Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2001-02-14-Speech-3-186"
Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
---|---|
rdf:type | |
dcterms:Date | |
dcterms:Is Part Of | |
dcterms:Language | |
lpv:document identification number |
"en.20010214.4.3-186"2
|
lpv:hasSubsequent | |
lpv:speaker | |
lpv:spokenAs | |
lpv:translated text |
".
If Turkey was an EU Member State there would be a whole host of reasons for suspending its membership. Officially this country is a parliamentary democracy which outwardly resembles Member States in terms of custom and practice, but for large minority groups amongst the population, this comparison does not hold water. Sadly, the inhabitants of Turkey are not participants with equal rights yet, because they have different political beliefs or speak a different language. The countless political prisoners, the ban on organisations, the press censorship, the army’s internal war against the Kurdish-speaking population, the denial of the mass murder of the Armenians and the Turks’ persistent refusal to completely abolish the death penalty, show that Turkey is still a very different sort of country at present than a large majority of people in the current Member States would think desirable. Under these circumstances, there is not a single reason for tightening the bonds of friendship and allowing Turkey to qualify for contributions from pre-accession funds such as ISPA and SAPARD.
Awarding Turkey this funding would only create the misunderstanding that the country is on the right path and that Turkey is going to accede to the EU just as soon as the Czech Republic, Slovenia or Malta. It is not possible to bring about change in Turkey by giving money to the government. It will only come through supporting the struggle of the internal opposition there and that of the exiles living in the EU Member States."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples