Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2000-11-14-Speech-2-066"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20001114.3.2-066"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
"Mr President, ladies and gentlemen, Mr Morillon I must congratulate you on your report. Unfortunately, however, you have not, and therefore we have not, managed to solve all the problems.
In the first place, it is clear that the strategy of accepting Turkey’s candidature was the right one. It was the correct strategy, as the Commissioner commented, because the debate which has taken place in Turkey today in order for it to become a member of the European Union is tantamount to a debate in favour of radical reform of the political situation in the country.
We are at an important historic phase for Turkey, which has made the transition from the phase of debate to the phase of practical action, i.e. the implementation of reforms of the Constitution and the law, such as, for instance, an amnesty for prisoners of conscience.
This is the phase which Turkey is now facing. We must be perfectly clear, we cannot move on to any further stages without Turkey making the transition from debate to practical action. That is exactly what the Morillon report states.
Then, there is the Cyprus situation. On this subject we have to tell Turkey that its refusal to accept the rulings of the European Court of Justice in Strasbourg cannot be tolerated. There have been a number of rulings against Turkey. Turkey must without further ado fall in line with the rulings of the European Court of Justice as a token of acceptance of international relations as defined by us, and not just by them.
We now come to the basic problem. A variety of strategies are considered within the European Parliament and within the Member States. Some are in favour of the candidature and the accession of Turkey, and want this candidature to involve a radical reform of Turkish society. Then there are those that are opposed to the country’s accession, who take advantage of the essential debate on Turkish policy and reforms to create a great division between Turkey and Europe. Turkish society obviously perceives this contradictory attitude.
That is why the final problem to be resolved, the Armenian genocide, is of such importance. There is no one here, least of all myself, who would deny the fact that genocide was perpetrated against the Armenians during the last period of the Ottoman Empire. It is a clear fact, just as it is clear that Turkey, like any civilised society, should get used to the idea of facing up to its past, however terrible it may have been. This is one of the indispensable conditions in terms of ideology and civilisation needed for any country to join Europe.
There is another matter, and if we have to vote on it today, the majority of my Group will vote in favour of this resolution. I am not certain, personally, that this is a useful move, because I wish to take the debate to Turkey. In other words, I propose that the European Parliament should itself hold a debate on the Armenian genocide, the majority will follow on and we shall continue the debate in Turkey."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples