MLP's agenda".
Asked about the lack of consultation, Dr Mangion said he received a call from Dr Borg informing him about the government's decision to reactivate Malta's membership "and that was it".
There are 23 members in the PfP including Austria, Croatia, Finland, Switzerland, Russia, Sweden and Ireland, among others.
Meanwhile, the United Kingdom and the United States have reacted positively to the government's decision. British High Commissioner Nick Archer said: "The UK is delighted by Malta's decision to re-enter PfP. The key thing for us is that Malta will be able to participate more fully in European Security and Defence Policy (ESDP) activity, which means that it can in future make a bigger contribution to keeping Europe safe and to the EU's effort to create a more peaceful world."
On his part, US Acting Under Secretary of State for Political Affairs Daniel Fried said: "The United States welcomes Malta's decision to request reactivation of its cooperation with Nato's Partnership for Peace (PfP) and the Euro-Atlantic Partnership Council. These institutions make a valuable contribution to Euro-Atlantic security and dialogue. PfP has effectively strengthened relationships between states in Europe and North America, increased practical cooperation and underlined our common commitment to democratic principles."
RSS
Comments
Malta as a nation will benefit trough such schemes, being, more involvement in Nato issues, security on a global front and also the feeling of not being excluded and finally giving our share of commitment to the rest of the world.
Let us not forget that we have a group of dedicated and committed soldiers that have willingly signed a contract to serve Malta on such matters, being training exercises abroad and if the need arises also serve in peace keeping missions.
None of us forced these C 'Special Duties' Company soldiers to sign in. They all signed with great maturity and dedication, they want to get on with it and do the job they have always trained for. Soldiering is a vocation and as such they need to perform.
Let me thank this group of 120men and women who are doing an outstanding job and occasionally they feel sandwitched between our political parties. And I am sure that the majority of the Maltese people like myself feel honoured and proud with our Armed Forces.
Alfred Sant had suspended Malta’s participation in the PfP without any debate in parliament - 48 hours after the general election. This he did at the same time that Switzerland joined the PFP even though he crusaded in favour of a partnership with the EU and for a Switerland in the Mediterranean. How more strange can you get. Once again I ask , like many before me have - what’s the big deal? - Do you honestly know what the PFP stands for and could someone explain to me what the hell is wrong with us people to keep this constant division on anything which smells of foreign engagement.
In the last election, the PN kept this matter under wraps - one wonders why?
The "fuss" is about the fact that the Gov. took a decision which is, at best, constitutionally "dubious" without any notice, at a time when parliament has not even been convened, without any debate and without any consultation.
This is not the way democratic governments behave.
A reminder in 1987 the MLP agreed to amend the constitution for the simple reason that it agreed that to govern without a majority was a travesty to the democracy, and for your education that only happened in 1981 & 1987. By ignoring the facts does not mean you are right.
Also could someone explain to me what is the meaning of neutrality in 2008? We are neutral between which states and why?
The irony of it all is that the people who will mostly be affected by this decision - i.e. the AFM personnel who do a great job in this country are the ones who support this decision the most. They wanted it 10 years ago when Dr. Fredu's first decision was to take us out of it two years after. Remember the fear of the body bags and the articles written by the left-wing socjalisti. most of whom are still populating the Labour Party today. Always fear, fear, fear like the case of the EU, the Euro and everthing else. No No No and Don't Don't Don't.
I'm sure there will be a discussion in Parliament but who on earth would vote against something like the PFP which is there to help us in any way and in whatever way we would like.
For those who do not remember the 80s when the socjalisti gave 'gieh ir-repubblika' to the worst dictators in human history should also recall that it was the so called 'blood brothers' of that time who came to attack us with their guns and who were based in Malta under the pretext of humanitarian aid. I do not recall any consultations or referenda at that time. Today they are sending us more presents in the form of thousands of klandestini - but I do not hear any complaints on the Libyan regime. The PFP is a problem.
Time to move guys on as there are many other more problems lining up over the horizon. These include security. Wake up to the 21st century of global terrorism, mass illegal immigration and cyberspace war. Neutrality is a buzzword of the past, which has an expiry date in the 90s.
It goes to the very heart of whether Malta is a constitutional democracy in name only or in fact.
Is it acceptable for the Government to take decisions of - at best - "dubious" constitutional validity without any prior notice, at a time when Parliament has not even been convened and without any debate or consultation whatsoever?
I think not - not if we value our constitution and the safeguards that make Malta a true democracy.
The Gov should realise that it has erred badly and reconsider - its democratic credentials are at stake.
The 2008 election was a race between PN and MLP. It was a close result, granted, but PN obtained more votes and therefore has the full legal and moral right to govern till 2013. Lawrence Gonzi has the same right to govern as he had before the 2008 elections and this has been acknowledged by MLP. It has never been the PN’s style to abuse its right to govern or rule by dictat. Dialogue and discussion will remain the hallmark of PN in government.
It is wrong that Labour sympathisers should question the legitimacy of the government and attempt to force the country into a prolonged five year electoral campaign – the country needs to move on.
AFM personnel will not be going to Iraq or any other 'dangerous' place and nor will they be taking orders from foreign sergeants.
For heaven's sake, let's grow up!
This is a golden opportunity for the country as a whole and for the AFM in particular to form part of the outside world and be considered an equal and not a pariah.
Dear Mr. Fenech...somehow you people from the PN always mention the 1981 to 1987 as you said that the government of the day had 4500 votes less...but what you are forgetting to mention, that at the time the constitution was that a government is elected on the number of seats....(agreed by both parties) unlike today and in the 90's when a labour government was elected with more than 51% of the vote only to get 3 seats less then the opposition of your party at the time...Do you remember that.......Mr. Fenech.
And then you ended up with this nice quote......Let both parties strive to make a genuine effort to move forward instead of bickering about what should or shouldn’t have been!...How nice it sound coming from a guy like you...just wondering what if Labour won the election, as to what your comments would be then!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
"The Government is doing the right things at the right time. This government is ruiling Malta. And what the government says goes. OK?"
As far as I know that is totalitarianism. You should learn a thing or two about the power of the people in a modern democracy and a little bit about constitutional supremacy.
I honestly hope that you did not mean what you have written. I will give you the benefit of the doubt.
I think it is also irresponsible governance to decide on such an important issue of foreign policy and defence unilaterally. I am positive that if the MLP had been in government and did the same thing, all hell would break loose.
If it is thoroughly proven that this membership will indeed not impinge on Malta's neutrality I am still against it in principle.
Don't get me wrong. I full-heartedly believe in peace. But I don't think our soldiers should be sent to clean up the pieces of a war (e.g. the Iraq war) which more than half the world marched against 5 years ago. A war which destroyed hundreds of thousands of lives and created even more terrorists and fundamentalists.
No, I don't think we should be part of that....but "together", it seems, everything is possible.
PS: Shouldn't we make our country better before we delve into the realm of European Security and Defence Policy (ESDP)??
Let both parties strive to make a genuine effort to move forward instead of bickering about what should or shouldn’t have been!
This uniltaral action, taken before parliament has even convened and without any debate or consultation whatsoever is a clear indication that Dr Gonzi's fine words about the PN "learning" from the recent vote are just that- words.
It is clear he means to go on just as before, railroading over public opinion.
What's the betting the famous reform of MEPA will go the same way?
PM Lawrence Gonzi never mentoined once this so-called genius action of the Maltese Government.
Does the PM knows that he only have 1,500 votes in favour so as to govern.
This is the slighest margin in Maltese Politics and then how he decides this when he doesn't have the 50% plus one.
So I give PM Gonzi an advice and retire this infamous action.