Greece will not vote for the Bakoyannis report on Kosovo

The issue of the recognition of Kosovo returns to the public debate in Athens and Cyprus. The occasion was Dora Bakoyannis’s report on Kosovo’s accession to the Council of Europe.

The report did not provoke a series of criticisms and even attacks against Dora Bakoyannis, with the Cypriot one at the forefront, while Megaro Maximou and the Ministry of Foreign Affairs distanced themselves clearly, even declaring that Greece at the level of Foreign Ministers will abstain from the vote.

Gerapetritis and Marinakis

More specifically, Giorgos Gerapetritis was the first to state sharply the differentiation of Athens, even noting that the vote in the Parliamentary Assembly is not binding but the Council of Ministers and “at this stage the Greek government will abstain from this vote”. He pointed out that Greece “remains in the foreign policy of principles. We do not change our opinion unless the facts on the basis of which the decisions are made change. We will continue in this logic of principles.”

Asked about it on Monday, the government representative, Pavlos Marinakis, took the baton, who fully adopted Gerapetritis’ position, stressing that “Greek positions remain the same as they have been throughout time. We want the differences between the two States to be resolved, as provided for in the previous Agreements. Greek foreign policy has not changed, it remains the same. The same position that has existed throughout time. And I think it is something that has been reflected at all levels and at the level of the Greek Minister of Foreign Affairs George Gerapetritis. And this is what expresses the Greek position absolutely”.

Bakoyannis

Although Megaro Maximou and the Ministry of Foreign Affairs distance themselves from the Bakoyannis report, the ND MP herself defends her positions, even saying in an interview with (Politis) that she is receiving a “far-right attack”.

In the same interview, he also notes that “the Report is not about the status of Kosovo, nor whether Kosovo is a state. If the mandate we had from the Council of Ministers was to give my opinion or to give the opinion of the Assembly as to whether Kosovo is a state or not, then I would never have submitted this Report, because the position is not mine it is the position of Greece, which does not recognize Kosovo. So, we are not talking about status in this Report. This Report is only about human rights and how they are implemented by the rule of law within Kosovo.”

Bakoyannis in her article in “Vima” states that “the conclusion does not take a position on the issue of recognition of Kosovo. It simply highlights the need to protect the human rights of 2 million people living on European soil.”

At the same time, he argues that “society and the political system in Greece and Cyprus must fully understand that Kosovo and Cyprus are two completely different cases. After all, the International Court of Justice in The Hague, as early as 2010, has ruled that there is no question of parallelism between the two issues.”

For Dora Bakoyannis, “the parallel between Kosovo and Cyprus is completely unfounded and nationally dangerous”.

Dendias distinguishes between Kosovo and Cyprus

Nikos Dendias had also made the distinction between the Cypriot case and the Kosovo case many times as Minister of Foreign Affairs. And according to his earlier positions, Dendias had stated that the perception that the case of recognition of Kosovo has analogies with the occupied northern Cyprus is not accurate (Delphi Forum 2023), repeatedly noting that “there is a decision of the International Court of Justice that verbatim clearly distinguishes and differentiates the two cases”.

Cyprus

Cyprus, with one MP from AKEL and one from DIKO, who participated in the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe, voted against the report and the representative of the Cypriot Ministry of Foreign Affairs, for his part, Theodoros Gotsis, underlined that Cyprus remains consistent in its long-standing positions “fully committed to respecting the sovereignty and territorial integrity of all states” and therefore “does not recognize unilaterally declared independence”.

AKEL, in its announcement on April 18, noted that “the decision of the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe to invite Kosovo to become a member of the CoE causes serious concerns about the risks and the precedent it creates in relation to illegal separatist entities. Those who have supported the relevant Resolution must reflect on their responsibilities for the dangers arising from the encouragement of separatist movements both in Europe and in the world.”

He also underlines that “the Republic of Cyprus, a victim of a violation of its sovereignty and territorial integrity by the occupying power and the pseudo-state, has two reasons to be a completely consistent defender of international law”.

For AKEL, “the argument that each case is separate is hollow, since despite the differences of each case it is indisputable that the principle of territorial integrity is brutally violated, which is a basic principle of international law and the Charter of the United Nations”.

Even if analysts, politicians and diplomats try to separate the case of Kosovo from the case of Cyprus, it is clear that the pseudo-state is trying to take advantage of any development.

The pseudo-state

Indicative is the statement of the “MP” of the pseudo-state Oguzhan Hasipoglou, who considers the case of Kosovo and its inclusion in the Council of Europe as an example of the occupying structure and pointed out the difference of opinion of Greece and the Republic of Cyprus on the matter.

The debate on Kosovo in Greece

The debate in Greece over the recognition of Kosovo intensified in the background in 2021 when the US increased its urgings to Athens to recognize Kosovo, noting the need to limit Russian influence in the Balkan region. In the same year, Nikos Dendias, as Minister of Foreign Affairs, announced the upgrade of the Office of Commercial and Economic Affairs of Kosovo in Athens to the Office of Kosovo Interests.

A move that, even if the Greek diplomacy clarified that the position of Athens has not changed, was also translated as the start of a process that in the background could indicate – perhaps – recognition of Kosovo by Greece. Nothing however has been verified, so far.

In Pristina, however, they still maintain their hopes for recognition from Greece.

The statements of the Deputy Minister of Foreign Affairs and Diaspora of Kosovo, Kresnik Ahmeti, last January, who saw the possibility of Greece recognizing Kosovo because the relations between Athens and Pristina have become very close, are typical.

Obviously, the debate about the recognition of Kosovo is not new.

Those who oppose it link the case of Kosovo with the Cyprus issue and the creation of a bad precedent for Greek interests, which enables it to be exploited by the other side.

Something that, as it turns out, exists at the level of pseudo-state rhetoric.

Those who are in favor of recognizing Kosovo even under specific conditions emphasize the argument that the International Court of Justice in The Hague, which gave its opinion in 2010, clearly distinguishes the two cases as the declaration of independence of Kosovo did not violate International Law, since it did not arise from illegal use of force that was condemned by the UN Security Council and was not the result of an external invasion, unlike the Cyprus conflict.