Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/1999-11-17-Speech-3-042"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.19991117.2.3-042"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
"Mister President, the fact that most Members of my group welcome the creation of a European defence identity has a lot – but not everything – to do with the lessons we have learnt from the Kosovo war and the insight that, unfortunately, in some cases, it is necessary to use armed force if there is a mass violation of human rights. Having said this, I would like to emphasise once more – this has fortunately already been done by many speakers – that, to my mind, the power of the European Union is, or should lie, in crisis management and the prevention of conflict. I am therefore grateful to Mr Patten who has emphatically drawn attention to this very issue. I think that he is right. I think that the power of the European Union – as already referred to by the previous speaker – lies in the fact that, before conflict spreads, every effort should be made to prevent this from happening. Within this context, I would again like to ask Mr Solana about his pledges in the Committee on Foreign Affairs following a feasibility study carried out by the
European civil peace corps. He confirmed this at the time and I would like to hear from him again, as this is one of the very situations in which the European Union could be effective in the prevention of conflict.
The question remains how autonomous this conduct of the European Union will be in future, how independent from the United States and how closely involved with Russia, for example. Your successor, Mr Robertson, has stated in a number of interviews that the EU’s conduct will largely remain restricted to minor, less significant conflicts. This remark has prompted three questions that I would like to ask here. The first one is: in your opinion, what bearing does this have on the deployment of nuclear weapons? Would you agree with me that the EU’s involvement in smaller conflicts then renders nuclear weapons completely unusable and superfluous?
Secondly, you mentioned the reorganisation of funds and the making available of appropriate tools. Would you agree with me that, at present, the reorganisation of funds within the European Union is far more important than consideration being given to raising the ceiling on defence?
Thirdly, cooperation with Russia: Could you be more precise about how the European Union should bring this about, independently of NATO? After all, if the majority of potential areas of conflict are either in or bordering Russia, does this not raise the dilemma of us creating something which we will only be able to use in practice with great difficulty, precisely because Russia is involved?"@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples