Respected citizens,
Respected Speaker, Mr. Gashi,
Respected Prime Minister, Mr. Mickoski,
Respected Members of Parliament,
Respected Ministers,
Respected Representatives of the Judiciary,
Respected Representatives of Religious Communities,
Respected Chief of the General Staff,
Respected President of MANU, Academician Popov
Respected Representatives of the Diplomatic Corps,
Media Representatives, Ladies and Gentlemen,
As bearers of direct legitimacy, you and I have an Aristotelian goal: to contribute to the creation of a common good and a better society, through participation in political life, as Jean-Jacques Rousseau and John Stuart Mill advised. But politics requires dialogue and agreement, argumentation, not bare physical or verbal violence. Unfortunately, real politics has nothing in common with art, but, based on power, functions according to the formula: “Politics: Who Gets What, When and How”, to quote the title of Harold Lasswell’s work!
For the fourth time this year, I have the opportunity to speak before the members of parliament, after the address at the session on the occasion of the celebration of March 8, the address at the National Council for European Integration and the Committee on European Affairs, and the presentation before the Committee on Equal Opportunities for Women and Men.
I am here, in the spirit of the separation of powers, as a representative of all citizens, personifying national unity, to present what has been done in 2025, the difficulties I have faced and encountered, the achievements, the unresolved problems, the challenges before me and before you, the solutions.
I speak today in my capacity as President of the Republic, a function that does not belong to the individual, but to the state; a function that is not drawn only from personal authority, but from the trust of the citizens; a function that does not divide, but unites. The President is not only a constitutional category, but a symbol of the togetherness, of the continuity and of the dignity of one nation. When the President represents the state at home and abroad, he does not speak only on his own behalf, but on the behalf of the citizens, of the strong and the vulnerable, of those who are loud and those who are silent, even unnoticed. The presidential office is above all an obligation: an obligation for fairness, for restraint, for principle and for care for every citizen.
I understand this office as a point of connection between institutions and citizens, between the past and the future, between internal cohesion and external representation. The president personifies the state, but the state lives through the people. Therefore, my work has always been guided by the conviction that institutions exist for the citizens, and not vice versa.
The president must not be distant, untouchable or captured by protocol, but, on the contrary, must be accessible, present and human.
Citizens, universities, non-governmental organizations and numerous other social groups were given free and direct access to me, not as a formality, but as an essential opportunity to discuss the issues that concern them. It was not a symbolic gesture, but an undertaking of a specific obligation for problems to be transferred to the competent institutions and their resolution to be monitored.
I believe that social cohesion is not built with resolutions and declarations, but with recognition. Therefore, the president must be present where successes are celebrated: of the best students, of scientists, artists, athletes. When the state recognizes its best, it sends a clear message that labor, knowledge, and excellence are values that never remain invisible.
At such meetings, I act as a citizen who can be reached, who listens, sympathizes and understands. Only in this way does the institution gain a human face, and trust becomes real, not a formal category.
Humanism and solidarity are not abstract concepts. They are fundamental values that must be translated into policies and practices, especially when it comes to people with disabilities, members of smaller communities, and all those who are traditionally excluded from decision-making processes.
I often say that there are no “people with disabilities,” but rather a disabled state unable to recognize and utilize the energy, creativity and capabilities of all its citizens. When we remove physical, institutional and mental barriers, then society becomes stronger. Inclusion is a condition for democratic maturity.
Ladies and Gentlemen,
Unfortunately, 2025 will remain engraved in our minds and hearts as the year of the terrible tragedy in Kocani. We will all carry the trauma of the tragedy that killed 63 of our fellow citizens, sons and daughters, parents and friends, for the rest of our lives. With the fire at the disco in Kocani, the ugly face of spontaneous decision-making, ignoring procedures, lack of systemic control, but also of the culture of impunity and double standards came to the surface.
There are moments when a country stops in front of itself. The tragedy in Kocani was exactly such a moment, a moment of national shock, collective grief and deep questioning. In those days, we felt the fragility of human life, but also the strength of solidarity. A large number of friendly countries responded unexpectedly quickly and selflessly, driven not by self-interest but by humanity. The medical teams, the planes and helicopters on standby, the open health facilities and the activation of the European Civil Protection Mechanism sent a clear message: in the most difficult moments, you are not alone.
Those countries not only helped us, but also shared our pain. Their concern became our common medicine. Their solidarity will remain etched in the collective memory of our people as proof that humanity knows no borders.
The incredibly swift reaction of the neighbors was especially significant. At a time when political relations are often burdened with misunderstandings, the tragedy reminded of a simple truth: geography cannot be changed, but humanity can overcome all barriers. The solidarity shown further strengthened the friendly ties between the peoples of the region.
But Kocani was not just a tragedy. That event led us to the wall of shame, and then to the possibility of catharsis, because this tragedy was not only an act of misfortune, but also of systemic failures. Tolerating corruption, the non-sanctioning of crime and institutional irresponsibility increase the danger to the point of catastrophe. In the case of Kocani, we are not talking only about law, but also about justice, about ethics, about morality.
I understand the pain of the families of the victims; I understand their justified anger and rage. Their demands for truth, for responsibility and for justice are absolutely legitimate. The only legal way for the state to satisfy the legitimate demands of the families is through respect for the Constitution and the laws. Extra-systemic action cannot bear systemic fruit. Therefore, we should leave the prosecutors alone to accuse, the defense attorneys to defend, and the judges to rule. Parties and politicians should stop their daily political squabbles at the expense of the work of the court and the pain of the families. We cannot bring back their loved ones. The only thing we can bring back is the belief that justice is possible in this country. Hence, this trial is the test against which the determination and readiness of this country for judicial reforms, for European judiciary, for the rule of law in real life, and not just declaratively, on paper, will be assessed. This process will determine whether the judiciary will gain or permanently lose the trust of the Macedonian citizens.
Kocani shows that the rule of law and the eradication of corruption are not a technical issue, but a matter of life and death.
It is no coincidence that negotiations for membership in the European Union begin and end with the rule of law, with an independent and functional judiciary and with the fight against corruption. They are the core of European reforms, which are not concessions to Brussels, but an obligation to the Macedonian citizens.
I agree with the findings regarding the importance of the Copenhagen criteria. However, parts of the report, as I have already said, speak not only about the assessed, but also about the assessor. While the report confirms that we have a stable economy, the highest technical compliance with the European legislation in the region and 100% compliance with the European foreign and security policy, the assessment is still: “limited progress”.
According to the European Union reports, the country was best rated in the period 2017-2020, when the Agreement on Friendship, Good Neighborly Relations and Cooperation with Bulgaria and the Prespa Agreement with Greece were signed and ratified. Hence, the real obstacle to our European path is not the Copenhagen criteria nor reforms, but the acceptance of solutions and conditions that are not tied to the rule of law.
What is the new requirement for “political readiness for accession” or “political maturity” if not a de facto new political criterion introduced to measure the ability of the candidate country to build a stable political consensus for EU membership, in an environment of deep political and party polarization?
In the case of the Macedonian European integration, the problem is not administrative, but lies in the constitutional amendments. We are a technically compliant, but politically blocked candidate for membership. The fast lane on which some candidate countries have found themselves is not only the result of their reforms, but also of the political will of the Union. In the scales of the European Union, our constitutional amendments seem to have more weight than the substantive reforms. Regardless of how many reform achievements we add, in the end, the political condition weighs heavily and we are handed a very high political bill to pay.
The latest condition is the inclusion of Bulgarians in our Constitution. Let me remind you: back in the early 1990s, the Badinter Commission gave a positive assessment of the Constitution of Slovenia and our Constitution, recommending the European Community to recognize us. It, in turn, recognized Slovenia and Croatia and bypassed us. In 1996, the Council of Europe published an important publication entitled “The Rebirth of Democracy: 12 Constitutions from Central and Eastern Europe”, including the Macedonian, due to its democratic, liberal solutions. Following the Ohrid Framework Agreement, our constitutional solutions for the protection of the rights of non-majority communities guarantee the highest international standards, as it itself establishes, and this is confirmed by the Venice Commission in its opinion on the Law on the Use of Languages. This also refers to the Prespa Agreement and the famous referendum question: Are you in favor of EU and NATO membership by accepting the Agreement? The referendum failed, but 80 MPs forgot that according to the Law on Referendum and Other Forms of Personal Declaration, they had to harmonize all acts and activities of the Assembly with the referendum result and voted on the constitutional amendments. Interestingly, not a single constitutional amendment, initiated from outside, was on the agenda of the Venice Commission. If constitutional changes were a guarantee for the European reforms and harmonization in the spirit of European law, we would have been in the EU long ago, but we have not even started the negotiations, again because of the new constitutional amendment that we are required to implement.
Dear all,
Almost my entire foreign policy agenda this year was focused on the European integration. At the United Nations General Assembly in New York, at the European Political Community in Copenhagen, at the Paris Peace Forum, at the international forums in Baku, Astana and Podgorica, and at the 35th anniversary of the Venice Commission, I defended our sovereign right, to use Mr. Macron’s words regarding Ukraine, to European membership! It is no coincidence that my focus was on multilateral events where I could meet as many as possible heads of state and government and representatives of international organizations, in order to point out to them the paradoxical inconsistency after 20 years of candidate status quo and conditioning the start of negotiations with new constitutional amendments, by a new initiator, now the EU, although according to the constitution, as a lex superior and a social contract, constitutional amendments can be proposed by 30 MPs, the government, the president and 150,000 citizens!
Probably, after the change of our name, any other change seems benign to the unauthorized proposers. Well, I ask, wasn’t the problem finally solved with the Prespa Agreement, which the last Declaration refers to, because Article 7 establishes that the name “Macedonia” for the “second”, “nameless” party means a territory and a people with its own history, culture and language? Do the guarantees of respect for national and cultural identity, dignity and integrity, as fundamental values that the EU refers to in its constituent acts, but also in the December Declaration, apply to us? What happened to the respect for political and constitutional structures and the support for concluding agreements between the EU members and their neighbors on a reciprocal basis, established in the EU Treaty? In which Article of the Treaty on Good Neighborly Relations and Friendship with Bulgaria, the implementation of which is binding for us because of the Declaration, it is said that we need to change the Constitution in order to start negotiations? Can an international agreement be amended with a protocol signed by two foreign ministers, as if consuls, and that protocol (a synonym for minutes of the meeting) become part of the Negotiating Framework and the Conclusions and a reason for amending our Constitution?
If the Brussels constitutional and legal experts had taken a comparative look at our and Bulgarian constitutional solutions in terms of the level of guaranteeing and protecting minority rights, as well as the relevant opinions of the Venice Commission, they would have easily determined who has a problem and who meets high standards of minority protection!
Let me quote Amendment VIII to Article 48 of the Macedonian Constitution:
Members of communities shall have the right to freely express, preserve and develop their identity and the distinct features of their communities, and to use the symbols of their community.
The Republic shall guarantee the protection of the ethnic, cultural, linguistic and religious identity of all communities.
Members of communities shall have the right to establish cultural, artistic and educational institutions, as well as scientific and other associations, for the purpose of expressing, preserving and developing their identity.
Members of communities shall have the right to be taught in their own language in primary and secondary education, in a manner prescribed by law. In schools where teaching is conducted in a language other than Macedonian, the Macedonian language shall also be taught.
Here is what the Bulgarian Constitution says, in Article 6, paragraph 2: “All citizens shall be equal before the law. There shall be no privileges or restriction of rights on the
grounds of race, national or social origin, ethnic self-identity, sex, religion, education, opinion, political affiliation, personal or social status or property status.” What did the Venice Commission recommend to Bulgaria in its 2008 Opinion? To amend the Constitution to take into account the rights of minorities, instead of remaining only on the general non-discriminatory cause. Moreover, the Republic of Bulgaria does not implement the twenty judgments of the Court of Human Rights against Bulgaria, obtained by Macedonians who are denied the right to form cultural associations.
In whose interest is it that we remain outside the EU, if not of third powers? Who opens the door to the influence of third powers, if not an EU member state and our immediate neighbor? How does the European Union want to be a geopolitical union, while keeping our country and the Western Balkans in a geopolitical vacuum?
The Macedonian European integration is a textbook example of the consequences of neglecting the procedure as a guarantee of democracy. Let me remind you that the MPs from the previous parliamentary composition had no insight into the content of the second protocol with Bulgaria.
When I confront my interlocutors with these and many other issues, I get the impression that no one had previously pointed out the inconsistencies to them. I wonder: Would we have had a different Negotiating Framework and Conclusions if the leaders of the European Union and the European Council had been confronted with these arguments in a timely manner?
Why am I saying this? If over the past years and decades some of our political and party leaders had built a national consensus at home, here, in this Parliament, before going to Brussels, as a country we would have avoided wrong steps and unnecessary concessions and would have earned respect. We should learn from our neighbors, who speak with one voice for what is important to them and do not ignore the declarations adopted in their parliaments. Disagreement on issues of national interest has made us a weak country.
Double standards have led us to a strange situation. Public opinion polls show that, on the one hand, we still have a high percentage of support for EU integration, and at the same time, on the other, growing doubts that we will ever integrate into the European Union. Macedonian citizens love the goal, but they are losing faith in the journey.
Is there a way out of this situation? I believe there is. Political will is needed, but not only ours, but also the Union’s, because we are proposing several solutions, and the European Union needs to choose one, or find its own creative solution to unblock the process. If there is a solution for Ukraine and Moldova, it will easily find one for us too!
I believe that we have many friends in the European Union who understand the absurdity of the phenomenon we are faced with.
The message I am sending today, from this Assembly, is that without clear guarantees from the EU and Bulgaria and without appropriate safeguards, with yet another constitutional change, we risk emerging from this process like Hemingway’s old man emerged from the sea: with a fish skeleton, with stripped, thorned sovereignty and identity, national and cultural. This issue requires careful weighing of every step, because we see where the “brave” decisions have led us: to Huxley’s brave world! Imagine how the Committee on Inter-Community Relations with 43 members will function? Imagine how it will work if the Law requires the presence of 2/3 of the members? Imagine how an absolute majority will be ensured for decision-making! Do not forget the strangest constitutional article I have read in my teaching career, part of Amendment XII: “If a community does not have a representative, the Ombudsman, after consultation with the relevant representatives of those communities, shall propose other members of the Committee.”!
We need a national consensus more than ever before, because we live in uncertain times. The international order is rapidly moving towards unpredictable multipolarity, replacing multilateral rules with increasingly intense geopolitical competition. In addition to shaking up the European security architecture, the military aggression in Ukraine is stimulating the militarization of the continent. This situation, together with the instability in the Middle East, generates uncertainty.
Unpredictability requires territorially small states, such as ours, to have a dual focus: to firmly support multilateralism and international law, while at the same time uncompromisingly protect the interests of the Macedonian citizens. A wise foreign policy is one in which interests and values are not excluded, but are aligned. A wise foreign policy is one that, by carefully positioning and weighing the steps, makes pragmatic decisions. The more unpredictable the environment, the more important it is to advocate with one voice for our national interests, regardless of whether we are in power or in opposition. That is exactly what I have been doing this past year, in close cooperation with the Government and the Parliament.
Our country is moving with an unchanged geopolitical and strategic orientation, both as a NATO member state and as a factor of stability in the region. Currently, we are the only country in the Western Balkans with full, 100% compliance with the EU’s Common Foreign and Security Policy.
The time of hybrid and cyber threats and a changed security paradigm also require increased investments in defense in order to strengthen the capabilities of our Army, improve crisis management and develop defense capacities.
And all this must be done without neglecting the needs of the civilian population.
Among the key security priorities is the completion of Corridor 8, which connects the Western Balkans with the European ports. This strategic Corridor is important not only for trade and economic development, but also for strengthening regional security and supporting European integration. The EU should also invest in its construction.
The Balkans is a region of parallel processes: of cooperation, but also of tensions, dialogue and blockades, common interests and unilateral demands. In this complex environment with neuralgic security points, we choose to walk the path of principled policy, to build bridges of good neighborliness and cooperation, always taking into account national positions.
We rounded off the 30th anniversary of diplomatic relations with our most important strategic partner, the United States of America, with the Order of Military Merit.
Increased cooperation with important European countries, such as the United Kingdom and Hungary, serves as a stabilizing factor in times of crisis and supports the development of our country.
Regarding the issue of rejected asylum seekers in the United Kingdom, I repeat that if certain individuals are a security risk to UK, then, by definition, they are an even greater threat to our security.
As a country, we invest not only in military, but also in energy security. In this context, I was on my first, historic official visit to the Republic of Azerbaijan to discuss a possible partnership in the field of energy. The construction of the gas interconnector with Greece should enable us to have a fairer energy transition. We will become part of the EU Southern Gas Corridor and the Trans-Balkan Gas Ring, which will enable energy diversification and accelerated economic growth. This means lower prices for both industry and households.
In order to create effective policies, it is necessary to hear the voice of the people, where they live and work. Therefore, in order to find out the real problems, needs and priorities of the Macedonian citizens, I did not wait for them to come to me. Instead, I go to them, within the framework of what I called “Mobile People’s Offices”, and in the next period, we will activate the former People’s Office in Center.
The problems and expectations of the Macedonian citizens are not just a wish list, but the contours of our social contract. They are the basic blueprint according to which all policies should be developed and according to which state institutions should function. Only by consistently fulfilling these important needs, we strengthen legitimacy and restore trust, turning the social contract into reality.
First and foremost is the need for justice: impartial, timely. The “Safe City” project shows that habits change when rules apply equally to everyone, without ties and protections, but a systemic approach to solving traffic problems is necessary, related to confronting uncontrolled construction, which overloads and paralyzes the traffic in certain urban areas. In solving these problems, local self-government plays crucial role. Municipalities must strengthen inspection control and urban discipline, so that public space and security do not fall victim to chaos and interests.
Justice is the basis of trust and certainty. The state should protect citizens; citizens should not feel that they need to protect themselves from the state, from the anomic judicial system. That is why reforms in the judiciary are important, which begin with the adoption of a new Law on the Judicial Council.
The old Law was a factor of crisis in the judiciary, enabling partisanship, politicization, ineptitude and incompetence. The new Law, which has also passed the strict filter of the Venice Commission, which I believe you will soon vote on, tightens the selection criteria and increases transparency. Therefore, instead of rushing to fill the vacant positions in the Judicial Council according to outdated criteria, it is wise to wait for the new Law to establish a meritocratic-based Judicial Council.
The success of the judicial reforms will determine whether our judiciary has the power to say “no” when politics says “yes”. It will depend on this whether we will strengthen citizens’ trust in justice.
Although there is no formal obligation to align with the European legislation in the judicial sphere, it is clear that without a legal framework compatible with the best European practices, there can be no rule of law. Reforms must be guided by principles, not by party interests; by knowledge and integrity, not by loyalty.
In that context, my decision to refrain from nominating two members of the Judicial Council, until the new Law is adopted, was not an act of passivity, but an act of responsibility. I was aware that there could be no judicial reforms with anti-reform profiles created according to the preferences of the parties, not of the rule of law. In accordance with the new Law on the Judicial Council, based on clear, measurable and strict criteria, I will propose the best candidates, people with undisputed integrity, professional reputation and knowledge. This will put an end to the practice of political agreements behind closed doors and pave the path for a true meritocracy in the judiciary. Only an independent Judicial Council can be a guarantor of justice. Everything else is an illusion paid for by the citizens. The Constitutional Court, as a separate state institution outside the regular judiciary, has a key role in protecting constitutionality and legality. In times of political turbulence, its independence is of essential importance. The decisions of the Constitutional Court must not be under the pressure of politics, but of legal argumentation and constitutional principles.
I have always advocated for respecting the institutional balance, through the system of checks and balances. The President does not have the right to usurp the judicial power, but has an obligation to defend its independence. Only in this way can the institutions function as a system, and not as parallel centers of power.
At the beginning of this year, I pointed out that the Law on Pardoning in its current form, after several repealed articles, does not provide sufficient legal certainty or transparency, things that citizens rightly expect from a democratic state. Pardoning must not be an act of discretion without clear rules, but a mechanism with clear provisions in the public interest.
My recent visit to the Idrizovo Correctional Institution further strengthened my conviction that pardoning should not be just a formal act. The talks with the convicts reminded me that justice is not just a punishment, but also an opportunity for resocialization and a second chance for those who work dedicatedly and sincerely on their own improvement.
Within the framework of my constitutional powers, I reached for the right of veto when I considered it necessary and justified. Much more often, through dialogue and cooperation with the competent ministers, I point out the need for better solutions, for amendments and supplements to legal texts. In this way, in many cases, the veto was avoided, and higher-quality normative solutions were created. I consider this to be the essence of institutional cooperation, not confrontation for the sake of confrontation, but correction for the sake of the public interest and good.
However, citizens do not need only judicial justice, but also social justice. And according to the Constitution, we are a welfare state. It is much more than a minimum wage and an increased pension, basic health care and social assistance. All strategies and policies of a welfare state are designed to the needs of citizens. Therefore, it is necessary to continue with the initiated European reform of public administration, with projects for digitalization of public services and simplification of electronic procedures, with transparent budget financing. A welfare state does not mean a poor state, but a state that cares for its citizens. This also includes the vulnerable. Fair and appropriate representation should be extended to people who express their abilities in a different way. The state must overcome its disability in not recognizing the need to create an environment in which ‘special’ gifts and talents of people with disabilities will be expressed.
Vulnerability also includes women. We must not allow activism against gender-based violence to last only 16 days, for the remaining 349 to pass in passive toleration of the culture of verbal and physical violence. Femicide is the most extreme consequence of tolerated violence against women and a clear indicator of institutional failure. It does not begin with murder, but with ignored threats, insults and fear. When institutions do not react in time, they become part of the problem. Therefore, the fight against femicide must be a national priority, with zero tolerance for any form of violence against women. A National Strategy 2026-2033 and an expansion of the network of shelters with long-term support for victims are necessary. Professionalization of centers through strict standards, professional staff and rapid licensing of SOS lines is needed. Change begins with education that teaches respect and continues with the visibility of women in decision-making. This is how a society is created in which every woman lives freely, with dignity and without fear.
A country becomes modern not only with harmonization, but also with application of the European legislation, when citizens see from their own experience that justice is available, that the judiciary is independent, that the administration is professional, that discrimination is unacceptable.
Justice is also a prerequisite for the second key need of the Macedonian citizens, which is a healthy economy.
The National Bank, whose governor I recently nominated, is responsible for maintaining price and financial stability through macroeconomic policies. This is very important, especially in conditions of geo-economic fragmentation of global economy. In such an environment, the small and open Macedonian economy has shown visible resilience. Gross domestic product continues to grow, budget revenues are increasing, inflation has stabilized, and the deficit is moderate. Public debt, although higher, remains sustainable and low-risk. Although economic indicators are encouraging, the need for caution remains and measures to protect citizens from price shocks should be continued. EU-oriented trade, foreign investments, a stable denar and a solid banking sector give us the confidence to continue with reforms and build a more predictable economic future. And the future belongs to developing, digital economies that are based on knowledge, technology and competitiveness. Otherwise, we risk losing the main drivers of economy – the youth.
This leads me to the third need of Macedonian citizens, which is preventing the exodus of young people. The entire Balkans is facing a mass exodus that is causing a serious demographic and democratic crisis. There is no progress without their favorite word “why?”, there is no authentic democracy without their voice, there is no modern society without their intelligence, mind and creation.
Aware of this reality, I advocated for creation of mechanisms through which young people would not only be a topic, but active actors in the defining of public policies. The establishment of the Youth Council under my auspices was precisely such a step, an institutional framework that allows young people to be included in the dialogue on issues that directly shape their future. Through the Youth Council, I have held several meetings and thematic debates with young people from different backgrounds and communities and with different experiences and needs. Young people must not allow the average and below-average to occupy key positions. They must fight; we must help them in that fight. Only in this way will we ensure that leaving their homeland is not destiny for young people. They do not need only declarative support, but a functional system that creates opportunities and values quality.
Recently, I awarded the Order “September 8” to our top cardiac surgeon and mountaineer, academician Sasko Kedev, who climbed the 14 world peaks and hang the Macedonian flag there. We need to enable young people to climb not only Macedonian and European, but also world peaks in science, culture, art, sports, technology and business. After all, what are teachers and professors, mentors and coaches, if not Sherpas who should prepare young people for the path to success. And Sherpas, in addition to being dedicated to their noble calling, should also have appropriate conditions and support from the system, from institutions, and from the business community. This country must allocate more funds for education and science, for research and development, for culture and sports.
If you remember, last year, I did not go to the opening of the Olympics in Paris so that students could go to the Mathematical Olympiads. With that decision of mine, I disrupted the system. A few days ago, I signed the decree promulgating the new Law by which, for the first time, the state undertakes to cover the costs of students for international competitions in mathematics and natural sciences. Only with this approach will we avoid the fate of an economy of cheap labor and grow into a knowledge-based economy. There is power in knowledge, and that is why we need to invest therein. Science, education, culture and sports do not recognize small and large countries.
The fourth need of citizens is related to the environment. I recently visited Resen, and I was convinced of the alarming state of the water level of Lake Prespa. One of the oldest tectonic lakes in Europe is drying up before our eyes. Water is an invaluable resource. Slovenia has protected waters in its constitution. And what are we doing? Or our forests, which are being decimated not only by forest fires, but also by loggers. Natural wealth belongs to everyone. Ecology must not be reduced to the actions of a group of enthusiasts, but must grow into a social habit, which is built with consistent respect for the laws. Do we perhaps need a “Safe City” for illegal landfills as well? The right to a healthy environment, to clean air, to sustainable development is not a luxury for wealthy societies but a prerequisite for a dignified life for each of us. Climate change is not only an environmental issue, but also a security issue. It affects water resources, agriculture, health, migration and social stability. Therefore, environmental protection must be treated as part of national security and as a long-term investment in the stability of the state.
The fifth need is our compatriots in the diaspora. Emigrant Macedonia is already more numerous than domicile Macedonia. That makes the diaspora the second wing of the Macedonian homeland. Can we fly with only one wing? For too long, the diaspora was neglected, but now, with digitalization and artificial intelligence, we can finally be one. As our greatest strategic resource, the diaspora can be a key driver of the economy, a guardian of identity, a promoter of culture and the best ambassador in the world. The new National Strategy for the Diaspora offers a new relationship with our emigrants. But that new relationship begins with accepting the multifaceted nature of the diaspora, from the emotionally attached first generation, to the young people of the third generation who bring knowledge and ideas. However, the success of the strategy depends on three things: clear institutional mechanisms, secured financial support and strong, long-standing political will for consistent implementation. We have one of the rare constitutions that has provisions for the diaspora. Perhaps we should consider, following the example of Montenegro, adopting a Law on Diaspora. Why is this important? Because countries that have strong ties with the diaspora prosper, while countries that have weak ties with the diaspora stagnate. If we fulfill all this, then, and only then, will we reach the key turning point in the relationship between the homeland and the diaspora and write the first page of the new, common chapter of our state.
The Security Council, for me, has never been just a formal body in which the key word is given to the ex officio members. I understand this institution as the intellectual and strategic core of the state, a place where experience, expertise and responsibility for long-term national interests meet. Therefore, I attach particular importance to the external members of the Council, whose expertise is related to European integration, environmental protection, security policies and modern hybrid threats. I communicate with them not only formally, but continuously, seeking opinions, analyses and assessments that go beyond daily politics.
Security today is not limited to the defense of the territory. It includes the energy security and climate stability, the resilience of institutions and the trust of citizens. Only with such an extended approach can the Security Council be a truly functional, not a protocol body.
The Army is one of the most stable and trusted pillars of the state. In agreement and close cooperation with the Chief of the General Staff, my commitment was clear: promotions and personnel decisions should be based on meritocracy, professionalism and proven capabilities. A strong army is not built only with equipment and numbers, but with people who know that their work will be valued, and their service – respected. Intensified cooperation with international partners and holders of high military positions has contributed not only to strengthening the capacities, but also to international recognition of the professionalism of our Army.
A particularly sensitive, but extremely important area is the functioning of the intelligence services. In this area, the principles of legality, non-discrimination and institutional consistency must not be subject to political calculations. The initiated procedures regarding the selection of the leadership of the Intelligence Agency were subject to the Commission for Prevention and Protection from Discrimination, the Constitutional and Administrative Courts. They confirmed that there was no discrimination and that the decisions were made in accordance with the legal competences. Attempts to present these decisions as a legal problem actually revealed something deeper, a clash with the patriarchal political culture.
Institutions must be stronger than individual ambitions. Only in this way can the state be stable and predictable.
When the highest state awards are awarded to the right people, they cease to be a formality and become an inspiration. My goal was precisely that, to reward excellence, integrity and lasting contribution to society. The awards are not a reward for loyalty, but for value. They send a message about what the state values and what examples it wants future generations to follow.
The way a state acts outside its borders is a direct reflection of its internal stability, institutional maturity and clarity of value orientation. Foreign policy is not a set of protocol meetings, but a long-term strategy for protecting national interests and affirming the state’s identity.
In this context, the president has a special responsibility to represent the state authentically, with dignity and credibility. The first image of a state in the international community is not its declarations, but its representatives. Therefore, the issue of the diplomatic network and the quality of ambassadorial appointments is not technical, but essential. The situation with insufficient coverage of a large number of countries with ambassadors is unsustainable. Ambassadors are the face of the state, its first line of communication and trust. My conviction is clear: career, experience and professionalism must be the basic criteria for diplomatic representation.
Although I understand the political realities, the amendments to the Law on Foreign Affairs, which established a 50:50 ratio between career and political appointments, were a step towards a balanced solution. However, balance must not mean compromising on quality.
In a world of growing conflicts and erosion of international law, the role of multilateralism is becoming more important than ever. I believe that small and medium-sized states should be the most vocal supporters of an effective multilateral order, with strong and reformed international institutions. The Security Council and the General Assembly must be reformed to respond to the realities of the 21st century. Institutions created in 1945 cannot solve the problems of today’s world without fundamental changes. The judgments of international courts must be binding, and the law must be equally applicable to all. I particularly strongly emphasize the need for a woman at the forefront of global institutions. In a world dominated by strong men with weapons, we need strong women with wisdom. Culture is one of the most powerful and least used diplomatic tools. I recognize in art a bridge between peoples, a language that knows no borders, and a means of building trust where politics often fails. Supporting cultural events, festivals, artists and cultural heritage is not a luxury, but an investment in international reputation and internal cohesion. Through cultural dialogue, friendship, understanding and mutual respect are strengthened.
No country, no continent, can independently establish peace with nature. Climate change is a common challenge that requires a common response. Our country, although small, is part of the global ecosystem and has a responsibility to contribute to its protection. The priority we give to water resources, biodiversity and environmental protection is an investment in the future. Especially as part of the Mediterranean – one of the most climate-vulnerable regions in the world – we do not have the luxury of indecision.
I will conclude with the following.
Recently, I had the great honor of celebrating the national holiday October 11 – the Day of the People’s Uprising together with members of our diaspora in Italy. I will never forget that experience, when everyone, regardless of their ethnic, religious and generational affiliation, instead of just silently listening to it, together and loudly intoned the Macedonian anthem.
I believe that it was a foreshadowing of the unity we need here, whether we are Macedonians, Albanians, Turks, Serbs, Roma, Vlachs, Bosniaks or others, whether we are Christians, Muslims, Jews or atheists. Only by building that unity around the interests of the state will we be able to truly renew the social contract of free citizens, equal before the law, united around the common good.
Thank you for your patience, and I wish you a New Year filled with positive moments and memories.
