Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2000-11-29-Speech-3-123"

Predicate	Value (sorted: default)
rdf:type	lpv_eu:Speech2
dcterms:Date	"2000-11-29"^^xsd:date2
dcterms:Is Part Of	lp_eu:Common foreign and security policy – Afghanistan2
dcterms:Language	"fi"^^xsd:language2
lpv:document identification number	"en.20001129.8.3-123"2
lpv:hasSubsequent	lp_eu:2000-11-29-Speech-3-1242
lpv:speaker	lp:Paavo Väyrynen2
lpv:spokenAs	member; Delegation to the EU-Russia Parliamentary Cooperation Committee (1999-09-29--2002-01-14)3 unknown; Suomen Keskusta (1999-07-20--2004-07-19)3 member; Committee on Foreign Affairs, Human Rights, Common Security and Defence Policy (1999-07-21--2002-01-14)3 substitute; AFCO (1999-07-21--2002-01-14)3 vice-chair; ELDR (1999-07-20--2002-03-06)3 substitute; Delegation to the European Economic Area Joint Parliamentary Committee (EEA) (1999-09-29--2002-01-14)3
lpv:translated text	"Mr President, I would like to focus in my speech on Mrs Lalumière’s report, which I think is clearly worded and well put together. The decision taken at the Helsinki summit to establish a rapid reaction force has been interpreted in different ways by the Member States. In Finland and Sweden they speak about crisis management, which in these countries chiefly means a traditional peacekeeping operation. Mrs Lalumière’s report reflects the thinking of many NATO countries, according to which a rapid reaction force would very quickly develop into a fully-fledged army capable of warfare. It would have at its disposal, among other things, heavy transport aircraft, aircraft carriers, cruise missiles, and in-flight refuelling for long-distance bombing missions. The Finnish people have not been told anything about this. In my opinion, Europe’s military identity should have been established in the context of NATO, then the EU could just stick to the task of crisis management. I cannot approve of the EU becoming a military alliance and a military superpower. Now that the development of the EU’s military dimension has begun, it is wise to aim for a situation where the Union should be internally differentiated in this area also. The NATO countries could form a defence organisation within the framework of the Union that would function as a strong European pillar of NATO. In this way other EU Member States could keep to their traditional peacekeeping activities. I cannot accept certain details of Mrs Lalumière’s report, and in the final vote I shall support its rejection."@en1

Named graphs describing this resource:

The resource appears as object in 2 triples

Context graph