REPORT

 

Second Plenary Session of the Parliamentary Assembly of the Mediterranean

 

St. Julians, Malta 22 – 24 November 2007

 

 

Thursday 22 November 2007

OPENING OF THE PARLIAMENTARY ASSEMBLY OF THE MEDITERRANEAN

 

Welcome Address by Hon Anton Tabone, Speaker of the House of Representatives, Malta

The Speaker of the Maltese House of Representatives extended a warm welcome to the distinguished gathering of parliamentarians for the Second Plenary Session of the Parliamentary Assembly of the Mediterranean (PAM).  Hon. Tabone explained to the members of the Assembly that the agreement handing over Spinola Palace as the permanent headquarters of the Secretariat of the PAM would be signed the same afternoon by Hon Dr. Tonio Borg, Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of Justice and Home Affairs of Malta, and Mr. A. Radi, President of the Assembly, and that the Headquarters would be inaugurated by the President of Malta, His Excellency Dr. Edward Fenech Adami. Hon Tabone then thanked all those who had collaborated in preparatory stages of the Assembly and ensuring that the Spinola Palace would be ready to host this occasion.

The Speaker mentioned Malta’s past and ongoing commitment to achieving unity in the Mediterranean, and he reiterated how proud and honored Malta felt to be able to host the permanent headquarters of the Secretariat of the PAM.  Hon Tabone also referred to the important mission of the Assembly, and stressed its forthcoming role in promoting peace and stability, as well as economic prosperity for the Mediterranean people, suggesting that it would be important to create a Mediterranean investment bank for such purposes. Furthermore, he highlighted the need for better use of available resources, a joint approach to immigration, and reiterated that promoting intercultural dialogue would also be a fundamental aim of the PAM.

The Speaker referred to the unique character of the Assembly as the only forum to unite all the Mediterranean littoral states, and any vision of Mediterranean unity would require an all-inclusive approach under the auspices of the PAM by promoting cooperation and closer understanding. In this sense, he saw the Assembly not as a competing organization, but as a complement to the existing bodies dealing with Mediterranean questions.

Thanks were also expressed to the IPU for its contribution towards achieving the goal of establishing the Parliamentary Assembly of the Mediterranean, and finally to President Radi, for his continuous commitment to this project since its inception.

 

Opening remarks by Abdelwahed Radi, President of the Assembly

President Radi re-echoed the sentiments of the Speaker, and thanked him for his vision of the Parliamentary Assembly of the Mediterranean. In particular, he commented on achieving the milestone of having an operative permanent Secretariat for the Assembly at the Spinola Palace and thanked the Maltese Government for its contribution, generosity and unswerving commitment to bringing the PAM to Malta. Special thanks were also extended to the new Secretary General, Dr. Sergio Piazzi, without whose cooperation the inauguration of the headquarters of the Assembly in Malta would not have been possible.

The President commented on the historical process leading to the PAM’s establishment, which had taken 15 years since the first Conference on Security and Cooperation in the Mediterranean (CSCM) in Malaga in 1992, to get to its first working session, which was really an achievement. President Radi then spoke of the mission and future work of the PAM, stressing the importance of actions being visible. He thanked the members for attending and offered his encouragement and support for the geopolitical groups and work of the Assembly in the forthcoming plenary session.

President Radi read the apologies Mr. Pier Ferdinando Casini, President of the IPU, to the Assembly for his absence, and then proceeded to read to his introductory address to the Assembly on his behalf.

The President of the IPU pointed out that the Assembly was unique in that it was not attached to any other ongoing process, which meant that it was free to determine its own mandate, its priorities, and that it also had the decision-making power to adopt its own resolutions. Furthermore, he referred to the unique fact that each member of the PAM participated in its sessions on an equal footing, regardless of its size.

 

In his vision of the Mediterranean, President Casini thought that peace and security would be possible in the whole Mediterranean region through cooperation and negotiation, and such a wide and all-inclusive platform as that of the PAM could make an important contribution to this process.

Finally, President Casini also offered the IPU’s continued commitment and collaboration to achieving the goals set by the PAM, especially that of contributing to peace in the region.

 

INAUGURATION OF THE HEADQUARTERS OF THE SECRETARIAT

 The members were invited to Spinola Palace, headquarters of the PAM Secretariat, for the signature of the Headquarters Agreement by Hon Dr. Tonio Borg, Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of Justice and Home Affairs of Malta and H.E. Abdelwahed Radi, President of the Parliamentary Assembly of the Mediterranean.

The headquarters of the Assembly, Palazzo Spinola, was then inaugurated by H. E. Dr. Edward Fenech Adami, President of Malta. After the inauguration, H. E. Abdelwahed Radi, President of the PAM offered a reception to members of the Assembly and distinguished guests.

 

Friday 23 November 2007

The agenda for the day was adopted before handing the floor to the Secretary General Dr. Sergio Piazzi, who explained the role and activities of the Secretariat to the Assembly.

 

Address by Dr. Sergio Piazzi, Secretary General, on the role and activities of the PAM Secretariat

 

Dr. Piazzi explained that the PAM Secretariat was the administrative organ of the PAM, and its principal purpose was to assure the smooth functioning of the Assembly, guaranteeing amongst others the efficient management of resources available to the PAM, following up on the decisions taken by its members, as well as supporting and stimulating the activities of the Assembly, and preparing groundwork for the activities of the PAM and its members.

Furthermore, it is also foreseen that the Secretariat will assure administrative services to the various Committees and Special Task Forces, as well as liaise with other public bodies, academic institutions and civil society. Moreover, the Secretariat will provide a public information service, be responsible for press releases and development of a media network, as well as the creation and updating of the PAM official website, and securing sponsorships. The Secretary General also confirmed that the Secretariat would also act as coordinator for the Good Will Ambassador program of the PAM, as well as establishing partnerships in conducting activities with other organizations and public bodies.

He also distinguished the activities and functions of the Secretariat in supporting those of the Bureau, which is the governing body of the PAM. As such, the Bureau approves the accounts for the previous financial year of the PAM’s activities, prepares and coordinates the annual program of activities of the PAM and its Standing Committees, subject to the terms of the Statute, and with the support of the Secretariat. It also assists the President in his functions. The Bureau decides on membership or suspension from the Assembly.

The Secretary General suggested the launching an “Annual Day of the Mediterranean” and a PAM “Mediterranean Prize” as part of the PAM outreach strategy. He also stated that the financial situation of the Assembly would be presented during the afternoon session.

Finally, mention was made of the fact that the Secretariat had only a small staff employed on a temporary contractual basis (comprising 3 international and 2 local staff members), and that it was therefore essential for member States’ contributions to be made regularly and on time, which would allow regular employment contracts could be issued to ensure the continuity of the activities of the Secretariat.

 

Presentation of the Strategy Document “Building on our common Mediterranean Heritage” by the President of the PAM, Mr. Abdelwahed Radi

The President informed the Assembly that, at his request and that of the Bureau, the strategy document had been prepared as a working paper, containing the proposed work plan for the next five years and the calendar of the meetings of the Assembly and its respective Standing Committees. The President stated that he now felt it necessary to take the strategy document a stage further and develop a “common vision of the Mediterranean”, which would be complementary to the former and become the guiding principles of the PAM’s political work.

Citing the history of civilizations that had either peacefully co-existed or belligerently dominated the shores of the Mediterranean, President Radi felt that the Mediterranean region was of immense importance both to history, economic wealth and humanity and that the time was now mature for an era of peaceful and harmonious development through the creation of Mediterranean community. In his opinion, the drafting of a “Mediterranean Charter” would constitute an important instrument laying down the parameters of a peaceful, harmonious and prosperous community of peoples. President Radi pointed out that the second half of the 20^th century had witnessed the establishment of the European Union, and that the 21^st century could witness the creation of a Mediterranean Community, and serve as the vision, terms of reference and guiding principles for the work of the PAM.

The President reminded the Assembly that a divided region with an affluent North and poor South was a destabilizing factor for regional security. He emphasized, however, that the South had enormous human resources to offer, given its surplus of labor, which was urgently needed by the European Union. At the same time, he argued that Europe needed to align itself with south Mediterranean States to be able to compete with the new emergent economic superpowers of China and India. The President referred to the importance of creating investment opportunities in the southern Mediterranean through the establishment of a Mediterranean investment bank, and co-development projects.

President Radi also reviewed President Sarkozy’s initiative for the creation of a Mediterranean Union, and reiterated that it was important for the PAM to engage governments and executive organs in addition to national parliaments.

He then opened the floor for discussion to the members of the Assembly.

 

PLENARY DEBATE OF THE PARLIAMENTARY ASSEMBLY

There was general consensus amongst the members that one of the most important issue to be tackled was that of security, and that achieving peace in the Palestine-Israeli conflict was essential for the Mediterranean region. Nonetheless, this was not considered as the only border issue for the region. Reference was also made to the Turkey-Cyprus issue, Macedonia-Greece, the instability of the Mediterranean-Balkan States, as well as other conflicts close to the region potentially affecting the stability of the Mediterranean region as a whole.

Specific reference was made to the extreme conditions under which the Palestinian people were living and suffering, and the Assembly urgently called for a peaceful solution through active cooperation. The Assembly insisted on respect for human rights and human dignity and unanimously supported the realization of a “two States solution” to the Palestine-Israeli conflict,  and the so-called Syrian and Lebanese tracks. Reference was also made to attempts to bring the Palestine-Israeli conflict closer to a solution, e.g. through the Ankara Forum, established in 2005 in which Turkey had organized bilateral meetings with both Palestine and Israel, and there was widespread interest in the forthcoming Annapolis initiative launched by the US government. There was also suggestion and support for organizing a future event of the PAM in the Occupied Palestinian Territories (OPTs), or at any rate Jordan, to show the outside world that the PAM was prepared to lead by its actions.

International terrorism was also cited as one of the major threats jeopardizing the future stability and security of the Mediterranean region. It was suggested that this issue should also be considered in wider context of its root causes, which was exacerbated by the economic inequality between the North and the South, leaving southern States more vulnerable to terrorist phenomena due to poverty and lack of future for its youths.

Certain members felt that there was a need to ensure that cultural and religious differences amongst peoples of the Mediterranean should not be instrumentalized to distance people from one another, but rather bring about a better understanding of each other.

Mention was also made of the need to defend individual cultures from the effects of globalization, which was equated to the lowest common denominator whereby one language equals one culture. At the same time, it was also recognized that cultural diversity should include respect and tolerance for religious diversity of the region’s three monotheistic religions (Christianity, Islam and Judaism).

There was widespread regret that Israel, a founding member of the CSCM and the PAM, was not able to attend the Plenary Session. The Assembly urged Israel to attend future sessions and agreed that there should be a delegation to visit the Knesset, composed of both members from the south and north of the Mediterranean, to brief Israeli MPs on the outcome of the Assembly and promote enhanced partnership.

The Assembly agreed that parliamentary diplomacy, inter-parliamentary cooperation, participative democracy and the involvement of civil society would be among its tools for a peaceful and prosperous development of the Mediterranean region.

There was wide consensus about the need for co-development projects in the weaker southern economies, as a way of stabilizing migration pressures and brain drain on account of the exodus northwards. In this sense, the Assembly felt that it was important to develop durable, pragmatic solutions by forging forms of decentralized cooperation, at regional, provincial and local level. A Mediterranean investment bank could be an important instrument for attracting equitable foreign investment. It was suggested that economic integration was the precursor to the creation of an integrated region. Moreover, careful consideration should also be given to the human  rights of migrants.

In relation to the use of resources, the Assembly called for greater investment in alternative energy sources stating that current energy needs relied too heavily on traditional resources such as oil and natural gas. They favored increased use of renewable energy sources such as wind and solar energy, and also felt that the improved management of water was critical to environmental sustainability. Support was given to the Horizon 2020 Program for the decontamination of the Mediterranean Sea, but the Assembly also expressed its concern over the future of the Mediterranean in the light of the current and envisaged future effects of climate change.

Certain members felt that, in shaping the future of the Mediterranean, there was a need to learn from our experiences, and whilst the Euro-Mediterranean process had achieved modest results they should not be dismissed; instead the Assembly should focus on concrete problems, be realistic about the prospects of resolving them, but above all, remember the importance of considering what unites the Mediterranean peoples and not what divides them. It was also suggested that the work of the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe could be an important source of guidance on many issues of interest to the Assembly and that regular cooperation should be established between the two Assemblies.

There was unanimous support amongst the Members of the Assembly for the drafting of a “Charter”, which should inject a new vision into the future of the Mediterranean region.

The Assembly also debated Sarkozy’s initiative for a Mediterranean Union project, and whether or not it represented an underhand tactic to deny Turkey accession to the EU, as had been popularly described in the press. Turkey itself did not regard Sarkozy’s project as a way of preventing it from entering the EU, and there was widespread support for the establishment of such a project. The Assembly was also reminded that members could further their understanding of the Mediterranean Union project and put their questions to the French Ambassador Alain Le Roy after his presentation of  President Sarkozy’s project to be held on the Saturday morning session.

Within the context of the future of the Mediterranean, Romania - attending the Assembly as a guest - drew attention to the fact that in delineating the geopolitical perimeters of the Mediterranean for the future, the PAM should also take account of the East-West dimension of the Mediterranean opening to the Black Sea, which is a gateway giving access to two world superpowers (China and Russia). As such, the Black Sea would also play an important role in trade throughout the Mediterranean Sea.

The Vice-President, Mr. Rudy Salles, chairing the second half of the plenary debate, concluded that the PAM was to date the unique forum that brings together all the Mediterranean littoral states under one platform.

 

ADOPTION OF THE RESOLUTIONS OF THE STANDING COMMITTEES

 

First Standing Committee

Mr. George Vella presented the resolution of the First Standing Committee on Regional Issues in the Middle East for adoption by the Assembly.

Members debated a couple of the terms used in the Resolution adopted by the First Standing Committee submitted to the Assembly. The Members were reminded that they could not re-examine the terms of the resolution approved by the Standing Committee, as the venue for discussion of its terms of reference is the Standing Committee itself. At this stage, they were entitled to adopt or refuse it.

Resolution adopted unanimously.

 

Second Standing Committee

Mrs. Elissavet Papadimitriou presented the resolution of the Second Standing Committee “Managing migratory flows and co-development in the Mediterranean region” in a mutually beneficial manner for adoption by the Assembly. The question of brain drain from the south to the north was considered to be an urgent issue that needed to be addressed within the framework of this resolution.

Resolution adopted unanimously

 

Third Standing Committee

Mr. Learco Saporito presented the resolution of the Third Standing Committee on “the role of parliaments in fostering the dissemination of knowledge about the major civilizations and religions of the Mediterranean basin and the promotion of dialogue between them”, for adoption by the Assembly.

It was pointed out that international terrorism existed well before the events of September 11 and that the Resolution needed to give greater consideration to that. It was also suggested that the Committee should examine further the definition of terrorism. It was suggested that the definition of terrorism could be the one used by the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe.

Resolution adopted unanimously.

 

NOMINATION OF THE MEMBERS OF THE SPECIAL TASK FORCES / AD HOC COMMITTEES

With reference to and in accordance with the provisions of the PAM Statutes and the implementation of the PAM strategy document, the members agreed on the establishment of the following ad hoc Committees and Special Task Forces:

 

First Standing Committee

• Ad hoc Committee – Regional Issues: the Middle East
• Special Task Force – Energy and related issues

 

Second Standing Committee

• Special Task Force – Free Trade in the Mediterranean
• Special Task Force – Environment and Climate Change
• Special Task Force – Integrated Resources Management

 

Third Standing Committee

·        Special Task Force – Gender and Equality Issues

·        Special Task Force – Dialogue among Cultures and Religions

·        Special Task Force – Migration

As agreed during the meeting of the geopolitical groups, national delegations forwarded the names of the members of the above bodies to the Secretariat.

 

FINANCIAL REPORT

Presentation of the Financial Report by Dr. Sergio Piazzi, Secretary General

 

The Secretary General briefed the Assembly on the financial situation of the PAM.  He reminded the Assembly that for the 2005–2006 period, the members of the CSCM/PAM had approved a Special Budget of CHF 252,000 to be administered by the IPU. In accordance with the hand over note received by IPU, they had been granted CHF100,000 to cover costs of part time administrative support and IPU had advanced from its own resources EUR 20,000  to assist the establishment of the PAM Secretariat in Malta. The Secretary General observed that not all the PAM members had paid their contributions to the Special budget 2005-2006 and that the outstanding contributions amounted to EUR 44,800. Accordingly, the PAM would have to honor its commitment of EUR 20,000  to IPU from its own budget, if the members concerned did not pay their arrears.

He then summarized the PAM financial situation with respect to the 2007 budget. The budget for the period August – December 2007, determined on a pro rate basis as agreed in Amman in 2006, amounted to EUR 178,963.87. The Secretary General reminded the Assembly that four countries had not yet paid their contributions and that the allocated budget resources for 2007 had already been spent or committed for the establishment of the Secretariat and the preparatory work for the Plenary Session of the Assembly.

The Secretary General proceeded with the presentation of the Budget for 2008, which was consistent and proportional to that of 2007. The 2008 budget, allocated on a pro rata basis and for the twelve month period, amounts to EUR 480,000.  The budget was endorsed at the Bureau meeting in Rabat in September 2007 and covered the key functions of the Assembly.

The Secretary General further proposed the setting up of a Working Capital Fund to the Assembly to ensure the smooth transition from a fiscal year to the next and cover any unforeseen expenditure undertaken at the request of the Assembly. At the Bureau meeting in Rabat, it had been agreed to set aside an amount of EUR 100,000 for the Working Capital Fund and to establish it over a five-year period so as not to weigh too heavily on the finances of the Assembly.

The members appreciated the report, and with reference to the 2005–2006 budget, several members requested the Secretary General to contact IPU and clarify the issue relating to the CHF 100,000 allocated to cover the costs of part-time services, as the amount agreed for that function stood at CHF 80,000.

The 2008 Budget and the proposal for the establishment of a Working Capital Fund were unanimously adopted by the Assembly.

End of session

 

Saturday 24 November 2007

 

THE MEDITERRANEAN UNION INITIATIVE, BRIEFING BY H. E. ALAIN LE ROY

 

The President of the Assembly introduced the French Ambassador, Alain Le Roy, who had been invited to present President Sarkozy’s Mediterranean Union project. The Ambassador referred to the recent geopolitical history of Europe, pointing out that in the last fifteen years, Europe had focused on re-opening its frontiers towards the East, the Balkan States and Turkey, and that during this period, the South of the Mediterranean had been to some extent neglected. Ambassador Le Roy therefore encouraged the States of the Mediterranean to welcome President Sarkozy’s initiative, as Europe at present invested too little of its Foreign Direct Investments (FDIs) in the South of the Mediterranean.

He noted that whilst the USA invested 18-20% of its FDI in Mexico and Latin America, and Japan 20-25% of its FDI to the South Asia-Pacific region, only 2% of the European FDI was directed to the South of the Mediterranean.

The Ambassador commented on the European need for human resources over the next 20 years, and on the wealth of available labor in the South Mediterranean, but at the same time insisted on the need for economic convergence and development of investment to avoid Europe’s needs simply being transformed into a migratory phenomenon.

The Ambassador commented on the fact that Europe has taken 50 years to get to where it is today, and that President Sarkozy’s Mediterranean Union project was even more ambitious given the greater diversity amongst the states of the Mediterranean involved. In this unification project, he still felt that the Barcelona process was a valid organization, but questioned the adequacy of its instruments to achieve its aims. This process still deserved to continue to exist, but its results were not sufficient. President Sarkozy felt that the Mediterranean Union project would be complementary to the Barcelona process, which needed to be given greater impetus than in the past.

As far as membership of President Sarkozy’s project was concerned, it would include all the Mediterranean littoral States. France will be calling a summit meeting on this project in June 2008, to be attended by Head of States and Governments of the Mediterranean States, during which the question of membership and representation would be further discussed. The project could, for istance, be all-inclusive in relation to membership, but with variable geometry regarding specific issues. For example, the issue of pollution in the Mediterranean would be an all-inclusive issue, whilst security in the East Mediterranean would involve the participation of only certain States.

Accordingly, littoral States of the Mediterranean would be part of an inner or first circle of members, although other non-littoral States with an interest in the Mediterranean would not be excluded from the organization. This system would allow States such as Germany and the United Kingdom to participate. The position of Jordan would have to be discussed too.

As far as the mechanism of the Mediterranean Union Project was concerned, the Ambassador indicated that a permanent secretariat would be established, but that States would meet under the auspices of a G-MED-like structure with a rotating presidency, whose first meeting would take place in mid-June 2008. Initially, legal binding instruments would not be adopted, States would meet to determine the agenda and the priorities of the Project. Littoral States would be asked to designate “sherpahs” who would be involved as experts in the negotiation process  and determine the agenda from as early as January 2008. The Project is based on the idea of creating agencies to deal with specific Mediterranean issues, such as the establishment of a Mediterranean water agency, an environmental agency, or littoral protection agency. An alternative energy agency could be set up focusing on solar energy and wind energy. Another important area which requires attention was adapting to climate change. In the social sector, education, the Erasmus program, exchange of scientists, teachers, university cooperation etc, would need to be developed. As regards health, attention would be given to the health of women, children, and prevention of epidemics.

The Ambassador also informed the Assembly of the current state of developments emphasizing that consultations were currently taking place with interested partners. He welcomed the warm reception of the Project from Italy, Malta and Tunisia. He also felt that there was common ground with the European Commission, President Barroso, and that the EU would be a member of the Mediterranean Union.

As regards investment in the Mediterranean, the Ambassador supported the creation of a development bank for the Mediterranean, and suggested setting up an agency for initiatives relating to the Small and Medium-Sized Enterprises (SMEs).

Further issues for the region were also security and civil protection.

The President then opened the floor to questions from the Assembly.

 

Plenary Debate

 

There was general consensus about the prospect of the creation of a Mediterranean Union from the members, although it was generally felt that this project was not yet mature and needed further reflection. The Assembly also reminded the French Ambassador that the PAM was the fruit of more than 15 years of work and that it had been created by the will of its members. Mention was made of the fact that the creation of the Mediterranean Union would have to be a real union and not be established for the purposes of serving the European Union’s need for human resources.

The Assembly expressed the view that the most important aspect of establishing any union was the whole process of democratization, and those values could be changed by instilling the yearning for democratic values. To this extent, a set of core values would need to be developed, which all members of any Mediterranean project would need to understand and ascribe to. Reference was made to the need to establish a sort of “politica franca” of core values for the Mediterranean region, and that the greatest need for the Union was to unite peoples’ values and mentalities.

The Assembly agreed with the Ambassador that the future of Europe lays in the Mediterranean and also felt that the economic problems of the Mediterranean region were partly due to the fact that the region had received little compared with Eastern Europe over the last 20 years.

The Assembly also stated that it would be important for any such union to take political stances, and that cooperation in the region could not be based on purely economic motives.

Turkey reassured the Ambassador that it did not interpret President Sarkozy’s project a way of showing it the back door to European Union membership.

The Assembly considered that Middle East security was an issue of utmost urgency for the future stability and prosperity of the Mediterranean region, and that a political stance would need to be taken on this issue. It was also felt that in dealing with this issue, the project should remember the enormous price that had been paid to date in terms of human suffering and loss of lives.

Certain members of the Assembly mentioned that the security of the Mediterranean was also threatened by terrorism, the ramifications of which went far beyond its regional boundaries.

The Assembly also welcomed the intention of the project to deal with immigration, whether legal or illegal, and that this would require financing, the transfer of know-how and achieving better standards of living in the South of the Mediterranean. The members felt that it was necessary to take a united stance on tackling illegal immigration and trafficking of people.

The Assembly appreciated the fact that the Mediterranean Union would be promoting the use of alternative sources of energy, such as solar and wind energy.

The geographical borders of the project were questioned. What were the limits of a region being considered interested in the Mediterranean? How far would membership be extended to non-littoral European States, Gulf States and African States? Would Israel be invited to be a member?

A question was also raised concerning how President Sarkozy’s project would differ from the Barcelona process and how it could contribute to strengthening the process without simply duplicating it.

The Assembly reminded the Ambassador that the Mediterranean States needed to be officially notified of the project. The question was also raised of how the project would be financed and what would the budget for such an organization be.

In answer to the questions and issues raised by the Assembly, the Ambassador made the following replies.

The Ambassador felt that the question of peace process and political issues could also be addressed by the Mediterranean Union. Peace was the main priority in Middle East, but there were also other priorities and processes, including the Barcelona process. The Ambassador referred to the fact that all States were closely following attempts to reach a peaceful settlement to the Israeli-Palestine conflict in Annapolis, but that the Mediterranean Union project did not have the vocation of solving peace in the Middle East.

As far as possible membership was concerned, the Ambassador stated that the “first circle” would include 22 littoral Mediterranean States and Portugal. In addition, observer status would be granted to non-littoral States such as Germany in the case of Europe. These criteria would apply also to States in the South. Other potential observers would be: the Arab League, the European Union, the Maghreb Consultative Council, the Economic Council of the Gulf States, the African Union. Associated membership could also be extended to other States upon invitation by the core group of littoral members.

The Ambassador also confirmed that Israel would be invited to participate, but that according to the principle of variable geometry, it would not necessarily participate in all aspects of the Union.

In relation to the process of democratization, the Ambassador saw the Mediterranean Union as an intergovernmental and executive process, working closely alongside the PAM, whereas the PAM would bring the Parliamentary dimension of the Mediterranean to the intergovernmental process and would serve as a catalyst by suggesting projects and initiatives that would be implemented by the Union. The Secretariat of the Union would have to coordinate closely with that of the PAM to ensure the Parliamentary and the executive bodies of the Mediterranean region remain linked to one another on the model of the Council of Europe and its Parliamentary Assembly.  

As regards the organization of the Union, the Ambassador stated that there could be two permanent secretariats: one to liaise with member states and one to shadow the work of other bodies such as the Barcelona process and the European Commission to ensure the coherence of activities and projects. On the question of Turkey and EU membership, the Ambassador categorically stated that France certainly had no intention of showing Turkey the back door to EU membership by creating the Mediterranean Union Project.

In concluding the discussion, the President thanked the Ambassador for shedding light on the Mediterranean Union project and on behalf of the Assembly confirmed that all its members were in favor of this proposal, and that they would offer their encouragement and support to the realization of this ambitious initiative.

 

CALL FOR CANDIDATURES TO HOST THE ASSEMBLY MEETINGS FOR 2008 – 2011

 

President Radi proposed a change of the program, as the Monaco delegation had to leave the meeting before the conclusion of the session, and proposed voting on the invitation to host the third Plenary Session of the Assembly in Monaco in 2008. The Assembly unanimously accepted Monaco’s invitation.

Palestine offered its candidature to host the Assembly in 2009 in Ramallah, subject to the situation there allowing this.

 

ADOPTION OF THE WORKING INSTRUMENTS OF THE ASSEMBLY

The Secretary General confirmed that the Statutes, the Rules of Procedure and the Rules of the Standing Committees adopted in Amman in 2006 had been closely examined to ensure the coherency of terminology, and that the proposed amendments had also taken into consideration the comments received from members since that time. He confirmed that any terms in the wrong place had been moved in order to ensure that there were no contradictions and the respective rules were up-to-date. The Secretary General thanked the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe, the IPU and the Office of the Arab League in Geneva for the assistance provided in finalizing the documents.

The Secretary General also informed the Assembly of the amendment procedure that had been taken. The amendments had been already submitted as a draft to the Bureau meeting in Rabat on 21 September 2007 where minor amendments were made.

The President then invited the Assembly to adopt the amended texts. The Assembly unanimously adopted its working instruments, namely, the Statutes, the Rules of Procedure and the Rules of the Standing Committees.

 

ANY OTHER BUSINESS

Turning to miscellaneous points on the agenda, the President opened the floor for comments from the Assembly. No comments were made by members of the Assembly.

 

CONCLUSIONS AND CLOSURE OF THE SESSION

Concluding Remarks of President Radi

President Radi concluded that the Second Plenary Session of the Assembly had been an overwhelming success. He noted that it had achieved the objectives set at the beginning, that there had been constructive debate on the major issues concerning the Mediterranean, the common heritage of all the members. He pointed out that the three resolutions prepared by the respective Standing Committees had been adopted, and that members had been appointed by the geopolitical groups to serve on the Ad hoc Committees and the Special Task Forces. In addition to the strategy document, the PAM had agreed to develop a Mediterranean Charter in 2008, which would lay down the vision and guiding principles of a peaceful, harmonious and prosperous community of people of the Mediterranean, as well as constituting the terms of reference for the work of the PAM itself.

In addition, the Assembly had learnt more about President Sarkozy’s Mediterranean Union project, and finally adopted the proposed amendments for the Rules of Procedure, Statutes and Standing Committees, as well as decided the venue for the next Plenary Session of the Assembly. The Assembly had furthermore endorsed a five year working approach, the financial report and the 2008 budget. Moreover, the Assembly had behaved throughout the course of the Plenary Session in a spirit of solidarity and mutual respect and understanding, forging and deepening bonds that would unite its members in solving its problems rather than divide them. At the close of the session, the President therefore concluded that the members had grown closer both in spirit and substance. A special thanks was owed to the Maltese Government for its enormous contribution.

During this session, an agreement had been signed with the government of Malta in the presence of the President of Malta for the handing over the Spinola Palace, the headquarters of the Assembly and seat of the Secretariat, officially integrating it into the legal status of the PAM.

By way of conclusion, the President commented that the Assembly had raised a number of critical issues that he hoped could be overcome to finally achieve the aim of creating a genuine Mediterranean community.

 

Final Remarks from the Assembly

The Greek delegation mentioned that it would be presiding over the Euro-Med process in 2008 and that President Radi would of course be invited to the event. The Greek delegation asked for at least one MP from each delegation of the PAM to attend. Greece also stated that it would be willing to host the Special Task Force Meeting on climate change, as a major issue for Greece, in Athens in April 2007.

The Maltese delegation also thanked the Assembly as a whole for its words of appreciation, and expressed a general aspiration that an important foundation stone had been laid down paving the way for better understanding in the Mediterranean.

To conclude, the President thanked the Maltese House of Representatives and Government for its selfless contribution, as well as the Secretary General, his team, the interpreters and all persons who had contributed “backstage” to the successful organization of the Second Plenary Session. The Maltese Delegation made special thanks to the selfless contribution of Ambassador Alfred A. Zarb and Mr. Joe Mangion, Diplomatic Counselor to the Speaker of the Maltese Parliament, for their endeavors towards the establishment of the PAM.