Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2001-04-04-Speech-3-145"

Predicate	Value (sorted: default)
rdf:type	lpv_eu:Speech2
dcterms:Date	"2001-04-04"^^xsd:date2
dcterms:Is Part Of	lp_eu:Question Time (Council)2
dcterms:Language	"en"^^xsd:language2
lpv:document identification number	"en.20010404.7.3-145"2
lpv:hasSubsequent	lp_eu:2001-04-04-Speech-3-1462
lpv:speaker	lp:James L.C. Provan2
lpv:spoken text	"The next item is Question Time to the Council (B5-0163/2001 ). Does the Council agree that the above peace plan constitutes a sufficient basis for talks? What measures will it take to facilitate the opening of talks between the political leaders of the Albanian-speaking population of southern Serbia and the Yugoslav leadership? Question No 3 by Efstratios Korakas () The armed and murderous attacks against FYROM by the illegal mercenary army of the UCK which has been strengthened and armed by NATO have intensified and are now threatening to further destabilise the Balkans, causing a general conflagration. Far from promoting stability, the presence of KFOR troops in FYROM actually causes further destabilisation. This is confirmed by media reports that armed mercenaries are crossing over from the German and American sectors unimpeded. All these attacks and developments are the result of the 'divide and rule' policy pursued by NATO and the EU, a policy which is advanced by inciting and exploiting nationalism and splinter groups and tendencies with the aim of setting up protectorates in the region in order better to exploit its wealth and peoples. What specific steps does the Council intend to take to implement UN Security Council Resolution 1244/99, to safeguard the territorial inviolability of FYROM and to put an end to all foreign interference in the Balkans? As they deal with the same subject, the following questions will be taken together: Question No 1 by Mihail Papayannakis () As developments in the Balkans crisis have revealed, recognition of the borders of many countries in the region is a matter of direct or indirect contention. A case in point is the border between the Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia (FYROM) and Serbia, on which the two countries themselves have agreed but which Albanian groups in FYROM itself and in Kosovo refuse to accept. What is the Council's view of these current developments and, in particular, what is its position on the acceptance of borders as a stabilising force in the Balkans crisis? Question No 2 by Alexandros Alavanos () Terrorist activity by Albanian extremists in southern Serbia and FYROM, even within the KFOR-monitored zone, is out of control. Terrorist operations and fighting, even involving the use of heavy weaponry, are reported on an almost daily basis. The Yugoslav peace plan for the Presevo Valley has, in principle, received a favourable response."@en1
lpv:spokenAs	vice-president; Parliament's Bureau (1999-07-20--2002-01-14)3 vice-president; European Parliament (1999-07-20--2002-01-14)3 substitute; Committee on Regional Policy, Transport and Tourism (1999-07-21--2002-01-14)3 member_of_the_bureau; EPP-ED (1999-10-12--2002-03-07)3 member; EMPL (1999-10-04--2002-01-14)3 unknown; Conservative and Unionist Party (1999-07-20--2004-07-19)3 member; Delegation to the EU-Cyprus Joint Parliamentary Committee (1999-10-06--2002-01-14)3
lpv:unclassifiedMetadata	"President."1 "Subject: Crisis in the Balkans"1 "Subject: Situation in FYROM and danger of a general conflagration in the Balkans"1 "Subject: Uncontrolled activity of extremist organisations in southern Serbia"1

Named graphs describing this resource:

The resource appears as object in 2 triples

Context graph