Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2001-03-01-Speech-4-018"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20010301.1.4-018"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:translated text |
"Mr President, I want to comment on, and try to answer, a number of the questions put during the preliminary part of this debate.
Mr Salafranca Sánchez-Neyra put a number of questions to the Council, for example concerning the sanctions. I believe it is extremely important that we should have a common view of the purpose behind the international community’s action against Iraq. The purpose is to make Iraq comply with those instructions and commitments that are mainly to be found in Resolution No 687, which is of course the major and basic resolution governing the international community’s relations with Iraq. It is there that our demands upon Iraq are stated. Those demands do not, for example, include any change to the government in Iraq – that is a matter for the Iraqi people – but Resolution No 687 states very clearly what is required if it is going to be possible to lift the sanctions against Iraq. That is the basis for our entire discussion.
Mr Salafranca Sánchez-Neyra went on to raise a number of very relevant questions about whether we need an embargo against Iraq and about whether consideration might be given to changing the sanctions regime currently imposed upon that country. Issues he mentioned included those relating to an international verification committee and to the currency flow.
Within the framework of the reforms being worked on by the UN Security Council, there is intensive discussion of the effectiveness of sanctions as a tool. The European Union is actively participating in that discussion. These are difficult issues. For example, the issue is being discussed of whether time-limited sanctions ought to be introduced so that, right from the time that sanctions are first imposed, it is determined when and under which conditions they are to be lifted. As was mentioned here in the debate, the issue is also being discussed of whether what are called smart sanctions
should be introduced which, by being more specific and more clearly directed against those whom they are intended to affect, would be aimed at minimising the suffering of the civilian population.
I believe it is important that the European Union should actively participate in that discussion. I also believe it is important that Parliament should contribute to this important discussion about how we get the world to comply more readily with international law.
Mr Lagendijk addresses the issue of bringing Saddam Hussein before an international tribunal. Clearly, this may appear to be an attractive idea in itself, in view of what that man has done. I would say once again, however, that I believe it is important that any action against Iraq should be taken within the framework of the UN’s resolutions. To act outside that framework would, I believe, damage all of our common efforts in the long run. These efforts – and on this issue I can see that this House is completely unified – are aimed at ensuring that we get an Iraq which can again be incorporated into the international community. That is, unfortunately, impossible with the current regime.
I note what Mr Lagendijk has to say about the European Parliament’s resolutions from last autumn. They are important. They also serve as an important guide for subsequent actions on the part of the Council. I look forward to a continued exchange of views as to how we can strengthen international law even where Iraq is concerned."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples