Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2000-07-05-Speech-3-279"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20000705.9.3-279"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spoken text |
"The European Union has made remarkable progress in shaping a European security and defence policy over the past year. From Cologne via Helsinki to Feira we have gone from an ambitious vision to concrete targets, first military and now also civilian headline goals and the establishment of new specific structures.
This very welcome development has given substance to the objectives of the ‘Petersberg principles’ as set out in the Amsterdam Treaty. Like their incorporation into the Treaty a few years ago this has only been possible with the full and active support of all Member States.
It is too early to say whether any further Treaty change in this area is required at this stage. There has been no formal discussion of the European Union's defence dimension in the IGC framework so far. The presidency report to Feira indicated that the conclusions of Cologne and Helsinki could be implemented without it being legally necessary to amend the Treaty unless the Council's decision-making powers were to be altered or the Treaty's provisions regarding the WEU needed to be amended. The presidency has suggested that the issue of a revision of the ESDP provisions in the Treaty should remain open to examination as required before the Nice European Council.
As for the specific question of the position in any future defence cooperation of EU Member States that do not belong to Nato, this is first and foremost an issue to be addressed by the Member States concerned. What is clear is that the military headline goal agreed at the Helsinki European Council will require a concerted and coordinated effort by all Member States.
As to the shape of individual national military contributions, these will be discussed at the pledging conference to be held in the autumn under the French presidency. Again, how non-Nato EU states view their role and what their contribution to the defence dimension of the European Union should be is rightfully for these Member States to say. But it may be helpful to distinguish between two component parts of the overall European security and defence equation, the Petersberg tasks of peace-keeping and peace enforcement on the one hand and territorial defence on the other. The European Union's stated aim is to be ready to support action within the framework of Petersberg tasks. All EU Member States have agreed this and are ready to contribute to it.
The excellent record of the European neutrals in the field of peacekeeping and crisis management operations has come very much to the fore in the new European security context. All four Member States which are not also members of Nato are contributing actively and constructively to the development of CFSB in general and to the European security and defence policy in particular. Their contribution to the last IGC was indeed crucial to the inclusion of the Petersberg tasks in the new Treaty.
Finally, I have no doubt that their contribution in this area – materially as well as in the ongoing discussions shaping the new structures of cooperation will continue to be both active and ambitious, be it in the military or non-military dimensions of conflict prevention, conflict resolution and crisis management."@en1
|
| lpv:unclassifiedMetadata |
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples