The Rt. Hon. Sir John Major KG CH

Author: admin

  • Mr Major’s Comments on Northern Ireland (I) – 31 August 1994

    Below is the text of Mr Major’s comments on Northern Ireland, made during an interview given in London on Wednesday 31st August 1994.

    QUESTION:

    [Mr Major was asked whether Gerry Adam’s offer of permanent peace was sufficient or what a permanent ceasefire was needed].

    PRIME MINISTER:

    It truly isn’t a semantic point. Firstly, let me say I think the statement that has been made today is very welcome and it is a very great advance and to have this cessation of violence is a remarkable move forward but I think we do have to be clear that this is permanent, that it isn’t a temporary cease-fire that will be turned over at some stage and the armed conflict, as the Provisionals call it, will begin again. We must be certain it has ended.

    QUESTION:

    [Mr Major was asked if Gerry Adams had to use exact words].

    PRIME MINISTER:

    No, no. He doesn’t actually have to use the words I did but I think he has to make it clear unambiguously that this is the end of the use of violence, that they aren’t going to return to violence in pique if they don’t get their way at some future stage and there is a very practical reason for that.

    What we have said in the Joint Declaration is that once there is a permanent renunciation of violence, after a period has elapsed in which that promise has been kept and there has been no violence we will talk to Sinn Fein about how to bring them into the democratic process. We cannot do that under the duress that they may return to armed conflict; we cannot do it and neither could any British Government.

    QUESTION:

    [Mr Major was asked if Gerry Adams saying he wanted a permanent peace was not enough].

    PRIME MINISTER:

    I haven’t seen what he said but I do know that it is perfectly clear he must make it unambiguously the case that whatever happens they will not return again to violence. As I have said, I am not hung up on a particular form of words but he must make that clear. That isn’t a new condition I should say; that is something that has been set out time and time again over many months and Mr Adams is well aware of that.

    QUESTION:

    [Mr Major was asked if he accepted that Gerry Adams had a political problem in getting his supporters to back him on a ceasefire].

    PRIME MINISTER:

    We have indicated for many months what is necessary and I have made the point just now and repeat it again. It isn’t just a semantic point, it is a very real point. It isn’t a practical proposition to move forward, begin to enter into discussions with Sinn Fein about how to bring them into the talks and then let them lightly suddenly return to using violence. That is impossible. It isn’t right. I hope and believe that what they mean by their statement is that this is a permanent end of violence, but I don’t know it. I wish to be reassured about that. The terms in which they do it, there can be many ways in which they do it.

  • Joint Doorstep Interview with Sir Patrick Mayhew and James Molyneaux – 31 August 1994

    Below is the text of the joint doorstep interview with the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland, Sir Patrick Mayhew, and the Leader of the Ulster Unionist Party, Sir James Molyneaux, given outside 10 Downing Street on Wednesday 31st August 1994.

    [some sections were inaudible and are marked with …]

    MOLYNEAUX:

    I retain my view which I think is broadly reflected by the … which put together the Declaration, that is the two governments plus the American Administration plus Mr. Hume for example, that there has to be a total permanent cessation of violence and that is set out very clearly and very concisely in paragraph 10 of the Declaration.

    As I said to you earlier, I am very glad that there has been a halt to the killing in Northern Ireland and throughout the United Kingdom and I hope that those who have influence with the IRA will now be able to persuade them to take the next decisive step and make the halt permanent – that is a very simple operation.

    QUESTION:

    … the word “permanent” written into the statement?

    MOLYNEAUX:

    The Declaration made that the key, it made it the trigger for the entry into the exploratory discussions and the countdown thereto so I am sure, as I say, that those who have influence with Sinn Fein/IRA will persuade them to take that second step because quite clearly they haven’t felt able to take it today.

    QUESTION:

    Mr. Molyneaux, is it your view that the 90-day clock cannot start running yet and is that view shared inside No. 10?

    MOLYNEAUX:

    They will speak for themselves but after all they signed the Declaration, I didn’t, contrary to what people said at the time; the two governments signed it, it was a joint product and they knew what they were doing when they worded paragraph 10 which said hat there had to be not only a permanent cessation of violence but there had to be a repudiation of violence and from that would follow the period of cooling-off – somebody at an earlier stage said “decontamination period”, actually a Dublin minister – and at that stage then there would be exploratory discussions with Sinn Fein/IRA as to how they could enter the democratic process.

    Of course, we shouldn’t forget that they are not excluded from the democratic process because as you know they have a considerable number of councillors in the councils in Northern Ireland and you will also remember that they fielded candidates for Jim Prior’s 4-year Assembly, they got elected to that body but like the SDLP they boycotted it and didn’t take their seats.

    QUESTION:

    Can we be quite clear that as far as you are concerned the 90-day clock does not start running from today?

    MOLYNEAUX:

    That is correct because Mr. Hume would claim to be one of the joint authors of the Declaration and as Mr. Hume is a very close buddy of Mr. Adams, he will have explained precisely to him what paragraph 10 means and what is required of Mr. Adams and what is required of the IRA, namely a permanent cessation of violence and as I say, I am not making that demand today, I am simply saying that it be done today and simply saying that those who have influence with the IRA I hope will be able to persuade them to take that second modest but very vital step in the very near future because that will be for the good of all of us including themselves.

    QUESTION:

    … by saying they have not to use the word “permanent”?

    MOLYNEAUX:

    I am not singling out words, I am simply saying that they meet a requirement which is not present today. It is a cessation of hostilities, that is all it is, that is not convincing, that is the problem and I think any fair-minded person would recognise that it is inadequate as it stands.

    QUESTION:

    [Inaudible but regarding British Government’s position]

    MOLYNEAUX:

    They will be making their position clear but I think you, ladies and gentlemen, listened to the Prime Minister at an earlier stage. I didn’t hear what he said but my secretary did hear and it wasn’t very different, I think, from what I had been saying before he made the statement.

    I don’t think we are that far apart nor do I think the Irish Government is that far apart and I know for a fact – and it had better now be mentioned this point – that the White House is not very far apart from what I have just said because I had a telephone conversation with them this afternoon about thirty minutes before I came here so they are broadly in line with the attitude I have been taking.

    QUESTION:

    Mr. Adams this afternoon was saying that the onus is now on the Prime Minister to seize the moment but from you are saying obviously that is not your view?

    MOLYNEAUX:

    No, the onus can’t possibly be on the Prime Minister. The Prime Minister set out the Declaration and paragraph 10 with Mr. Reynolds, they stood on the steps behind me here when they made that statement and nobody quarrelled with them at that time, nobody said: “Well, you should go out now and take the initiative!” The initiative was taken; in the minds of a good many people in Northern Ireland it was too generous an initiative but it was taken, it was there, fair ‘does’ for everybody and it is up to, as I say, particularly those who would claim to have influence and those who have influence with the IRA to be the persuaders.

    QUESTION:

    [Inaudible]

    MOLYNEAUX:

    My message would be what it has consistently been, that there is no justification or excuse for violence on the part of anyone and the Loyalist paramilitaries clearly understand my position; they have been making statements which are moving towards the position which we would all like to see them adopting but that is for them to decide, it is not for me to bully them into it.

    QUESTION:

    Did you get an assurance from Mr. Major that the London and Dublin governments will press the IRA now to hand over their arms as well as declaring a cessation of violence because presumably if it is permanent cessation of violence those arms will not be required

    MOLYNEAUX:

    It wasn’t a matter we were dealing with today because we had more immediate matters on our hands but that is the natural outcome. In the interests of internal discipline – if you could call it that – within any armed body if decisions are going to be implemented it is in their own interests that they should surrender arms and they shouldn’t be left lying about because we have had far too many accidental casualties.

    QUESTION:

    Would you expect the IRA to take this step publicly by saying it is permanent, not by private communication with the British Government

    MOLYNEAUX:

    I am simply saying that they can because they will be asked by and your opposite numbers in Dublin no doubt exactly what the meaning of their statement is and they will be asked if it is in conformity with the Declaration and I hope that they will feel that they can take that not unreasonable step and say: “Right! We are not playing with words, we are simply saying that the armed struggle is over for good; this is a permanent end to violence!”

    QUESTION:

    [Inaudible].

    MOLYNEAUX:

    I did say when I was in America to your colleagues over there at the press conference that the ice, was beginning to crack up and that the violence could happen [cease?] somewhere within the next two years, that was in the month of April because I had that instinct and I still have that.

    QUESTION:

    If the cessation of violence is permanent, how long do you think it will last?

    MOLYNEAUX:

    I have no idea but there would be a hideous risk of course to life in Northern Ireland if it were only a halt or a cessation so therefore the security forces and the chiefs of the security forces – both the RUC and the GUC – have a bounden duty to do two things: to ensure that the civilian population in Northern Ireland is not put at the risk of a sudden upsurge, a sudden mass attack by armed forces in Northern Ireland and secondly, those two commanders have a duty to their own men in both the Army and the RUC and other ancillary bodies to ensure that they are not caught in some sudden outburst of violence which could be very deadly indeed so that is why I think that it will be clearly understood by all reasonable people that there has got to be a permanence about this operation and a gradual scaling down after the permanency is demonstrated and achieved.

    SIR PATRICK MAYHEW:

    I would just like to say before I cross over to Northern Ireland that the Prime Minister has had the latest of a series of very useful discussions which are frequently held between him and Mr. Molyneaux.

    It was recognised at once that there was absolutely no question there having been any kind of private understanding or secret deal between Her Majesty’s Government and Sinn Fein that led to the statement that has been made today, that was accepted as being self-evident. It was also similarly accepted as being self-evident that there has been no weakening or dilution or adjustment in any way of any kind to the constitutional guarantee which the Government has over so many years maintained that there will be no change to the constitutional status of Northern Ireland as an integral part of the United Kingdom except with the consent of the greater number of people living in Northern Ireland, something which is written into the Joint Declaration made between the two governments for example in December last year and it therefore follows that the greater part of the conversation centred upon the important statement made by Mr. Adams in Dublin today and there was naturally enough a welcome that after so long there is from midnight tonight to be no more murdering and bombing and maiming and violence generally; that naturally is a matter to be welcomed very much.

    However, it was equally obvious as the Prime Minister’s own statement issued shortly before one o’clock this afternoon made clear, that the word “permanent” didn’t feature in the statement that was issued by Mr. Adams and I think everybody will remember that the Irish Government, the British Government with the approval of Mr. Hume and the American Government as well has expressed its approval for this, all of them had insisted that before the entry process into the talks process could begin for Sinn Fein as an elected mandated political party there had first of all to be a permanent end to violence, a renunciation of violence and a permanent renunciation of the support for violence.

    It may very well be that that is the intention of the statement that has been issued by Mr. Adams today but it will be recalled that what he said was there had been ordered as from midnight tonight a complete cessation of military operations as they put ii. and the Prime Minister’s statement this afternoon just before one o’clock drew attention to the fact that they had declared a complete cessation of violence but went on to say that it needed to be made clear that this was indeed intended to mean that it was over permanency, that is to say for good. I understand that there are some who say that if you look at the whole body of that statement issued by Mr. Adams that that is the intention but this is so important a matter that the Prime Minister and we believe that it ought not to be left at large or able to be the subject of discussion and argument and if indeed that is the intention it is surely the simplest thing in the world for it to be made clear that that is indeed the intention, that it is over for good.

    This is not just a piece of pleasantry or nit-picking about a particular word. What lies behind it is the absolute essential importance that such talks and negotiations as may take place in future shall not take place under the implied threat that violence which after all has gone on for so long could be taken up again and resumed if people didn’t behave during those discussions in a way that was congenial to the IRA.

    That is what it is about and I very much hope that it is the case that the intention is that it is over for good. The Prime Minister feels and we all feel very firmly that this is something that does have to be put beyond doubt. It is a very simple matter to do and we hope that it will take place, that it will be done very quickly whereupon the British Government naturally enough will start to put in place the time-scale that has already been made public about the approach to preliminary talks and so on.

    QUESTION:

    Can I be very clear about that last sentence you just uttered. Are you saying, therefore, that the 90-day clock cannot start to run until the IRA makes clear that it is permanent, makes that statement about permanence?

    SIR PATRICK MAYHEW:

    It couldn’t possibly start to run until midnight tonight because violence is said to be at an end only from midnight tonight.

    There is plenty of time to make that clear before midnight tonight but it should be made clear.

    QUESTION:

    [Inaudible].

    SIR PATRICK MAYHEW:

    The Prime Minister has interpreted that in the statement that he issued just before lunchtime today as an end to violence, a complete cessation of violence and of course that should include violence of all kinds not just the hideous abuses that have gone in the form of bombing but things such as punishments, shootings and the like, they are all to be included.

    QUESTION:

    Is it true to say that the clock can’t start running until the IRA has specifically said that it renounces violence permanently and used the word?

    SIR PATRICK MAYHEW:

    It does have to be made clear before the British Government considers that the time-scale to which it is committed in public statements and most recently the commentary that it made to the twenty questions put to it in May, it does have to be made clear first that this is intended to be, as it may very well be, a permanent ending of violence, that is to say for good. Once that is done, then that process begins.

    QUESTION:

    Have you communicated this message through any channel directly to Sinn Fein or the Provisional IRA?

    SIR PATRICK MAYHEW:

    No.

    QUESTION:

    Will it have to be a statement by Mr. Adams of the same nature as the statement we had earlier today and as a follow-up question can I ask you at what stage will the British Government withdraw the broadcasting ban on Sinn Fein?

    SIR PATRICK MAYHEW:

    It doesn’t have to be made clear in any formal way in any particular format; it just has to be expressed in a means that leave ordinary people let alone governments satisfied that that which the two governments have said will be an essential before the talks process and entry into the talks process can begin, for it to be made clear in whatever form is sufficient to make it perfectly clear to the everyday people that that actually is what is intended to be delivered and of course, as we made clear in the commentary to the twenty questions in May, after the word there does have to follow a period of what I might call conduct, deed, behaviour, whatever you like to call it, that is consistent with the word and then within three months we are into the preliminary talks which we are committed to.

    QUESTION:

    Will the broadcasting ban go during the three months or only at the end of it?

    SIR PATRICK MAYHEW:

    Everything will be considered step-by–step in the light of prevailing circumstances.

    QUESTION:

    If over the next three months the IRA fires not a single shot, sets not a single bomb, is this what the British Government intends?

    PATRICK MAYHEW:

    The British Government’s position has been made very clear long before now that once there is a permanent renunciation of the use of violence and a permanent renunciation of the justification or support for violence then within three months the British Government will be prepared to enter into preliminary discussions on three topics: how they can be brought into a democratic process; how they can ultimately come into the talks process, matters of that kind; and lastly, what are the practical consequences that would flow from such a permanent renunciation. I am not going to be led into specific detail which would be hypothetical at the most.

    QUESTION:

    [Inaudible].

    SIR PATRICK MAYHEW:

    The last question was do I intend to seek clarification and I said you could put it like that.

    QUESTION:

    Are you prepared to lift the broadcasting ban so Mr. Adams can explain himself?

    SIR PATRICK MAYHEW:

    Our position is unchanged on the broadcasting ban. It is kept under continuous review in the light of changing circumstances. I don’t wish to say more than that. It doesn’t rest with me anyway, it rests with the Heritage Secretary.

  • Mr Major’s Joint Press Conference with East European Prime Ministers – 2 August 1994

    Below is the text of Mr Major’s joint press conference with the Lithuanian Prime Minister, Mr Adolfas Slezevicius, the Estonian Prime Minister, Mr Mart Laar and the Latvian Prime Minister, Mr Valdis Virkars, in Vilnius on Tuesday 2nd August 1994.

    MR SLEZEVICIUS:

    I would like to welcome His Excellency, the Prime Minister of Great Britain, Mr Major, and my colleagues from Latvia and Estonia, welcome to Lithuania.

    Today we had an excellent opportunity to discuss bilateral and multilateral relations, we discussed different things. First and most important for Lithuania is economic development and of course we discussed the security problems in the Baltic States region. We all agreed that now it is most important, the withdrawal of Russian troops from Latvia and Estonia, and we are supported in this process. We exchanged views about the integration process in the European Union, we are very thankful to the British government for their support we have had both before and now in this process. Of course we are very thankful for the support we have received from the Know-How Fund and we are very happy that the British government is ready to improve the category of this fund.

    We also discussed the possibility to increase our relations in the economic field, for establishing more joint ventures and foreign capital enterprises. I will leave it to our guest from England to tell you about the possibility to use some credits from the UK and other issues.

    PRIME MINISTER:

    Thank you very much. Can I say firstly that I am delighted to be here this morning and to have had the opportunities of not just meeting the President of Lithuania and the Prime Minister, but also the Prime Ministers of Estonia and Latvia and it has been an extremely useful morning from my point of view.

    Of course leaders of all the three Baltic States have visited London, including President Brazauskas, all of them have visited us in London recently, but I believe that this is the first occasion that a British Prime Minister has visited Lithuania, as far as we can discover it is, and I am delighted to be here.

    We had what I suppose one might call a unilateral summit this morning in that the meetings exchanged, we all met each other and exchanged views on a very wide range of issues. What was apparent though was that a number of key themes emerged from those discussions, let me just draw a small number of them out for you in the next few moments.

    This month it is three years since the Baltic States regained their independence. A very great deal has happened in those three years, we have exchanged Embassies, exchanged hundreds of visits, and we have begun to build up trade and investment between our respective countries. All these developments are welcome but they are all in their infancy thus far and have a great deal further to go.

    In all the talks I had this morning we have discussed the closer integration of the Baltic States with Western Europe in general and the European Union in particular, and that is a common goal, a common goal amongst the Baltic State governments and in Western Europe as well. And I think the reason for that is very clear. We see the Baltic peoples as part of what we tend to call in Western Europe the European family. As independent countries, and they are and will remain I trust independent countries, the Baltic States have established links with NATO through the Partnership for Peace Programme, and with the European Union through free trade agreements recently agreed and yet to be expanded and implemented.

    But the first step, the European Union intends to negotiate Europe Agreements as well, and I think it is both natural and right, perhaps even one might say inevitable, that we should develop increasingly close relations, that threatens no-one and I think it will be of assistance to the three Baltic States and of assistance to Western Europe as well.

    It would have been extraordinary this morning if we had not discussed the relationship between the Baltic States and Russia. I believe it is very important to establish a partnership with Russia based on common interests and based on respect for the same international principles. And I believe that the intention of the Baltic governments is to establish stable neighbourly relations with Russia and that is very much to their advantage and to everyone else’s advantage that that is successful. I am delighted that the last of the troops which once occupied the Baltic States will leave, by agreement, by the end of this month.

    One of the areas of course of interest to the Russians is ensuring the fair treatment of ethnic minorities, that is important to the international community as a whole and it is important to Baltic stability, and I welcome for example the revisions that have been made to the citizenship law in Latvia.

    We spent some time this morning with all three of my colleagues discussing trade matters between Britain and the Baltic States. Trade is growing, it is helped by the progress there has been with economic reform, and investment by British companies, although not yet remotely at the level it can and I believe will reach, that investment equally is beginning to grow. I have informed my Lithuanian hosts of our decision to extend export credit cover to Lithuania so it is now available for all three of the Baltic States and I hope that will be taken as a sign of our confidence in their economic success and in their future political independence.

    We are also steadily building up a large number of projects under the British Know-How Fund, all of those are designed in separate ways across a whole range of different endeavours to help the reform process that has been gathering pace in the three countries. For example, we have projects to help small and medium size enterprises right across the Baltic States, to develop agricultural advisory services in Latvia and Lithuania, and to help banking and investment in all three countries. And there are a large number of other examples of this kind.

    If there is one quality that has shone through in my discussions with my colleagues this morning, but also shone through all of the contact we have had with Baltic people over the past three years, it is determination. There is I believe an unshakeable determination to succeed among the Baltic people and I have no doubt that they will do so. It is a difficult task to build a modern democracy, to restructure a distorted economy after half a century of communist occupation. It is a huge huge task to undertake and it is a task I think that has been undertaken very bravely by successive governments in the three Baltic States.

    They have by their efforts put themselves already well on the road to success.

    We discussed a range of other bilateral matters also this morning and a range of other security matters. The discussions I had this morning though were necessarily brief because of the brief period I am able to stay here, but the Foreign Office Minister of State, Douglas Hogg, is here, he will be remaining and will also be visiting the other Baltic States to carry those discussions forward over the next day or so.

    In conclusion, let me just say this. I do not have any doubt about the prospects for the Baltic States and I have even less doubt about the importance of their relationship with the United Kingdom both now and in the future and I very much look forward to developing that relationship.

    MR LAAR:

    I would just mention some issues which were raised during our bilateral meeting, those were of course the withdrawal of Russian troops and all situations in Estonia now between Estonia and Russia, the problems of discriminating questions, what Russia is using against Estonia and Lithuania at the same time. And we talked about our bilateral cooperation in the military field which is very successful from our point of view , and our cooperation among the Partnership for Peace Programme to help support a peace-keeping battalion to develop and we are having increasing bilateral contacts between Great Britain and Estonia in this field as well. One of the main issues was of course our economic and help more investment to come to Estonia. And we are very thankful for the support we have received from the United Kingdom in our talks with the European Union, treaty and now starting negotiations to sign the Europe Treaty.

    MR VIRKARS:

    I would like to start with the point that the Baltic States had a success so far involving political and economic confidence in their transition to a democratic society and a market economy. And I suppose really what all three of us have achieved is macro-economic stabilisation with a low inflation rate and stable and convertible national currency. And we thank the United Kingdom, we pay due regard to the continuous support of the United Kingdom in our comprehensive reform process. We are in a new situation, the withdrawal of the Russian military force is taking place after the conclusion of an agreement with the Russian Federation and I must congratulate my colleague, the Estonian Prime Minister, with this agreement. It is an important step towards strengthening security in the whole Baltic region.

    Nevertheless, current circumstances require the constant attention of the world community. I suppose after the completion of the withdrawal of Russian troops new regional security setting will require new responses from international organisations and I suppose we had today a very truthful discussion about these new responses. I suppose free Baltic States after 31 August will have the next step three Baltic States in the new unified Europe.

    We had discussions about economic issues. The Latvian government, as well as Lithuania and Estonia, has concluded the free trade agreement with the European Union. This is a first step towards integration into the EU and will make a strong impact on political and economic development of the Baltic States and on security issues. All of us are interested this year under the German Presidency to sign the European Agreement and I suppose the United Kingdom will be very helpful in this process. We have planned to submit a trade policy memorandum this summer and then to become a party to GATT as soon as possible, and again I must say the same about my colleagues, and again the UK’s support in this process is very important and will be a determining factor. And of course Latvia has concluded military technical cooperation agreements with a number of NATO countries and we would very much appreciate one with the UK as well and I suppose this process has started too.

    In any case, I am very happy to be here together with my colleagues and the Prime Minister of Great Britain and we really had a good conversation. But what is most important, all of us have good futures.

     

    QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS

    QUESTION:

    I would like to ask the British Premier what he thinks about the prospects of the Baltic countries eventually becoming fully-fledged members of the European Union and NATO and I would like to ask the Latvian Premier about the referendum and the support which he has given for the arrangement of that referendum here in Lithuania.

    LATVIAN PRIME MINISTER MR. VALDIS BIRKAVS:

    That is the referendum about indexation. I don’t know who had this idea about compensation and about indexation but I suppose this idea if adopted will work against Lithuania. That is not the way in which to solve economic problems.

    PRIME MINISTER JOHN MAJOR:

    Shall I pick up those two earlier questions? The first one was of course about the relationship with the European Union both in the short and the long term. Let me try and set out the process as I see it.

    The European Union have just agreed a free trade agreement with each of the three countries individually. I think that is a very important step in the relationship with the European Union and the first priority is to make full use of that once it comes into force at the beginning of 1995.

    The second point would be to build upon something that was agreed by the European Heads of Government at the Corfu summit just a few weeks ago and that was to establish a Europe agreement that is broadly an association agreement with the European nations that would have two practical implications: the first would be to open up trading barriers and increase trade, a very necessary part of moving towards membership of the European Union; and the second practical aspect would be to open up the prospect – the certainty – of regular political dialogue collectively with the European Union, that would be what would come with a Europe agreement.

    The Europe agreement itself would open up the prospect of accession to the European Union itself at a later stage. It isn’t possible to put a time scale on these developments. The principle is clear, the direction is clear but there is a great deal to be done on both sides; the European Union itself is expanding at the moment, it has a great deal to absorb itself and there is a great deal to do to help the three countries prepare themselves for closer integration with Western Europe and a closer trading relationship with them. It is a very fierce, competitive world inside the European Union and one needs to prepare oneself for that or the individual economies of the Baltic states would suffer some damage so there is a march towards that end but it is impossible to put a time scale on it.

    As far as defence is concerned, let me firstly make the point that bilateral defence links are growing quite rapidly between the United Kingdom and the Baltic states. We have been very pleased, for example, to be able to assist with the development of the Baltic peacekeeping battalion with infantry training and with English-language training and I was able to confirm this morning that that will continue.

    I think a very important move was made with the development of Partnership for Peace and the accession to Partnership for Peace of each of the countries represented here today and, of course, Latvia also is now an associate partner of the Western European Union.

    Those measures are quite significant measures to undertake in the short term. Growing trade relationships have their own security implications but I think one has to take it at a measured pace and that is what we are seeking to do at the present time.

    ESTONIAN PRIME MINISTER MR. MART LAAR:

    If I can comment on the proposals about indexation, I think if this will be voted for in the referendum it will have extremely negative results on the Lithuanian economy and I have some suspicion that most of this work what is made to this point to get the reforms forward will be lost just now.

    QUESTION (LATVIAN NEWSPAPER):

    I would like to ask His Excellency John Major how the change of Latvian government can influence the integration of Latvia into Europe?

    PRIME MINISTER JOHN MAJOR:

    I think the most important thing for the governments, whether Latvian or any of the others, is to continue to work to integrate themselves both in the international institutions – the Western European Union, the CSCE, moving towards European Union membership, Partnership for Peace – and also to begin to integrate the nature of their economies and the general free-trading impetus that dominates Western Europe, I think those are the best ways to develop but it seems to me that that is what is happening. Some of the economic progress that has been made has been quite staggering and that economic progress needs to continue if there is to be a greater and other relationship in the future.

    I should just say one thing because there is sometimes a tendency I know when talks of the Baltic states to talk of the Baltic states as though they were all the same. The reality is you have got three independent countries each with their own interests; many of those interests overlap understandably so but they are different interests, they are independent countries and I believe they would wish to be seen as independent countries and I perhaps ought to make that point but I think the general direction is the one I set out a moment ago.

    EDWARD LUCAS (BALTIC INDEPENDENT):

    Prime Minister, there is a lot of concern here about the Kaliningrad region of Russia which is host to many tens of thousands of Russian troops. Would Great Britain like to add its voice to that of Sweden and the Baltic states in urging Russia to demilitarise this region very speedily so as to reduce the potential instability that this concentration of forces presents to the whole Baltic Sea basin?

    PRIME MINISTER JOHN MAJOR:

    We are certainly very keen to see an agreement reached between Lithuania and Russia over Kaliningrad and I believe from my discussions this morning that that agreement is now within reach. I think that is of interest not just to Lithuania and Russia but of interest to a number of other Central and East European states as well as the other two Baltic states. I don’t think I wish to go further than that.

    EDWARD LUCAS:

    It was on militarisation.

    PRIME MINISTER JOHN MAJOR:

    I understand that point very clearly and I am just coming to that. I don’t wish to go further than that. I think it is right for them to reach an agreement – that is what Lithuania and Russia are doing – and I don’t believe it is for us to go further than that.

    Nobody is in any doubt that Kaliningrad is Russian territory and the important thing therefore is to make sure that there is a proper transit agreement in the first place and at this moment I don’t propose to go beyond that.

    LATVIAN PRIME MINISTER, MR. WALDIS BIRKAVC:

    Of course, this is not only a Lithuanian question or a Lithuanian problem, it is a problem for the two other Baltic countries as well and as we have seen during last year, both Latvia and Estonia gave very strong support on the question of the withdrawal of Russian troops so we are very clear that Estonia and Latvia will support the Lithuanian activity to find some solution to the Kaliningrad problem and they are of course afraid after the withdrawal of troops from Estonia and Latvia of the important problems this will raise and of course, as I said before,. we will support fully Lithuania in trying to find solutions which are acceptable for Lithuania and that means those that are acceptable for us.

    QUESTION:

    Prime Minister Major, there were some aspects about military relations with Russia discussed. That is still a big topic in all three Baltic states with different aspects of the question but in your stay in Warsaw recently you strongly spoke of Britain’s help for Poland becoming a full NATO member. I guess most of the Baltic people still want to hear some answers about our prospects of becoming NATO countries.

    PRIME MINISTER JOHN MAJOR:

    I set that out both in Poland and here. The implication of Partnership for Peace is that NATO will expand its membership. The question is not whether NATO will expand its membership but when, how and how far and one can’t be clear about precisely when that will be. We certainly wish to do that without destabilising the peaceful circumstances that now exist in Central and Eastern Europe so I think these are matters that need to be taken gradually and by agreement and I think that rather than setting out ultimate aims with the disruptive implications that self-evidently that could have, it is better to proceed with the Partnership for Peace agreement and the Partnership for Peace arrangements that have been established.

    Each of the Baltic states are members of Partnership for Peace. think people have perhaps underestimated the medium and long-term significance of this development. There is a changing shape across Europe at the moment, that changing shape is moving quite satisfactorily and it needs to continue. What nobody needs to do is to disrupt that by pushing too fast or too hard in a way that may disrupt what looks like a satisfactory development of security arrangements.

    QUESTION (RUSSIAN AGENCY):

    I would like to ask the British Premier to once again go back to a very pressing problem here in Lithuania and that is the problem of Russian military transit through Lithuania. There have been voices treating the intention of Lithuania to sign an agreement with Russia on transit as treason. This is an important thing not only for Lithuania but also for the region itself. What would your opinion of that be?

    PRIME MINISTER JOHN MAJOR:

    I think my opinion of that would be one shared by most of my European partners and that is that it is in everyone’s interest that a satisfactory transit agreement to Kaliningrad is reached and I believe that one is now within sight. I am sure it is right.

    I understand very clearly, given the history and background of Lithuania and indeed of each of the three Baltic states, the concerns that arise in many people’s minds about that transit agreement of troops and material through to Kaliningrad. Nobody could fail to understand the concerns that people may feel based on history about that but I think the circumstances have changed and we have moved on and I believe it is right to reach such an agreement. I think it is a statesmanlike decision to reach such an agreement and I strongly believe that that would be the view of most of my European Union colleagues as well. I hope such an agreement will be reached. It will take some courage to reach such an agreement but I believe it is the right decision.

    QUESTION:

    Prime Minister Major, you said earlier today that you were optimistic about Baltic security in the future but if things don’t go so well, say Russia turns more belligerent and turns on its neighbours, then will Britain will be willing to stand by the Baltic states? Should the Baltic states have the confidence that Britain will stand by the Baltic states if such a thing happened?

    I would also like to ask the Baltic prime ministers what their degree of confidence is that the West will come to their aid.

    PRIME MINISTER JOHN MAJOR:

    We have taken a consistent position that the Baltic states are independent, should have remained independent, thankfully are independent again and I believe the greatest security that the Baltic states can get will come not least by their increasing trade and other integration with Western European institutions and Western European trading patterns.

    You erect a doomsday scenario and ask what would happen in the event of that doomsday occurring. I don’t think people are likely to answer that question in those terms but I have to say to you that I believe that the Western European countries and the Western states generally would feel strongly about maintaining the independence of the Baltic states but we see no threat to them at the moment. Perhaps if I were a Balt, I would see it differently and I absolutely understand that and I do not dismiss the concerns that many people feel but I believe matters have moved on. The departure of the Russian troops is a very significant step from within the Baltic states and I both hope and expect they will not face the sort of scenario you set out but certainly it is a very strong wish of the United Nations and everybody else that the Baltic states should retain their political and economic independence.

    ESTONIAN PRIME MINISTER, MR. MART LAAR:

    The most important thing is to avoid the possibility of such a scenario and I totally agree with Prime Minister John Major that the best thing for us is to integrate as fast possible with all Western institutions open to us and just now we can see that all European institutions are open to us. This is maybe the most important thing that is happening to us now.

    LATVIAN PRIME MINISTER, MR. VALOIS BIRKAVC:

    I can add that a very important thing in this connection is to be very cooperative amongst the Baltic states and to continue our efforts and step-by-step process of integration in all the European international organisations – step-by-step but fast.

    LITHUANIAN PRIME MINISTER, ADOLFUS SLEZEVICIUS:

    I agree with my colleagues on the principle of an umbrella for the security of the region. In my understanding and the understanding Of our government it is speeding up the integration into the European economic and security structure. We are moving this way, the [indistinct] is very good and after 31 August when we have a completely new situation in the Baltic states this process will move very fast.

    PRIME MINISTER JOHN MAJOR:

    Let me just add a point to that. what I said here today about the necessity for the independence of the Baltic states is not something we just say to the Baltic states; that is a message that the United Kingdom has consistently delivered to Russia over the last few years. I delivered that message in the past to President Gorbachev and also to President Yeltsin and I believe many other Western Heads of Government have done the same thing as well.

  • Government Statement on Bosnia – 2 August 1994

    Below is the transcript of a Government statement on Bosnia, released on Tuesday 2nd August 1994.

    We welcomed the statement by President Milosevic supporting this Contact Group proposal and calling on the Bosnian Serbs to accept it. It was important that all Serbs should realise what was at stake and that the Bosnian Serbs should reconsider their position. The latest Bosnian Serb statement suggesting further negotiations with the Contact Group did not provide the clear acceptance of the Group’s proposal which was a prerequisite to any further discussions. We now looked to President Milosevic to exercise decisive influence on the Bosnian Serb leadership to accept the proposal so that the peace process could go forward.

  • Mr Major’s Remarks in Reply to President Brazauskas – 2 August 1994

    Below is the transcript of Mr Major’s remarks to President Brazauskas on 2nd August 1994.

    PRIME MINISTER:

    Mr President, Prime Ministers, Ladies and Gentlemen.

    I am very grateful to you, Mr President, and to the Lithuanian Government, for your generous hospitality.

    Prime Minister Laar and Prime Minister Birkavs have kindly travelled from Estonia and Latvia to join us.

    This may be the first visit ever by a British Prime Minister to Lithuania. It has certainly been the first visit of its kind in over half a century.

    For over fifty years we, like you, held firm to the idea that the three Baltic States would again be independent. You never lost hope. Your determination brought you back to independence.

    I had the pleasure of nominating the first three British post war ambassadors to your countries, and of greeting the first Baltic leaders to visit London again. Now I have the even greater pleasure of coming here to one of the Baltic States and of meeting the Prime Ministers of all three.

    We have had an intensive morning of talks. We have discussed individually the different problems of each of your countries, and the particular relationships which you have with the United Kingdom. But there have also been some common themes, and I would like to say a few words about them.

    First, let me say that your independence is no less important to us now that you have regained it.

    You rightly insisted – with our support – that occupying forces had to withdraw. Your persistence will see the Baltic States free of uninvited foreign forces by the end of this month – for the first time in 54 years.

    The way this has been achieved testifies to the good sense of your governments and of the Russian Government under President Yeltsin.

    Second, you want a greater sense of security. We live in an uncertain world, and your countries have had a turbulent and uncertain history.

    I cannot hold out certainty for the future, but I am optimistic about the prospects for the Baltic States.

    Your sovereignty is a recognised fact. You have the rights and status of members of the United Nations and the CSCE. Violation of that status would carry a heavy cost.

    You have developed links with NATO through Partnership for Peace – links which threaten no other country.

    You now have a network of bilateral relationships with your friends in Europe and elsewhere. For example, Britain’s defence cooperation with you and the establishment of the Baltic Peacekeeping Battalion is a sign of practical cooperation which ties in well with Partnership for Peace.

    But I am optimistic also about Russia. I take nothing for granted. The huge changes under way in Russia will take years to work through. But both you and we have shown the desire to develop stable and modern relations with Russia, as sovereign partners and in your case as neighbours. The leaders of Russia, for their part, know that this meets their country’s interests, too. They know, I hope, that the last thing we want is to create new barriers in Europe, now that we have erased the post war dividing line.

    This brings me to my third point. The Baltic peoples are members of the European family. Britain has always been the foremost advocate of an outward looking European Union. I cannot at this stage predict exactly how the European Union will develop in the years ahead. You have taken a first step with your Free Trade Agreements with the European Union. At Corfu, the European Council agreed that Europe Agreements should be the next step of the Baltic States.

    I want the European Union to go on building up its relations with your countries, step by step, matching the development of your own economies and political systems.

    Mr President, fellow Prime Ministers, I have come here at an encouraging time.

    Estonia has now reached agreement with Russia on troop withdrawals.

    Latvia has resolved the problem of her citizenship law. I hope that Lithuania will soon be able to find agreement with Russia on military transit.

    You are making progress with economic reform. This has been reflected in increasing trade with Britain, and investment by some of our largest companies such as Shell and Cable and Wireless.

    Rebuilding your countries after half a century of Communism and foreign occupation is a huge challenge.

    You and your peoples have risen to that challenge. I have no doubt at all that you will succeed.

    We wish to play a part in that success, and will continue to offer our enthusiastic support.

     

  • Mr Major’s Speech in Warsaw – 1 August 1994

    Below is the text of Mr Major’s speech at Krasinski Square in Warsaw on Monday 1st August 1994.

    PRIME MINISTER:

    Mr President, Ladies and Gentlemen. This year and next in many of the countries in Europe we commemorate the inspiring but tragic events of 50 years ago, we honour the bravery and sacrifices of those who fought in a just cause, and we celebrate half a century of peace and reconciliation. Your guests from abroad today, Mr President, embody that spirit of reconciliation.

    I am proud to represent my country here today. Britain stood with Poland in 1939. Your government then found refuge in London. Through the war Poles and Britons served side by side in the air, on land and at sea.

    It was in a broadcast from London that the world first heard of the 1944 uprising. Winston Churchill declared that Britain felt itself responsible for the restoration to the Poles of their own country. He was deeply moved by what he called “the martyrdom of Warsaw”. In his “History of the War” he later gave a moving account of the struggle by Warsaw’s people to save their city, of their hardships and of how they saw it almost totally destroyed.

    Britain tried to help, though no country could do enough. During the fighting 186 sorties were flown from British bases on the other side of Europe in the south of Italy. One in three aircraft did not return.

    Earlier today I laid a wreath at the spot where one of them crashed in the Sharasevenski Park, just across the river. I met there veterans from Britain and other Commonwealth countries and allies who risked their lives so that Poland might be free. They are a living witness to the values which bind our free nations, and so are the thousands of Polish veterans who today live in my country of Britain.

    The uprising was Poland’s decision to assert her sovereignty and independence. But Poland’s tragedy was that the outcome of the war, and of the uprising, left her under another occupation. It took 45 years fully to reassert your country’s independence and sovereignty.

    After the destruction of Warsaw in 1944, the people of Warsaw and of Poland rebuilt this capital city. The world can see your success and your pride in the old town, the Royal Castle, the streets and stones of Warsaw.

    Now you grapple with another challenge – to rebuild your economy and society after the devastation of communism. With your other friends we are taking part in the rebuilding of Poland, through trade, through investment, through transfer of Know-How. And now a democratic and independent Poland has made the sovereign decision to apply for membership of the European Union. I welcome that. Europe will not be complete without Poland as a full member of our Union. The values of the Union are those values for which your citizens and ours fought and died 50 years ago.

    This evening we remember and we honour those dead, we honour also all those who lived through time of pity and terror. Soldiers and civilians, men and women and children symbolised by the statue of the little boy soldier with the helmet, the brave people of Warsaw. Let the past be an inspiration for the future, for the new challenges of peace and freedom.

    Perhaps those, like me, who were not there cannot fully understand, but we can stand beside you now, as we stood then, and offer thanks and honour.

    Let me quote from the words of one of the last broadcasts from Warsaw in October 1944. It goes as follows:

    “In Warsaw is the nation that can muster such universal heroism. For those who have died have conquered and those who live on will fight on, will conquer and again bear witness that Poland lives when the Poles live”.

  • Mr Major’s Speech at Wreath-Laying Ceremony in Warsaw – 1 August 1994

    Below is the transcript of Mr Major’s speech at a wreath-laying ceremony at the site of the Liberator Stone in Skaryszdwski Park in Warsaw, on Monday 1st August 1994.

    PRIME MINISTER:

    Ladies and Gentlemen,

    It is a privilege to be with you this afternoon and to have had the opportunity of laying this wreath. It is a wreath in honour of all the air crew who lost or risked their lives to bring help to the heroic people of Warsaw during that terrible time in 1944. 1944 is especially remembered but of course the help spread through so much of the war.

    We stand this afternoon on the spot where a Liberator aircraft was brought down; British, Canadian and South African airmen died on that occasion. This afternoon we are here especially to remember them and we rejoice that the only living survivor of that crash is with us here today; he is here together with comrades from the air drop, veterans from Poland and from allies and Commonwealth countries.

    We look back over a space of fifty years to those remarkable events. As we do so, we owe it to the dead to continue the task of building a Europe in which peace and stability will take root and will remain with us for ever. I have but one simple message on this occasion and that is that Poland and Britain can join together in that task of providing peace in the future.

    It is my privilege to be your guest to lay this wreath today. It is the privilege of all of us here to be here today in freedom because of what was done by the men who died in that Liberator and so many others besides. Let us therefore remember them not just in the short term but for ever and I am delighted to be but a small part of that remembrance on this occasion and thank you for being here.

  • Mr Major’s Joint Doorstep Interview with Polish Prime Minister – 1 August 1994

    Below is the text of Mr Major’s joint doorstep interview, held with the Polish Prime Minister, Mr Waldemar Pawlak, in Warsaw on Monday 1st August 1994.

    PRIME MINISTER:

    I was delighted to have the opportunity of discussing a range of matters with the Prime Minister this afternoon. Firstly let me say how pleased I am to be here, it is a very remarkable occasion, this 50th anniversary, and anybody who has studied, even at the most superficial level, the remarkable heroism of Warsaw in 1944 will understand the importance of the occasion, so firstly let me say how pleased I am to be here.

    PRIME MINISTER PAWLAK:

    [Not interpreted].

    PRIME MINISTER:

    Let me just add a few words. We did not only discuss the past, of course, though we touched upon it as I indicated a moment ago, we spent a good deal of time discussing the present and the future. As far as the future is concerned we looked at the future prospects of Poland in due course becoming a member of the European Union. The British are very much in favour of widening the Union, we do not believe the European Union is complete as an instrument until it has the EFTAN states as members, until it has the Central and Eastern European countries, prominent amongst them of course Poland, as members as well. So we look forward to the prospect of Poland becoming a member of the European Union and we examined some of the matters that needed to be determined before that could come about. It is clearly a little way ahead but we are anxious to move that forward as speedily as is consistent with Poland being able to undertake the competition necessary when she becomes a member.

    Thirdly, we discussed some contemporary matters and in particular trade matters and the development of the mass privatisation programme in Poland. We foresaw a great many business opportunities in a range of areas – oil, gas, predominant but not only that, tobacco and a range of other areas as well – where there was the prospect of joint ventures and an increased investment and trading activity between the United Kingdom and Poland, and we discussed a number of technical matters like that in our brief discussion.

    I have invited the Prime Minister to come to the United Kingdom and he will be coming to the United Kingdom in November when we will be able to have much longer discussions on these and other issues and he will also be able to meet a number of other United Kingdom Ministers.

    QUESTION:

    Prime Minister, can you tell us anything about your talks with vice President Gore this morning, and anything on the exchange of letters between the Chief Secretary and the President of the Board of Trade, do you have any response to the suggestion that reveals a split in your Cabinet?

    PRIME MINISTER:

    I am accused of that every day and it is usually nonsense, and this is too. I have nothing to say about domestic matters in the UK while I am here, certainly not. I think the difference between examining matters and making decisions is very wide and ought to be understood by everyone.

    I had the opportunity with the Vice-President this morning of examining the decisions of the Contact Group and looking at some of the problems that lie ahead in Bosnia. Clearly there is a great deal for us jointly to consider and that consideration will go ahead, so we spent most of our time discussing the future development of events in Bosnia.

    QUESTION:

    What is your reaction to the German presence at these celebrations when they pointedly were not invited on D-Day?

    FOREIGN SECRETARY:

    The Germans will be coming to VE Day of course next year, it was decided that that was appropriate and the Germans felt that was appropriate as well, so I can only answer for D-Day and VE Day, I cannot answer for these particular celebrations, that is a matter for the Prime Minister and the President.

    QUESTION:

    [Not interpreted].

    PRIME MINISTER PAWLAK:

    [Not interpreted].

  • Mr Major’s Speech at the Opening of Archives Exhibition – 1 August 1994

    Below is the text of Mr Major’s speech at the opening of the Archives Exhibition in Warsaw on 1st August 1994.

    PRIME MINISTER:

    The two themes of my visit are captured in this British/Polish exhibition: commemoration and cooperation.

    The exhibition is the result of cooperation between the Polish National Archives and the Public Record Office in London. They have done a fine job.

    I am here first to pay tribute to those who fought fifty years ago so that Poland might be free. To commemorate the men, women and children of Warsaw who risked everything in that cause. And to recall the heroism of those who flew supplies to the Home Army.

    The documents and photographs gathered together in this Exhibition bear witness to the extraordinary bravery of the citizens of Warsaw in the tragic days of August 1944.

    They record the efforts of those in Britain who sent help to the insurgents in Warsaw.

    They show the courage of the Polish, British and other Allied airmen. The pilots and their crews flew from the south of Italy across hundreds of miles of occupied territory for the sake of a few precious minutes over Warsaw in which to drop their supplies.

    The exhibition shows the desperate straits of the insurgents as they fought, often hand-to-hand, sometimes underground, to defend their city; the distress of the Allies that they could not do more to help the defenders of Warsaw; the agonising choices which had to be made; and the determination of the Allies to fly in supplies at enormous cost in lives and material.

    Winston Churchill was moved by Poland’s fight and Polish spirit. He gave the command for help to be sent, however uphill the struggle. In the end, this help could not change the outcome. But it had a deeper meaning, which is not forgotten by the people who lived through the Uprising or who have studied its history.

    After the Uprising, Warsaw was razed to the ground. When I came here two years ago I saw the city that rose on the ruins of the old. The fine reconstruction of the old Town and the determination to rebuild their capital is testimony to the pride and vigour of the people of Warsaw.

    The physical changes since 1944 are staggering. But the moral and political reconstruction of the last 5 years is as astonishing as the physical reconstruction of Warsaw. Poland has shaken off the legacy of Communism, the Command Economy and the Cold War.

    As we recall our past alliance, let me say this: Britain is supporting Poland also as she faces the challenges of constructing a truly democratic society. We in Britain are proud to help in this through trade, investment, transfer of Know-How; through all the cooperative links which exist between partner countries in Europe.

    I firmly believe in Poland’s ability to contribute to the stability and security of Europe. Poland’s application for membership of the European Union opens new prospects. I welcome it. I welcome the contribution that a free and democratic Poland will make to the Union.
    Every state, every nation, wants security. But for the Polish people, with their troubled history over several centuries, security has a special

    meaning. By developing our relations with you in a way which threatens no-one, and is not founded on a new division within Europe, we want to create a deeper sense of security in Poland.

    We welcome the enthusiasm with which you have embraced Partnership for Peace. We look forward to taking part in the first joint exercise on Polish soil next month: a symbol of what we can, and mean to, do together. We shall do all we can to build up substantial effective military cooperation between Poland and NATO: preparation for eventual membership.

    Next year we shall mark 50 years of peace in Europe. Now Poland is not only at peace, but is free. And Britain is at your side, as we were in the Uprising 50 years ago. We look forward to being equal partners within the European Union. As you prepare to join us there, you can count on our support.

  • Mr Major’s Speech at the Warsaw Uprising Monument – 1 August 1994

    Below is the text of Mr Major’s speech at the Warsaw Uprising Monument on 1st August 1994.

    PRIME MINISTER:

    Mr President, Ladies and Gentlemen.

    This year and next, in many of the countries in Europe, we commemorate the inspiring but tragic events of 50 years ago.

    We honour the bravery and sacrifices of those who fought in a just cause.

    And we celebrate half a century of peace and reconciliation.

    Your guests from abroad today, Mr President, embody that spirit of reconciliation.

    I am proud to represent my country here. Britain stood with Poland in 1939. Your Government then found refuge in London. Through the War, Poles and Britons served side by side in the air, on land and at sea.

    It was in a broadcast from London that the world first heard of the 1944 Uprising. Winston Churchill declared that Britain felt itself responsible for the restoration to the Poles of their own country.

    He was deeply moved by what he called “the martyrdom of Warsaw”. In his History of the War, he later gave a moving account of the struggle by Warsaw’s people to save their city, of their hardships, and of how they saw it almost totally destroyed.

    Britain tried to help, though no country could do enough.

    During the fighting 186 sorties were flown from British bases on the other side of Europe, in the south of Italy. One in three of those aircraft did not return: 61 were lost.

    Earlier today I laid a wreath at the spot where one of them crashed, in the Skaryszewski Park, just across the river. I met there veterans from Britain and other Commonwealth countries and allies who risked their lives so that Poland might be free. They are a living witness to the values which bind our free nations. So are the thousands of Polish veterans who live in Britain today.

    The Uprising was Poland’s decision to assert her sovereignty and independence. But Poland’s tragedy was that the outcome of the war and of the Uprising left her under another occupation. It took 45 years fully to reassert your country’s independence and sovereignty.

    After the destruction of Warsaw in 1944, the people of Warsaw and of Poland rebuilt this capital city. The World can see your success and your pride: in the old Town, the Royal Castle, the streets and stones of Warsaw.

    Now you grapple with another challenge: to rebuild your economy and society after the devastation of Communism. With your other friends, we are taking part in the rebuilding of Poland: through trade, through investment, through transfer of know-how.

    And now a democratic and independent Poland has made the sovereign decision to apply for membership of the European Union. I welcome that. Europe will not be complete without Poland as a full member of our Union. The values of the Union are the values for which your citizens and ours fought and died 50 years ago.

    This evening we remember and honour those dead. We honour also all those who lived through that time of pity and terror. Soldiers and civilians. Men and women; and children, symbolised by the statue of the little boy soldier with the helmet. The brave people of Warsaw.

    Let the past be an inspiration for the future, for the new challenges of peace and freedom.

    Perhaps those who were not there cannot fully understand. But we can stand beside you now, as we stood then; and offer thanks and honour.

    In the words of one of the last broadcasts from Warsaw in October 1944:

    “Immortal is the nation that can muster such universal heroism. For those who have died have conquered, and those who live on will fight on, will conquer and again bear witness that Poland lives when the Poles live.”