Membership 'unblocks' Malta's problems within EU-NATO
Malta will be able to attend high-level meetings between the EU and Nato in Brussels after the decision taken by the Government to re-enrol in the Partnership for Peace (PfP).
Since its accession to the EU in May 2004, Malta has not been able to participate in regular meetings between the Union and Nato.
During these meetings, Maltese officials had to leave the meeting room since Turkey, a member of Nato but not of the EU, objected to the presence of Malta and Cyprus when certain classified information was being discussed.
A senior EU official told The Sunday Times: "We all know that Turkey and Cyprus are not the best of friends and Malta was being brought into the issue because it was the only other EU member state, apart from Cyprus, that was not part of the PfP. Now for Malta, the issue should be over and Turkey cannot block Malta's presence any longer."
In Brussels, it is recognised that both the EU and Nato would benefit from working closely together on a range of security issues, from counter-terrorism to the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction.
However, since the 2004 EU enlargement problem emerged, Nato and EU ambassadors discussed only 'joint operations' - of which there is just one, in Bosnia. A whole raft of other important subjects, such as Afghanistan, Iraq and Darfur were completely off their agenda, especially in the presence of Malta and Cyprus.
"Turkey objects to neutral Cyprus sitting in on EU-Nato meetings because, unlike most other EU neutrals, it is not a member of the PfP programme," the EU official said. Strictly speaking, Turkey is not forbidden from acting this way since according to a December 2002 agreement, EU governments which are not members of Nato must form part of the PfP programme to attend EU-Nato meetings.
This arrangement worked well at first as it allowed the former four EU neutrals (Austria, Finland, Ireland and Sweden) to sit in, since they are members of the PfP. However, the goalposts shifted after the 2004 EU enlargement as neutral countries Cyprus and Malta were not in the PfP.
Annoyed that the Cypriots rejected a UN peace plan in a referendum in 2004, Ankara started blocking Cypriot (and Malta's) participation in EU-Nato meetings.
The PfP currently has 23 members including Russia, Belarus, Switzerland, Sweden, Denmark and Croatia.
Malta joined the PfP in 1995, but the application was withdrawn a year later following a change in government. Malta was the only country that withdrew its membership since the start of this programme in 1994.
The Labour Party has strongly criticised Malta's reactivation of the application, saying it came about with no consultation and before Parliament was reconvened.
The PfP is a programme of practical bilateral co-operation between individual partner countries and Nato. It allows partner countries to build up an individual relationship with Nato, choosing their own priorities for co-operation.
The purpose of the PfP is to increase stability, diminish threats to peace and build strengthened security relationships between individual partner countries and Nato.
2 Comments
Post comment
Please sign in or create your Account to post comments.
Alfred Farrugia
Mar 23rd 2008, 20:00
If and when Malta becomes a member of the Partnership for Peace again, will it have the right to object to Turkey's presence in the relevant EU meetings for as long as Turkey continues to occupy a part of the European Union? The occupation of a part of Cyprus by Turkey amounts to the occupation of a part of the EU! Why were we Maltese not informed about Turkey's objections? What is the position of Malta concerning Turkey's accession process and the various chapters of the acquis? Has Malta expressed any reservations on Turkey's accession process while Turkey was objecting to Malta's presence in relevant EU meetings? If Turkey can object to Malta's participation in EU meetings while Turkey is still a Candidate Country, what is it expected to do when it becomes a member?
Robert Sant
Mar 23rd 2008, 15:54
Someone needs to explain to New Labour what the PFP is all about. The Labour Party has strongly criticised Malta's reactivation of the application, saying it came about with no consultation and before Parliament was reconvened. Could you also remind the readers that when the MLP withdrew our membership at the same time that 'Svizerra fill-Mediterran' joined in, they did that 48 hours after they won the election. I do not recall parliament being reconvened or any discussion with anyone. Labour needs to find a new leader who can shift the party to another level, take the middle ground and believe in it not by saying no to everything, not by isolating us from the rest of the world and not by doing any u-turns for the convenience of an election victory.