Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2000-07-06-Speech-4-196"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20000706.8.4-196"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
"Madam President, ladies and gentlemen, it is true that the Pacific always evokes images of paradise: beaches, coconut palms, sun. Today, the reality is far sadder. The two coups d’état that have taken place in Fiji recently in fact show unstable States divided by poverty. The most incredible thing in this matter, apart from the passivity of our institutions, is that the pretext of interethnic tension is always used to explain such conflicts. We are well aware, however, that the true cause is not just that. In the Solomon Islands, the vast majority of the population is Melanesian and Christian. In Fiji, almost half the population is of Indian origin, but these origins date back to the last century. Moreover, in spite of these differences, all these people are at home in Fiji.
I believe there are causes other than this ethnic conflict. For example, we deny the role played by those who make a profit from these conflicts: multinationals and local politicians. For the former, periods of instability mean fewer social, tax and environmental obligations as the State is very weak in these cases and conflicts favour the arms industry as the political groups need to get their weapons from somewhere.
As far as politicians are concerned, the practice of pitting one group against another, as, for example, the far right does in Europe, allows a political vacuum to be created or power to be maintained. This practice is only possible because the population is poor and suffers from a lack of knowledge of other groups. In this case, the two conflicts should have enabled some people to take back or gain power that they could not win through the ballot box.
In Fiji, the coup d’état was fomented by a bankrupt businessman who used his distant Fiji origins to legitimise his actions. As for the new Prime Minister, he is also from a business background. In the Solomon Islands, a sham parliamentary vote brought a new Prime Minister to power, elected by the power of the gun. These two examples support our vision of the conflict.
The joint resolution, however, is too sanctimonious and effectively wants to restore the previous situation. As is all too often the case, it does not refer to the true sources of these conflicts: poverty and the underlying self-interested role of political and economic participants. From this point of view, if we want to be really effective, we must prevent further conflicts and to do so, we must genuinely aid the development of education, the local economy and local democracy. This is how we might succeed in changing things."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples