Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2000-03-01-Speech-3-044"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20000301.5.3-044"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
"Madam President, this is the second time we have had occasion to enter into discussion with the High Representative Javier Solana, and I would like to begin by addressing a few words to the Commission’s representative, Chris Patten. The first time we entered into discussion with the High Representative for the CFSP, the Commission, represented by Chris Patten, took the floor, at the request of our Group, and also at my personal request and with the support of all the group chairmen. I freely admit that we omitted to take this into consideration when drawing up the agenda for today.
It sometimes seems to me that we are critical of small countries – and sometimes excessively so – but that we knuckle under where large countries are concerned However, our guiding principle must be that wherever crimes are committed, we must respond to this with words and, where possible, with the appropriate measures.
We have made great strides in recent years on account of the Treaty of Maastricht, then the Treaty of Amsterdam, and the outcomes of Saint Malo, Cologne, and now Sintra. Of course, we welcome this with open arms. Mr Solana, if we were to start building up this 60 000-strong core of troops now, then it would supposedly be fit for action within 60 days. However, the rhetoric our governments in the countries of the European Union are using must be followed up with deeds. Several governments are cutting back on their budgets and also their defence capability. This goes against all the rhetoric we are hearing these days. Please encourage the governments in the countries of the European Union to put their money where their mouth is, so that we are not left with rhetoric and less security at the end of the day, but rather we have a more secure Europe.
Now our American friends have expressed some concerns, and I emphasise “our American friends” for we do want a North Atlantic Alliance between the USA and Europe that operates in an amicable manner and on the basis of equal rights. So there are concerns, and people talk in terms of the three “D’s”. Decoupling, i.e. the fear that Europe might decouple from America, then there is the fear of duplication, i.e. the duplication of military instruments, as well as competences and military command structures. Lastly, there is discrimination, i.e. the fear that NATO Members that are not members of the EU will be discriminated against. I urge you, after all, you have the experience having been Secretary-General of NATO, and I am convinced that you will endorse what I am about to say, to allay these fears by taking practical action and ensuring, as the incumbent NATO Secretary-General put it, that we make the three “I’s” a reality: i.e. indivisibility, improvement and inclusion. The indivisibility of transatlantic security, the improvement of the European capability and, lastly, the inclusion of those European NATO partners who are not members of the European Union in the process.
Military intervention must only ever be a last resort. I commend you for having made that point. The best security policy we can pursue in the non-military sense is the enlargement of the European Union eastwards, so as to achieve greater stability there, and dialogue with the Arab and Islamic states, so as to be able to live in peace with the countries in the Mediterranean region as well.
A final comment: I heard, to my amazement and wonder, that the Belgian Defence Minister, Flahaut, declared in Sintra that Belgium wished to break off its military and political relations with Austria. Now I do not know what these military and political relations are, but I am bound to say that there is an unacceptable moral arrogance behind such considerations which is unworthy of a government of a country whose capital hosts the European institutions. Let us put an end to this isolationism which creates divisions between countries and peoples by pulling together instead. For only if we pull together within the European Union and live in harmony will we also be able to set an example for peace and the peaceful resolution of conflicts outside the European Union. I urge those of the 14 States who are conducting themselves in the way I have roundly criticised the Belgian government for to work to this end. Let us be peaceable and live in harmony ourselves. That is why we must pull together and not isolate anyone within the European Union.
Madam President, I would ask you and the group chairmen that, in future, we always ensure that whenever we have discussions with the High Representative, the Commission takes the floor as a matter of form, because the Commission must play its part in the development of European policy….
… and that we should all bear this in mind. We are fairly and squarely to blame for not having taken this into consideration. I hope, Commissioner Patten, that you will still have the opportunity to evaluate our discussion.
Mr Solana, you mentioned Sintra. It was a great achievement to have brought the 15 Defence Ministers together. There is talk of the military, troops and soldiers, and rightly so. Things are moving in the right direction, but I want to reinforce the point that the military – troops and soldiers – is not an end in itself; rather it underpins everything we do in the name of human dignity, democracy, the constitutional state, peace and the peaceful resolution of conflicts. I had hoped to hear the 15 States of the European Union protest a great deal louder than has proved to be the case in recent weeks, in the face of the murders and crimes perpetrated by the Russian government and the Russian military in Chechnya."@en1
|
| lpv:unclassifiedMetadata |
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples