EnlargeEU Newsletter
September 2009
Reforms in the Law on Civil Servants were put in front of Macedonia’s authorities as a main precondition for getting positive remarks in the EC Annual Progress Report. Therefore, the Ministry of Justice had proceeded with the drafting of changes and amendments in the existing law and made them open to the public and the members of the parliament. According to the minister of Justice, Mihajlo Manevski, the proposed changes will produce positive effects on the overall functioning of the Civil Service and thus all obstacles that prevented the Civil Service from being independent, autonomous and in serve of citizens will be eliminated.
Five segments that the Proposal focuses on:
• the range of civil servants;
• redefinition of role and competencies of the Civil Servants Agency;
• employment of civil servants aiming at shortening of deadlines and reducing
the duration of the procedure;
• mobility (advancement) of civil servants through introduction of internal call; and career supplements.
On 24th of August 2009, the Law entered in the parliamentary procedure for first reading in the parliamentary commissions. It was initially expected that the changes and amendments will be approved with consensus until 15th of September 2009. However, based on the initial reactions by the opposition and some prominent experts, who were determined that the changes and amendments proposed do not move lagging issues forward, the consensual approval of the amendments was under a question mark. Vlado Buckovski from the biggest opposition party (SDSM) says that it is illogical that Civil Servants will be provided with the opportunity to advance in the hierarchy starting from the lowest level up to the highest one, for a period of only five years. The first amendment discussion was characterized with rough debates accompanied by 80 amendments filed from the political parties. The main amendment filed by the ruling party (VMRO – DPMNE) had to do with removing of the article which states that the Head of the Civil Service might be discharged from the position if the Parliament does not approve its Report. Albanian parties’ main concern had to do with existence of mechanisms in the legal provisions which would guarantee implementation of equitable representation of all ethnic communities in the Civil Service.
Surprisingly, most of the amendments were accepted and the changes and amendments were approved with wide consensus. Both parties (ruling and opposition) were significantly satisfied with what was achieved. Furthermore, it was one of the rare situations when both sides appraised each other for being rational and constructive, giving priority to country’s interest for EU accession instead of daily political outmaneuvers.
At this stage, it can only be concluded that due to the achieved consensus, the new legal frame has strong political backing and is good enough to ensure depolitization. However, the next challenge will with no doubt be its full implementation.
Friday, October 16, 2009
Sunday, August 30, 2009
Failing to be Accountable; Failing to Meet the Benchmark: Macedonia’s Judicial Reforms
EnlargeEU Newsletter
August 2009
Filip Taseski - Residential intern
Failing to be Accountable; Failing to Meet the Benchmark: Macedonia’s Judicial Reforms
The reforms of the judicial system in Macedonia are crucial requirement for the start of the accession negotiations with the European Union (EU). This newsletter comments on the actual situation in this sector prior the 2009 EC progress report.
Brief Overview of Reform
The authorities in Macedonia continued with the reforms in the judicial system after the 2008 EU progress report was published. On August 5th 2009 in the daily newspapers the Government published a statement for its activities in this area for the pastyear. According to this, 15 new laws have been passed or are in a procedure to be passed that refer to the judicial system, like the new law on Court Service, Law for Lobbying, Law for Management of Confiscated Property, Law for the Public Defender, Law on the Financing of Political Parties etc. In respect to harmonization of the existing laws with the European legislation the country had showed significant progress.vMoreover, the country has continued with itsvefforts to enhance the institutional capacity of the judiciary. New institutions have been set to ensure more efficient due process of law. A new court of Appeals has started to function in Gostivar, new specialized Public Prosecutor was created to deal with corruption and organized crime, the new Administrative Court has been fully functional and ten graduates from the Academy for Judges and Prosecutors have been appointed to public prosecutors. The modernization process of the courts continued and reconstruction of the courts’ buildings and equipping the courts has been finished in Prilep, Tetovo, Veles, Strumica nd Ohrid. This project was conducted
with the help of the World Bank. Additionally the changes in the Law of Execution, the Law on Mediation and the decision of the Ministry of Justice to lower court taxes
and offer free court services to members of the lowest social layers improved the access to justice.
However, biggest defficiency in the Macedonian judicial branch remains the lack of human capital management. Although significant number of training programs for judges were conducted and the Academy is functional, still hiring and promotion of court servants (and the overall administration) is problematic.
Employments and rewards on political basis still occur. The Government is expected to
pass legislation dealing with this matter in mid September.
Another problematic area is the slowness of the judicial procedure. In
Novermber 2008 the analysis showed that there are 10 500 cases stuck in the system
and some of these cases are decades old. A month ago, the Minister of Justice stated that all judges that have old cases will face penalties. However, no judge faced penalty and the Judicial Council concluded that the judges perform their
duties in good faith.
Interference of the Executive Brach into the Work of the Judiciary?
Independence and impartiality are seen as areas challenging to secure in the Macedonian courts. Several events indicated problematic actions of the executive branch that could be seen as direct influence on the judiciary. Transparency Macedonia, local NGO focused on corruption, noted in its monthly report that the government violated Article 64 of the Law on Judicial Council. According to
their report “the Government reviewed the 2008 Annual Report of the Judicial Council’s activities at a session held on 25 April 2009, while the issuing Opinion adopted at the meeting was dully sent to the President of the Assembly of the Republic of Macedonia.” According to the existing law, the Government should not review the Annual Report of the Judicial Council and adopt opinions based on the report. The decision of the Prime Minister of Macedonia to call the president of the Appeal Court, Mr. Jordan Mitrinovski, to discuss the reforms (as pointed in the statement of the president of the court) is a sign of a direct attempt of the executive branch to influence the judicial system. The Government response to these accusations was that the purpose of the meeting was to discuss the ongoing judicial
reforms.
Conclusion
The overall conclusion contains better‐sweet remarks for the judicial reforms in Macedonia. The country successfully progressed in adoption of new legislation and invested a lot in institutional capacity. However, the judicial branch is still under tremendous political influence and faces severe corruption allegations.
Another problematic part remains the absence of an efficient human resources system
that will select, discharge and penalize judges, prosecutors and defenders etc on a merit base. As consequence, the reforms introduced fail to produce full independence and fail to hold accountable those who work in the system. Thus, as the Progress Report of the EU deadline is approaching it is more evident that the report will not contain more positive judgment of the judicial system than the one contained in the 2008 Progress Report. The reforms continued, but the judicial system is still inefficient and not fully independent.
Anderson and Cheryl W. Gray (Transforming Judicial Systems in Europe and Central Asia 2007) state that the principle issue is not ensuring greater judicial independence(although de jure might exist, but de facto may not), but to ensure judicial accountability, given the ne found independence.
Thomas Carothers, Promoting the Rule of Law Abroad: In Search of Knowledge, stated that the rule of law promises to move countries past the first, relatively easy phase of political and economic liberalization to a deeper level of reform.
August 2009
Filip Taseski - Residential intern
Failing to be Accountable; Failing to Meet the Benchmark: Macedonia’s Judicial Reforms
The reforms of the judicial system in Macedonia are crucial requirement for the start of the accession negotiations with the European Union (EU). This newsletter comments on the actual situation in this sector prior the 2009 EC progress report.
Brief Overview of Reform
The authorities in Macedonia continued with the reforms in the judicial system after the 2008 EU progress report was published. On August 5th 2009 in the daily newspapers the Government published a statement for its activities in this area for the pastyear. According to this, 15 new laws have been passed or are in a procedure to be passed that refer to the judicial system, like the new law on Court Service, Law for Lobbying, Law for Management of Confiscated Property, Law for the Public Defender, Law on the Financing of Political Parties etc. In respect to harmonization of the existing laws with the European legislation the country had showed significant progress.vMoreover, the country has continued with itsvefforts to enhance the institutional capacity of the judiciary. New institutions have been set to ensure more efficient due process of law. A new court of Appeals has started to function in Gostivar, new specialized Public Prosecutor was created to deal with corruption and organized crime, the new Administrative Court has been fully functional and ten graduates from the Academy for Judges and Prosecutors have been appointed to public prosecutors. The modernization process of the courts continued and reconstruction of the courts’ buildings and equipping the courts has been finished in Prilep, Tetovo, Veles, Strumica nd Ohrid. This project was conducted
with the help of the World Bank. Additionally the changes in the Law of Execution, the Law on Mediation and the decision of the Ministry of Justice to lower court taxes
and offer free court services to members of the lowest social layers improved the access to justice.
However, biggest defficiency in the Macedonian judicial branch remains the lack of human capital management. Although significant number of training programs for judges were conducted and the Academy is functional, still hiring and promotion of court servants (and the overall administration) is problematic.
Employments and rewards on political basis still occur. The Government is expected to
pass legislation dealing with this matter in mid September.
Another problematic area is the slowness of the judicial procedure. In
Novermber 2008 the analysis showed that there are 10 500 cases stuck in the system
and some of these cases are decades old. A month ago, the Minister of Justice stated that all judges that have old cases will face penalties. However, no judge faced penalty and the Judicial Council concluded that the judges perform their
duties in good faith.
Interference of the Executive Brach into the Work of the Judiciary?
Independence and impartiality are seen as areas challenging to secure in the Macedonian courts. Several events indicated problematic actions of the executive branch that could be seen as direct influence on the judiciary. Transparency Macedonia, local NGO focused on corruption, noted in its monthly report that the government violated Article 64 of the Law on Judicial Council. According to
their report “the Government reviewed the 2008 Annual Report of the Judicial Council’s activities at a session held on 25 April 2009, while the issuing Opinion adopted at the meeting was dully sent to the President of the Assembly of the Republic of Macedonia.” According to the existing law, the Government should not review the Annual Report of the Judicial Council and adopt opinions based on the report. The decision of the Prime Minister of Macedonia to call the president of the Appeal Court, Mr. Jordan Mitrinovski, to discuss the reforms (as pointed in the statement of the president of the court) is a sign of a direct attempt of the executive branch to influence the judicial system. The Government response to these accusations was that the purpose of the meeting was to discuss the ongoing judicial
reforms.
Conclusion
The overall conclusion contains better‐sweet remarks for the judicial reforms in Macedonia. The country successfully progressed in adoption of new legislation and invested a lot in institutional capacity. However, the judicial branch is still under tremendous political influence and faces severe corruption allegations.
Another problematic part remains the absence of an efficient human resources system
that will select, discharge and penalize judges, prosecutors and defenders etc on a merit base. As consequence, the reforms introduced fail to produce full independence and fail to hold accountable those who work in the system. Thus, as the Progress Report of the EU deadline is approaching it is more evident that the report will not contain more positive judgment of the judicial system than the one contained in the 2008 Progress Report. The reforms continued, but the judicial system is still inefficient and not fully independent.
Anderson and Cheryl W. Gray (Transforming Judicial Systems in Europe and Central Asia 2007) state that the principle issue is not ensuring greater judicial independence(although de jure might exist, but de facto may not), but to ensure judicial accountability, given the ne found independence.
Thomas Carothers, Promoting the Rule of Law Abroad: In Search of Knowledge, stated that the rule of law promises to move countries past the first, relatively easy phase of political and economic liberalization to a deeper level of reform.
Friday, August 7, 2009
Diversify, Supply and Secure: Towards energy stability in Macedonia?
EnlargeEU Newsletter Analytica, Thinking Laboratory | July 2009
"What are the priorities of Macedonia for the
development of the energy sector in the next 10
years? Does the new energy strategy secure the
Macedonian energy stability in the regional
environment? Is there an energy policy that
encompasses the energy supply and the energy
security, as feature of a foreign policy? these
are few questions that should be priorities in the
new Energy Strategy."
"In the energy supply three types of states are
important: energy producers, energy consumers
and energy transit states. When it comes to the
security of energy supply, as a small, landlocked
country Macedonia needs a transit relationship with
its wider neighbourhood much more than countries that
have access to sea waters."
At present the interest of the institutions and stake‐holders in Macedonia is focused on the stabilization of the domestic market of energy, which is caught in the web of domestic turmoil, like the dispute between ELEM and EVN, the changes of the Law on Energy, etc. At the same time the Ministry of Economy, together with MANU, has drafted new Energy strategy for the development of the energy sector in Macedonia until 2020. However, neither the draft strategy, nor the energy community in Macedonia have brought up the issue of the MacedonianIn the region of Southeast Europe (SEE) the new energy paradigm is being built around two major transit routes for natural gas – the Nabucco pipeline and the South Stream. The Nabucco pipeline is the EU answer to the increased energy dependence on Russia’s gas sources, diversification of transit routes, and the new geopolitical chessboard in the Middle East, the Caspian Sea and Russia. It has received an important boost with the signing of an inter‐governmental transit agreement between Turkey, Bulgaria, Romania, Hungary and Austria at the beginning of this July. On the other side South Stream, the Russian answer to the EU energy expansion, has already secured its support from the Balkan countries Serbia, Bulgaria and Greece, as transit countries. The outcome of these respective projects, therefore, will have far‐reaching implications both for Europe's long‐term energy security and for the strategic balance of power and influence in the Balkans. Having a central place at “the heart” of the Balkan Peninsula and the geopolitically important region of SEE, Macedonia has not managed to secure its place on the EU map of diversified energy sources, as a transit route for the natural gas flows from the East. In the past six months Macedonia has been shaping its energy future on the basis of the new Strategy for the development of the energy sector until 2020. When it comes to the market of natural gas, the Draft Energy
Strategy sees an increase of the consumption of natural gas up to 75% by 2020 in the industry and 61% in households. However, at the same time the Draft Energy Strategy understates the potential to develop the gas distribution and supply system. If all of its recommended gas projects become operational ‐ New CHP thermal power stations, Gas pipeline: Klecovce–Veles–Stip–Negotino and Negotino TPP, Gas pipeline and gas distribution in Tetovo, Gas ring around Skopje ‐ it is clear that the current capacity of the transmission pipeline of 800mcm will not be able to satisfy the increased demand for natural gas in the country. Therefore, it is the right time for the government to start considering other options to diversify country’s gas sources. Besides considering the Energy Community Gas Ring as the best option for gas supply from diverse gas sources, the Draft Energy Strategy should offer supplementary long term perspective for development of new connections to the planned gas pipelines of the SEE region. Incorporating EU energy policy objectives of competitiveness, sustainable development and security of supply, the creators of the energy strategy failed to frame Macedonian energy policy in the regional and international energy environment. Thus, the country once again is missing the opportunity to be a factor for the transit routes of the natural gas and to gain geopolitical importance in the new constellation of energy powers in the Eurasian region. However, the momentum is still not lost and the government can secure the gas supply by: prioritizing the natural gas as energy source in the country and encouraging the development of the gas market, and by more vigorous energy diplomacy for advantageous gas supply both with Russia and with the export countries of the Caspian region.
"What are the priorities of Macedonia for the
development of the energy sector in the next 10
years? Does the new energy strategy secure the
Macedonian energy stability in the regional
environment? Is there an energy policy that
encompasses the energy supply and the energy
security, as feature of a foreign policy? these
are few questions that should be priorities in the
new Energy Strategy."
"In the energy supply three types of states are
important: energy producers, energy consumers
and energy transit states. When it comes to the
security of energy supply, as a small, landlocked
country Macedonia needs a transit relationship with
its wider neighbourhood much more than countries that
have access to sea waters."
At present the interest of the institutions and stake‐holders in Macedonia is focused on the stabilization of the domestic market of energy, which is caught in the web of domestic turmoil, like the dispute between ELEM and EVN, the changes of the Law on Energy, etc. At the same time the Ministry of Economy, together with MANU, has drafted new Energy strategy for the development of the energy sector in Macedonia until 2020. However, neither the draft strategy, nor the energy community in Macedonia have brought up the issue of the MacedonianIn the region of Southeast Europe (SEE) the new energy paradigm is being built around two major transit routes for natural gas – the Nabucco pipeline and the South Stream. The Nabucco pipeline is the EU answer to the increased energy dependence on Russia’s gas sources, diversification of transit routes, and the new geopolitical chessboard in the Middle East, the Caspian Sea and Russia. It has received an important boost with the signing of an inter‐governmental transit agreement between Turkey, Bulgaria, Romania, Hungary and Austria at the beginning of this July. On the other side South Stream, the Russian answer to the EU energy expansion, has already secured its support from the Balkan countries Serbia, Bulgaria and Greece, as transit countries. The outcome of these respective projects, therefore, will have far‐reaching implications both for Europe's long‐term energy security and for the strategic balance of power and influence in the Balkans. Having a central place at “the heart” of the Balkan Peninsula and the geopolitically important region of SEE, Macedonia has not managed to secure its place on the EU map of diversified energy sources, as a transit route for the natural gas flows from the East. In the past six months Macedonia has been shaping its energy future on the basis of the new Strategy for the development of the energy sector until 2020. When it comes to the market of natural gas, the Draft Energy
Strategy sees an increase of the consumption of natural gas up to 75% by 2020 in the industry and 61% in households. However, at the same time the Draft Energy Strategy understates the potential to develop the gas distribution and supply system. If all of its recommended gas projects become operational ‐ New CHP thermal power stations, Gas pipeline: Klecovce–Veles–Stip–Negotino and Negotino TPP, Gas pipeline and gas distribution in Tetovo, Gas ring around Skopje ‐ it is clear that the current capacity of the transmission pipeline of 800mcm will not be able to satisfy the increased demand for natural gas in the country. Therefore, it is the right time for the government to start considering other options to diversify country’s gas sources. Besides considering the Energy Community Gas Ring as the best option for gas supply from diverse gas sources, the Draft Energy Strategy should offer supplementary long term perspective for development of new connections to the planned gas pipelines of the SEE region. Incorporating EU energy policy objectives of competitiveness, sustainable development and security of supply, the creators of the energy strategy failed to frame Macedonian energy policy in the regional and international energy environment. Thus, the country once again is missing the opportunity to be a factor for the transit routes of the natural gas and to gain geopolitical importance in the new constellation of energy powers in the Eurasian region. However, the momentum is still not lost and the government can secure the gas supply by: prioritizing the natural gas as energy source in the country and encouraging the development of the gas market, and by more vigorous energy diplomacy for advantageous gas supply both with Russia and with the export countries of the Caspian region.
Monday, July 6, 2009
Civil Society in Macedonia - Why Values Matter…
EnlargeEU Newsletter
Analytica
June 2009
The international and national non‐governmental organizations present in Macedonia pride themselves on the positive impact they have on Macedonian society. In defense of the importance of the work these organizations are doing they refer to theories that attribute a very positive role to civil society organizations. Civil society is often seen as the ‘cure‐all’ for many of society’s problems and more specifically for the well functioning of it’s democratic institutions.
It was the French historian and political writer Alexis de Tocqueville that ‘discovered’ the positive works of civil society on his trip to the United States of America in 1831¹. What he encountered was a flourishing civil society in which every social, political, economical, religious and ideological faction was represented. He spoke of the organizations in this civil society as “schools of democracy” referring to the positive effects these organizations had on their members ability to self‐organize to solve the problems in their community and, by doing so, to be better able to judge the effectiveness of politicians in dealing with problems on the bigger scale.
With his ’Making democracy work, civic traditions in modern Italy’ the contemporary author Robert Putnam points to the stark difference between the performance of regional governments in the north of Italy and the south of Italy which he attributes to the presence of a flourishing civil society in the north and the lack of civil society organizations in the south². The roots for the positive effects of civil society on democracy lies in, what Putnam calls, ‘bonding‐‘ and ‘bridging social capital’; with bonding social capital referring to intra‐group social ties and values like trust and friendship and bridging social capital revering to the social ties, the presence of trust and the willingness to cooperate between individuals from different ethnic‐ and socio‐ economic backgrounds.
The main problem with applying these popular theories of civil society and democracy to the Macedonian case is that there is no flourishing civil society in Macedonia³. The civil society like organizations present in Yugoslavia were very much intermingled with the communist regime and after the fall of communism civil society in Macedonia did not come to resemble the civil societies characteristic of the countries in Western Europe and the United States⁴.
Furthermore, most of the non governmental organizations present in Macedonia are not actually ‘grass rooted’ in society⁵. An often heard critique on Macedonian non governmental organizations is that they stop doing what they claim to do out of passion and commitment to solving the problems the moment the international donors close the money‐taps.
The authors Chambers and Kopstein mention that Putnam’s one‐sided positive view of the democratic effects of civil society stems from the fact that he compares the positive effects of the participation of citizens in the civil society with the negative effects of their non‐participation. Putnam’s civil society has to counter a society in which citizens are apathetic and threaten to lapse into anonymity⁶. But as Chambers and Kopstein write “sometimes the cure is worse than the disease”⁷ and unlike Putnam they focus on the ideological character of organizations in the civil society and on the values that these organizations promote to determine whether they have a positive or negative impact on democracy.
While the civil society of Macedonia is underdeveloped and the international and Macedonian non‐governmental organizations are not rooted in society we see that almost all of the latter adhere to, and are indeed inspired by, values of democracy and human rights. There are those organizations that fight poverty or strive for the rights of underprivileged minorities and those that are involved in ‘making democracy work’ in an even more direct way by for example providing trainings to local politicians or analyzing government policy.
And what’s more, many organizations in Macedonia focus on improving citizens’ capacities to actively participate in the newly decentralized democratic system and in society as a whole (in which endeavor the promotion of positive values also plays a vital role). And thus there is room to be hopeful for a civil society in Macedonia as Tocqueville and Putnam would (have) like(d) to see...
Analytica
June 2009
The international and national non‐governmental organizations present in Macedonia pride themselves on the positive impact they have on Macedonian society. In defense of the importance of the work these organizations are doing they refer to theories that attribute a very positive role to civil society organizations. Civil society is often seen as the ‘cure‐all’ for many of society’s problems and more specifically for the well functioning of it’s democratic institutions.
It was the French historian and political writer Alexis de Tocqueville that ‘discovered’ the positive works of civil society on his trip to the United States of America in 1831¹. What he encountered was a flourishing civil society in which every social, political, economical, religious and ideological faction was represented. He spoke of the organizations in this civil society as “schools of democracy” referring to the positive effects these organizations had on their members ability to self‐organize to solve the problems in their community and, by doing so, to be better able to judge the effectiveness of politicians in dealing with problems on the bigger scale.
With his ’Making democracy work, civic traditions in modern Italy’ the contemporary author Robert Putnam points to the stark difference between the performance of regional governments in the north of Italy and the south of Italy which he attributes to the presence of a flourishing civil society in the north and the lack of civil society organizations in the south². The roots for the positive effects of civil society on democracy lies in, what Putnam calls, ‘bonding‐‘ and ‘bridging social capital’; with bonding social capital referring to intra‐group social ties and values like trust and friendship and bridging social capital revering to the social ties, the presence of trust and the willingness to cooperate between individuals from different ethnic‐ and socio‐ economic backgrounds.
The main problem with applying these popular theories of civil society and democracy to the Macedonian case is that there is no flourishing civil society in Macedonia³. The civil society like organizations present in Yugoslavia were very much intermingled with the communist regime and after the fall of communism civil society in Macedonia did not come to resemble the civil societies characteristic of the countries in Western Europe and the United States⁴.
Furthermore, most of the non governmental organizations present in Macedonia are not actually ‘grass rooted’ in society⁵. An often heard critique on Macedonian non governmental organizations is that they stop doing what they claim to do out of passion and commitment to solving the problems the moment the international donors close the money‐taps.
The authors Chambers and Kopstein mention that Putnam’s one‐sided positive view of the democratic effects of civil society stems from the fact that he compares the positive effects of the participation of citizens in the civil society with the negative effects of their non‐participation. Putnam’s civil society has to counter a society in which citizens are apathetic and threaten to lapse into anonymity⁶. But as Chambers and Kopstein write “sometimes the cure is worse than the disease”⁷ and unlike Putnam they focus on the ideological character of organizations in the civil society and on the values that these organizations promote to determine whether they have a positive or negative impact on democracy.
While the civil society of Macedonia is underdeveloped and the international and Macedonian non‐governmental organizations are not rooted in society we see that almost all of the latter adhere to, and are indeed inspired by, values of democracy and human rights. There are those organizations that fight poverty or strive for the rights of underprivileged minorities and those that are involved in ‘making democracy work’ in an even more direct way by for example providing trainings to local politicians or analyzing government policy.
And what’s more, many organizations in Macedonia focus on improving citizens’ capacities to actively participate in the newly decentralized democratic system and in society as a whole (in which endeavor the promotion of positive values also plays a vital role). And thus there is room to be hopeful for a civil society in Macedonia as Tocqueville and Putnam would (have) like(d) to see...
The Name Dispute: an American Perspective
EnlargeEU Newsletter
Analytica, Thinking Laboratory
May 2009
By Nina Stroempl, Residential Intern
The name dispute between Macedonia and Greece has recently come up in US politics. The United States has urged both nations to work together to find a solution. But it is not so simple even in the US.
The name dispute is what caused Greece to block Macedonia’s NATO entry and threatens to block EU accession as well. Therefore many in the US feel this issue needs to be resolved as soon as possible.
Earlier this month 15 members of the US Congress sent a letter to Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and urged a speedy resolution. These members of Congress fully support Macedonia, and even called Macedonia on of the United States’ “most staunch allies and trusted partners”.
There are also members of Congress who tend to sympathize with Greece, however. 19 Members of the US Congress recently proposed a resolution to the name dispute all the while criticizing Skopje for “Anti-Greek rhetoric” that is damaging relations with Greece.
The Greek American community has spoken about the issue as well. They recently wrote a letter to President Obama urging him to reconsider the US policy of recognizing Macedonia by its constitutional name. Around 200 lecturers from 11 countries took part in writing this letter.
This letter is quoted as saying "We call upon you, Mr. President, to help - in whatever ways you deem appropriate - the government in Skopje to understand that it cannot build a national identity at the expense of historic truth,” and later states "We believe that this silliness has gone too far, and that the U.S.A. has no business in supporting the subversion of history."
On May 22, 2009 Hillary Clinton received an award from the Greek American Community and was asked about the name dispute. She reiterated the US stance that a solution that is acceptable to both parties needs to be found. She also said that the administration is very committed to this issue which was picked up early on.
"Obviously, this has to be resolved by the parties themselves, but we are urging that resolution. We think it is in everyone’s best interest. As you said, it would open the way for movement toward another nation joining the European Union, which we think promotes stability in the region, so we are very committed to doing what the United States can to facilitate that," she said.
Concluding Thoughts:
It seems Greece holds all the trump cards in this issue, leaving Macedonia with very little bargaining power. It looks like Macedonia will have to make more concessions than Greece, and is left with the choice of preserving its name (and many feel this is core to its identity) or gaining members to NATO and the EU. Macedonia says it is ready to compromise. Yet, the huge statue of Alexander the Great that the government plans to erect in Skopje’s main square does not seem to send that message. That,
however, is another issue.
Sources: The Sofia Echo, Makfax, Mina, Focus
EnlargeEU Newsletter is also available at Analytica’s blog: www.analyticamk.blogspot.com
Analytica, Thinking Laboratory
May 2009
By Nina Stroempl, Residential Intern
The name dispute between Macedonia and Greece has recently come up in US politics. The United States has urged both nations to work together to find a solution. But it is not so simple even in the US.
The name dispute is what caused Greece to block Macedonia’s NATO entry and threatens to block EU accession as well. Therefore many in the US feel this issue needs to be resolved as soon as possible.
Earlier this month 15 members of the US Congress sent a letter to Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and urged a speedy resolution. These members of Congress fully support Macedonia, and even called Macedonia on of the United States’ “most staunch allies and trusted partners”.
There are also members of Congress who tend to sympathize with Greece, however. 19 Members of the US Congress recently proposed a resolution to the name dispute all the while criticizing Skopje for “Anti-Greek rhetoric” that is damaging relations with Greece.
The Greek American community has spoken about the issue as well. They recently wrote a letter to President Obama urging him to reconsider the US policy of recognizing Macedonia by its constitutional name. Around 200 lecturers from 11 countries took part in writing this letter.
This letter is quoted as saying "We call upon you, Mr. President, to help - in whatever ways you deem appropriate - the government in Skopje to understand that it cannot build a national identity at the expense of historic truth,” and later states "We believe that this silliness has gone too far, and that the U.S.A. has no business in supporting the subversion of history."
On May 22, 2009 Hillary Clinton received an award from the Greek American Community and was asked about the name dispute. She reiterated the US stance that a solution that is acceptable to both parties needs to be found. She also said that the administration is very committed to this issue which was picked up early on.
"Obviously, this has to be resolved by the parties themselves, but we are urging that resolution. We think it is in everyone’s best interest. As you said, it would open the way for movement toward another nation joining the European Union, which we think promotes stability in the region, so we are very committed to doing what the United States can to facilitate that," she said.
Concluding Thoughts:
It seems Greece holds all the trump cards in this issue, leaving Macedonia with very little bargaining power. It looks like Macedonia will have to make more concessions than Greece, and is left with the choice of preserving its name (and many feel this is core to its identity) or gaining members to NATO and the EU. Macedonia says it is ready to compromise. Yet, the huge statue of Alexander the Great that the government plans to erect in Skopje’s main square does not seem to send that message. That,
however, is another issue.
Sources: The Sofia Echo, Makfax, Mina, Focus
EnlargeEU Newsletter is also available at Analytica’s blog: www.analyticamk.blogspot.com
Religious Teaching in Schools – practices in Britain and France
EnlargeEU Newsletter Analytica, Thinking Laboratory
April 2009
by Sonja Risteska, Residential Intern
In every country, no matter of the continent or the stage of development the implementation i.e. introduction of religious teaching in schools has caused heated debates. There have always been two opposing sides regarding this issue, the church or any other religious institution with its believers, strongly lobbying for it on one side; and the people who believe the church and the state should be separated, and that the church should not be involved in the education process. No matter which side someone will take, there are pros and cons on both sides and most probably the debate will remain a never ending one.
Practices in the EU
The practises around the world dealing with religious teaching are of course different. Even in the European Union the ways it is sanctioned differ quite a lot from country to country. For example, two of the oldest democracies, the UK and France, have totally different laws and practices regarding this issue.
France on one hand is highly famous for its recent ban on all religious symbols in the public primary and secondary schools, triggered by the headscarves worn by Muslim girls. This highly controversial law called, Law on secularity and conspicuous religious symbols in schools, was adopted in 2004 as an amendment to the French Code of Education that expands principles founded in existing French law, especially the constitutional requirement of laïcité: the separation of state and religious activities. France’s past is filled with clashes and wars between different religious groups (Protestants, Catholics, Jews, etc.) and for that reason in 1905 a law was adopted which separates the church from the state. What French children study in schools today is some sort of transversal studies about the religions in general through other subjects such as history, geography and literature. This can certainly not be called religious teaching. Religious teaching can only be taught in private religious schools and it is not mandatory.
In Britain on the other hand religious instruction and daily worship are statutory requirement in every school. This issue is dealt almost the same across the country with small varieties. For instance, in England schools have to teach religion but parents have the right to withdraw their children from all or part of the lessons, even in church schools. The school is not obliged to provide alternative lessons for those children. In Wales, schools are encouraged to teach children about "Christianity and the other principal religions in Great Britain" but there is no mention of secular philosophies. Scotland's national guidelines on religious and moral education (RME) say that, "while recognising the role of Christianity as the major religious tradition in Scotland, pupils should also be encouraged to develop understanding of and respect for people of other faiths and people who adopt a non-religious stance for living". What children are taught is not how to be religious but how to be religiously and racially tolerant and to have a better understanding and respect for the different communities that constitute the British society.
Common ground
No matter what it is called, (histories of religions, religious education, ethics, etc.) what the education authorities should do is teach children from early age about tolerance, dialogue, understanding and appreciating differences. This is especially important in multicultural societies for building a solid basis for peaceful coexistence of all different religious groups. In order to avoid any negative impact special attention should be paid to the educators who should be carefully selected from professionals in the field that would not attempt to manipulate the children by promoting certain ideologies. However there are no guarantees and certain dangers will always exist since young children are easily influenced and can be used in someone’s propaganda. Most importantly the responsible authorities should always put the children’s rights and wellbeing first; children should always have the opportunity to familiarize themselves with their religion as well as with other religions and the morals and ethics behind them.
April 2009
by Sonja Risteska, Residential Intern
In every country, no matter of the continent or the stage of development the implementation i.e. introduction of religious teaching in schools has caused heated debates. There have always been two opposing sides regarding this issue, the church or any other religious institution with its believers, strongly lobbying for it on one side; and the people who believe the church and the state should be separated, and that the church should not be involved in the education process. No matter which side someone will take, there are pros and cons on both sides and most probably the debate will remain a never ending one.
Practices in the EU
The practises around the world dealing with religious teaching are of course different. Even in the European Union the ways it is sanctioned differ quite a lot from country to country. For example, two of the oldest democracies, the UK and France, have totally different laws and practices regarding this issue.
France on one hand is highly famous for its recent ban on all religious symbols in the public primary and secondary schools, triggered by the headscarves worn by Muslim girls. This highly controversial law called, Law on secularity and conspicuous religious symbols in schools, was adopted in 2004 as an amendment to the French Code of Education that expands principles founded in existing French law, especially the constitutional requirement of laïcité: the separation of state and religious activities. France’s past is filled with clashes and wars between different religious groups (Protestants, Catholics, Jews, etc.) and for that reason in 1905 a law was adopted which separates the church from the state. What French children study in schools today is some sort of transversal studies about the religions in general through other subjects such as history, geography and literature. This can certainly not be called religious teaching. Religious teaching can only be taught in private religious schools and it is not mandatory.
In Britain on the other hand religious instruction and daily worship are statutory requirement in every school. This issue is dealt almost the same across the country with small varieties. For instance, in England schools have to teach religion but parents have the right to withdraw their children from all or part of the lessons, even in church schools. The school is not obliged to provide alternative lessons for those children. In Wales, schools are encouraged to teach children about "Christianity and the other principal religions in Great Britain" but there is no mention of secular philosophies. Scotland's national guidelines on religious and moral education (RME) say that, "while recognising the role of Christianity as the major religious tradition in Scotland, pupils should also be encouraged to develop understanding of and respect for people of other faiths and people who adopt a non-religious stance for living". What children are taught is not how to be religious but how to be religiously and racially tolerant and to have a better understanding and respect for the different communities that constitute the British society.
Common ground
No matter what it is called, (histories of religions, religious education, ethics, etc.) what the education authorities should do is teach children from early age about tolerance, dialogue, understanding and appreciating differences. This is especially important in multicultural societies for building a solid basis for peaceful coexistence of all different religious groups. In order to avoid any negative impact special attention should be paid to the educators who should be carefully selected from professionals in the field that would not attempt to manipulate the children by promoting certain ideologies. However there are no guarantees and certain dangers will always exist since young children are easily influenced and can be used in someone’s propaganda. Most importantly the responsible authorities should always put the children’s rights and wellbeing first; children should always have the opportunity to familiarize themselves with their religion as well as with other religions and the morals and ethics behind them.
Possible reform in NATO - "Consensus minus one"?
EnlargeEU Newsletter
Analytica, Thinking Laboratory
March 2009
Due to Greece’s veto Macedonia was not invited to join NATO at the Alliance’s Summit in Bucharest despite its success to meet all of the necessary membership criteria. Citing the principle of solidarity and consensus, the allies gave in to the Greek pressure and postponed the invitation to Macedonia. The invitation remains open, namely it will be handed over upon settling of the name dispute. These developments seem not to influence the vast support the country’s NATO membership enjoys among the citizens, which is still at 85,2 percent, according to the latest poll of the Institute for Democracy. However, not much progress has been made for settling the name dispute.
In light of these events the Canadian Defense Minister Peter McCay recently came up with a proposal to revisit the consensus process in NATO, namely to adopt a “consensus minus one” formula when admitting new members into the Alliance. This means that at least two countries would have to object the accession of a new member which would result in avoiding blockades motivated by (unreasonable) bilateral disputes, especially disputes that have no prospects in being resolved swiftly.
This is currently a prevailing issue because in addition to the Macedonia/Greece problem there are other countries which might face similar problems; such case is Slovenia that is threatening to veto Croatia. The result of “consensus minus one” would be effective isolation of certain member states of NATO. Accordingly Greece would no longer be able to impose its will to prevent Macedonia from joining NATO and all together undermine the enlargement process.
An Alliance such as NATO which in the post-Cold War period has sought to redefine itself and preserve its viability by moving into “out of area” operations should have an internal mechanism to deal with problems such as an obstructive veto. As an increasing number of countries join the Alliance, its security demands increase as well; in the Balkan region Macedonia is undoubtedly an important factor for stability. Macedonia could contribute greatly to NATO’s security objectives; this however can be done much more efficiently from within the organization.
PPRROOBBLLEEMM:: tthhee ccoonnsseennssuuss rruullee ccaann oonnllyy bbee aalltteerreedd bbyy ccoonnsseennssuuss
The former Macedonian ambassador to NATO Nano Ruzin claims that even if this proposal sounds very attractive, it would be very difficult to isolate Greece within NATO. It is obvious that Greece has its political allies; it can be argued that if there was enough political will from all other member states in NATO to admit Macedonia, this would have happened at the summit of Bucharest even without the “consensus minus one” formula. Therefore it remains questionable how efficient such formulas can be amid lack of political will within the Alliance.
However many prominent political figures have openly stated their support for Macedonia. For example the Former NATO Secretary-General Lord George Robertson has stated that it is a disgrace that Macedonia did not receive an invitation to join NATO due to Greece’s objections. Such statements together with the proposal of the Canadian Defense Minister should be greeted as extremely positive for the Macedonian case because they demonstrate that countries which have significant contribution to NATO such as the US and Canada are willing to support Macedonia. Therefore Macedonia should remain hopeful that before long all Alliance members will realize the mutually beneficial relationship between NATO and Macedonia, consequently overcome the name issue and thus contribute to the overall peace, stability and development in Southeast Europe.
EnlargeEU Newsletter is also available at Analytica’s blog: www.analyticamk.blogspot.com
Analytica, Thinking Laboratory
March 2009
Due to Greece’s veto Macedonia was not invited to join NATO at the Alliance’s Summit in Bucharest despite its success to meet all of the necessary membership criteria. Citing the principle of solidarity and consensus, the allies gave in to the Greek pressure and postponed the invitation to Macedonia. The invitation remains open, namely it will be handed over upon settling of the name dispute. These developments seem not to influence the vast support the country’s NATO membership enjoys among the citizens, which is still at 85,2 percent, according to the latest poll of the Institute for Democracy. However, not much progress has been made for settling the name dispute.
In light of these events the Canadian Defense Minister Peter McCay recently came up with a proposal to revisit the consensus process in NATO, namely to adopt a “consensus minus one” formula when admitting new members into the Alliance. This means that at least two countries would have to object the accession of a new member which would result in avoiding blockades motivated by (unreasonable) bilateral disputes, especially disputes that have no prospects in being resolved swiftly.
This is currently a prevailing issue because in addition to the Macedonia/Greece problem there are other countries which might face similar problems; such case is Slovenia that is threatening to veto Croatia. The result of “consensus minus one” would be effective isolation of certain member states of NATO. Accordingly Greece would no longer be able to impose its will to prevent Macedonia from joining NATO and all together undermine the enlargement process.
An Alliance such as NATO which in the post-Cold War period has sought to redefine itself and preserve its viability by moving into “out of area” operations should have an internal mechanism to deal with problems such as an obstructive veto. As an increasing number of countries join the Alliance, its security demands increase as well; in the Balkan region Macedonia is undoubtedly an important factor for stability. Macedonia could contribute greatly to NATO’s security objectives; this however can be done much more efficiently from within the organization.
PPRROOBBLLEEMM:: tthhee ccoonnsseennssuuss rruullee ccaann oonnllyy bbee aalltteerreedd bbyy ccoonnsseennssuuss
The former Macedonian ambassador to NATO Nano Ruzin claims that even if this proposal sounds very attractive, it would be very difficult to isolate Greece within NATO. It is obvious that Greece has its political allies; it can be argued that if there was enough political will from all other member states in NATO to admit Macedonia, this would have happened at the summit of Bucharest even without the “consensus minus one” formula. Therefore it remains questionable how efficient such formulas can be amid lack of political will within the Alliance.
However many prominent political figures have openly stated their support for Macedonia. For example the Former NATO Secretary-General Lord George Robertson has stated that it is a disgrace that Macedonia did not receive an invitation to join NATO due to Greece’s objections. Such statements together with the proposal of the Canadian Defense Minister should be greeted as extremely positive for the Macedonian case because they demonstrate that countries which have significant contribution to NATO such as the US and Canada are willing to support Macedonia. Therefore Macedonia should remain hopeful that before long all Alliance members will realize the mutually beneficial relationship between NATO and Macedonia, consequently overcome the name issue and thus contribute to the overall peace, stability and development in Southeast Europe.
EnlargeEU Newsletter is also available at Analytica’s blog: www.analyticamk.blogspot.com
The Abortion Debate - a heated and never-ending ethical debate
EnlargeEU Newsletter
Analytica, Thinking Laboratory
February 2009
The Abortion Debate - a heated and never-ending ethical debate
by Karmen Sumić, Residential Intern
Roughly speaking, there are two camps with two distinct conceptions on life. The pro-choice movement emphasizes the freedom of choice for women, while the prolife adherents wish primarily to protect the rights of the unborn child/foetus. There is strong correlation between the abortion issue and religion. Generally, abortion is preached as negative because it entails killing of a human being, yet many religious groupings concede for some exceptions. Abortion rights fall under the larger concept of reproductive rights, generally referred to as women’s rights, but these do not form part of the international human law. Abortion becomes a highly politicised term when the state starts interfering with abortion law reforms.
A New Abortion Law in Macedonia: A needed change?
Recently, there have been some street campaigns supporting the governmental strategy to award Macedonian women with at least
three children, which were in turn condemned by many pro-choice NGOs. Additional turmoil was caused by rumours that the
Macedonian Ministry of Health is drafting a more restrictive law on abortion in order to improve the population growth. Tighter
rules (e.g. asking approval of the male partner) would restrict women’s rights and might suggest a drawback for woman
emancipation in Macedonia.
So far, Macedonia has had a quite liberal abortion policy (Yugoslav legacy). The statistics by the Republic Institute for Health
Protection is not updated (circa 6,000 in 2006), but it still shows that abortions have been constantly diminishing in the last 20 years
(five times lower than at independence). The official data is also lacking estimates of the existent practice of illegally terminated
pregnancies and does not reflect the complexity of the problem.
For comparison, Slovenia, with an equal population rate of 2 million, is displaying similar abortion trends. Experts believe that
natality rate is not related to the abortion rate, as induced abortions are diminishing faster than natality is falling. Even the myth
that irresponsible young women abort the most is untrue. Rather, it is the socio-economic status of women which is to blame for
terminating a pregnancy.
Studies show that minority women have a higher rate of unintended pregnancies because of their marginalisation and
stigmatisation. Half of the Macedonian Roma women interviewed by the National Roma Centre have had one or more abortions.
The size of Roma families can be explained by poor use of contraceptives which in turn leads to high rates of abortions.
Who benefits from making abortion a highly-charged issue?
A negative aspect of banning abortions is the phenomenon of medical tourism - travelling to countries where abortion is easier to perform – which in the Macedonian case is difficult because of slim financial means and visa policy. The prohibition may lead women to seek illegal practices, where unsafe and risky quasi-medical interventions can even be life-threatening. As the praxis from other countries has shown, women can easier plan their pregnancies when the economic situation is favourable, i.e. with better employment chances, organised child care and an overall climate of well-being. These factors stimulate childbearing more than state-imposed rulings.
Anti-abortion groups have the right to express their views. Understandably, these views should not become hate speech towards the female population. The real question that should be posed is whether the new law can in reality favour the national interests or whether it will just discriminate women in an already highly patriarchal society. There is need to speak openly about these issues and to have a sound and balanced public debate.
Quick Facts: Macedonia 6,000 (Source: RZZZ); Slovenia 6,000 (Source: IVZ) World: 42 mio (in 2003); 19 mio performed illegally, 70,000 deaths (sos.se). Illegal in Malta, Ireland, Nicaragua, El Salvador, Chile…
Analytica, Thinking Laboratory
February 2009
The Abortion Debate - a heated and never-ending ethical debate
by Karmen Sumić, Residential Intern
Roughly speaking, there are two camps with two distinct conceptions on life. The pro-choice movement emphasizes the freedom of choice for women, while the prolife adherents wish primarily to protect the rights of the unborn child/foetus. There is strong correlation between the abortion issue and religion. Generally, abortion is preached as negative because it entails killing of a human being, yet many religious groupings concede for some exceptions. Abortion rights fall under the larger concept of reproductive rights, generally referred to as women’s rights, but these do not form part of the international human law. Abortion becomes a highly politicised term when the state starts interfering with abortion law reforms.
A New Abortion Law in Macedonia: A needed change?
Recently, there have been some street campaigns supporting the governmental strategy to award Macedonian women with at least
three children, which were in turn condemned by many pro-choice NGOs. Additional turmoil was caused by rumours that the
Macedonian Ministry of Health is drafting a more restrictive law on abortion in order to improve the population growth. Tighter
rules (e.g. asking approval of the male partner) would restrict women’s rights and might suggest a drawback for woman
emancipation in Macedonia.
So far, Macedonia has had a quite liberal abortion policy (Yugoslav legacy). The statistics by the Republic Institute for Health
Protection is not updated (circa 6,000 in 2006), but it still shows that abortions have been constantly diminishing in the last 20 years
(five times lower than at independence). The official data is also lacking estimates of the existent practice of illegally terminated
pregnancies and does not reflect the complexity of the problem.
For comparison, Slovenia, with an equal population rate of 2 million, is displaying similar abortion trends. Experts believe that
natality rate is not related to the abortion rate, as induced abortions are diminishing faster than natality is falling. Even the myth
that irresponsible young women abort the most is untrue. Rather, it is the socio-economic status of women which is to blame for
terminating a pregnancy.
Studies show that minority women have a higher rate of unintended pregnancies because of their marginalisation and
stigmatisation. Half of the Macedonian Roma women interviewed by the National Roma Centre have had one or more abortions.
The size of Roma families can be explained by poor use of contraceptives which in turn leads to high rates of abortions.
Who benefits from making abortion a highly-charged issue?
A negative aspect of banning abortions is the phenomenon of medical tourism - travelling to countries where abortion is easier to perform – which in the Macedonian case is difficult because of slim financial means and visa policy. The prohibition may lead women to seek illegal practices, where unsafe and risky quasi-medical interventions can even be life-threatening. As the praxis from other countries has shown, women can easier plan their pregnancies when the economic situation is favourable, i.e. with better employment chances, organised child care and an overall climate of well-being. These factors stimulate childbearing more than state-imposed rulings.
Anti-abortion groups have the right to express their views. Understandably, these views should not become hate speech towards the female population. The real question that should be posed is whether the new law can in reality favour the national interests or whether it will just discriminate women in an already highly patriarchal society. There is need to speak openly about these issues and to have a sound and balanced public debate.
Quick Facts: Macedonia 6,000 (Source: RZZZ); Slovenia 6,000 (Source: IVZ) World: 42 mio (in 2003); 19 mio performed illegally, 70,000 deaths (sos.se). Illegal in Malta, Ireland, Nicaragua, El Salvador, Chile…
Imagine, Create, Innovate European Year of Creativity and Innovation 2009
EnlargeEU Newsletter Analytica, Thinking Laboratory
January 2009
January 2009
Imagine, Create, Innovate
European Year of Creativity and Innovation 2009
Source: Official Logo of the EYCI 2009-01-16 © European Communities, 1995-2009
Every year the EU launches so-called thematic years to promote, educate, raise awareness and stimulate action on a chosen theme (area, topic). This year in Prague on the 7th of January the European Union introduced 2009 as a year of creativity and innovation. Through this thematic year, the EU aims to stimulate education and research, promote policy debate and policy development, raise awareness of the importance of creativity and innovation for personal, social and economic development, as well as to disseminate good practices. What is the focus of the EYCI 2009, and how can Macedonia engage in the EYCI 2009?
Focus of the EYCI 2009
Through organizing debates, events, campaigns, the EYCI 2009 will address a vast area of issues leading towards boosting creativity and innovation through the educational process; promoting innovation as the route to sustainable development as well as development strategies based on creativity and innovation; encouraging creative forms of self-expression leading to a promotion of cultural diversity; usage of information and communication technologies as tools for the above mentioned purposes, and much more.
Within the frame of the EYCI 2009, activities are being undertaken in the following large scale projects: Europe INNOVA, PRO INNO Europe, Energy Europe and Open Days 2009 – EW of Regions and Cities. A series of debates will be organized, with the participation of the European Policy Centre (one of the partner organizations of the EYCI 2009), addressing creativity and innovation in the context of education, public sector, cultural diversity, sustainable development etc.
The 8 visual elements in the EYCI 2009 logo represent the 8 key competences this thematic year aims to improve:
1. Communication in the mother tongue;
2. Communication in foreign languages;
3. Mathematical competence and basic competences in science and technology;
4. Digital competence;
5. Learning to learn;
6. Social and civic competences;
7. Sense of initiative and entrepreneurship and
8. Cultural awareness and expression.
(Source: Style Guide. EYCI Website - Europa.
Acquiring key competences while attending compulsory education and further proper training to prepare young people for their adult and working life, as well as lifelong learning are one of the many goals the EU aims to achieve with the EYCI 2009. By increasing creativity and innovation the EU expects to add value in a diversity of areas - from culture and science progress to acting counter the financial crisis.
Considering the global financial crisis, the appointed Ambassadors of the EYCI 2009 (professors, scientists, artists, writers, high representatives of big corporations such as Nokia and Microsoft) recommend directing the policies which aim to deal with the current economic and financial crisis towards increasing investment in research, innovation, human capital and education, underlining that it would be a fundamental mistake to cut education, research and development spending. They see continuum in the funding as a foundation for the future.[1]
How can Macedonia engage in increasing creativity and innovation?
The thematic years are organized for and in the EU Member States. However, Macedonia can follow the trend and organize activities corresponding to the EYCI 2009. The government can organize events and offer funds to promote, educate and stimulate creativity and innovation. Macedonians can engage themselves by using funds already available to through the FP7 program.[2]
“Creativity is a driver for innovation and a key factor for the development of personal, occupation, entrepreneurial and social competencies and the well being of all individuals in society.”
(Source: European Year of Creativity and Innovation Website. Europa. <http://create2009.europa.eu/index_en.html>. Accessed on 8 January 2009. )
[1] Conclusions of the roundtable of the Ambassadors of the European Year of Creativity and Innovation. EYCI 2009 EUROPA.
[2] For more info on the FP7 program and funds available through it, please see: EUROPA: CORDIS: FP7. EUROPA.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
