Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2001-05-16-Speech-3-054"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20010516.3.3-054"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
"Mr President, Madam President-in-Office of the Council, Commissioner, we seem to have reached a turning point in transatlantic relations. First there is the legacy of the Clinton era. Even if we leave aside the serious trade differences, the emblematic banana dispute, the beef hormone dispute, the GMO dispute and a dozen others that are being or have already been examined by the WTO, we can see that in recent years, Washington had already shown growing signs of unilateralism, one of the stigmata of the superpower complex.
Opposition to the Treaty banning anti-personnel mines, opposition to the Charter on the Rights of the Child, opposition to the establishment of an International Criminal Court that might, one day, have to judge an American citizen, a casual approach to politics and financial blackmail of the United Nations, an economic blockade, in fact a military operation that violates international law, the Echelon affair, the Colombia plan – the list is endless. Moreover, we have hardly had a chance to hold a dialogue with our transatlantic interlocutors about certain decisions that Europeans regard as shocking in a civilised society, such as the death penalty and the refusal to grant universal access to medicines to combat AIDS.
Yet we have to admit that the Bush Administration’s first decisions have a more serious impact than anything we have ever seen so far. We were concerned enough when we heard the new President’s advisor on security, Mrs Condoleezza Rice, describe her vision of the new distribution of labour between Americans and Europeans for the maintenance of peace in the Balkans, when she pointed out with as much perspicacity as elegance that it was not the GIs’ job to take children to nursery school.
Frankly, we can only describe the refusal to sign the Kyoto Protocol and the promotion of the missile defence shield as irresponsible, not only towards Europe but towards mankind as a whole.
In view of this escalation, are we condemned to
protests before settling for realism? I think not. A Europe that is open to dialogue but adheres firmly to the principles of a civilised and responsible international community will find allies among the public opinion of the five continents and even in the US Congress and among a number of states.
Commissioner, of course we are not trying to promote a sense of anti-Americanism or indulge in aggressive rhetoric towards a partner who is indispensable in today's world. We simply want to set out the clear political resolve of the Fifteen and their united front towards objectives that could meet the expectations not only of Europeans but of all those, in whatever part of the world, who wish to free themselves from the unipolar system in which they are increasingly being confined."@en1
|
| lpv:unclassifiedMetadata |
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples