Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2000-07-04-Speech-2-215"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20000704.9.2-215"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:translated text |
".
There is no problem between Parliament and the Commission. The fact is, we received an explanation of the correct procedure, and it is in fact standard practice that we have the questions translated so as to be able to answer them properly and not have to improvise, since this would impair the quality of the answers.
To come back to the question raised, Article 17 of the Treaty on European Union lays down that Union policy under this article does not impact on the specific nature of the security and defence policy of some Member States, including non-allied Member States.
Similarly, the policy observes the obligations of the North Atlantic Treaty with regard to those Member States who consider that their common defence is provided within the framework of NATO, and it is compatible with the common security and defence policy established within this framework.
After Amsterdam, the European Union undertook a process aimed at enabling it to take all of the measures needed to play a role in the areas of conflict prevention and crisis management, measures that are defined in the Treaty on European Union and known as the Petersburg tasks, without prejudice to the position of the Member States as regards their membership or non-membership of NATO or the WEU. This was reiterated in the presidency’s report that was approved by the Helsinki European Council."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples