Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2001-07-04-Speech-3-066"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20010704.2.3-066"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
"Mr President, Commissioner, Mr President-in-Office of the Council, let me begin by praising the efforts of the European Union, the Council and the Commission up to now. We have spoken with one voice, unlike on other occasions when we debated the Balkans, and a powerful moderating influence was quite rightly exercised upon the use of violence, with the emphasis placed on finding a political solution.
Nevertheless, I have two concerns.
One of them relates to the link between EU aid and the parties’ playing a constructive role. This is a very tricky business. Of course, aid is not automatic. But – and this is a question to the Commission – do we withdraw our aid to the Albanian Language University in Tetovo if we do not like the attitude of the Albanian parties in the government, or do we halt the construction of small-scale infrastructure if we do not like the compromises of the Macedonian parties? I would be very careful about this. I am in favour of exercising pressure, I am in favour of the involvement of the EU, but I am against vague threats. My concrete question to the Commission is therefore about whether that link applies to the new aid, as seems to be implied in the words of the Commissioner, or whether it also applies to existing aid. In other words, will there be a moment at which the European Commission says to the parties, ‘we do not like your attitude, and so we are discontinuing all aid or part of the aid’?
My second concern relates to the reaching of an agreement. It has been said that military involvement will only come when there is an agreement within the government and an agreement with the rebels, and it is with this last point that, in my view, the problem lies. That is because the special representative, Mr Léotard, whom Mr Swoboda has already said, even before he was on the scene, that it would be necessary to negotiate with the rebels. The world was too small. Mr Léotard was almost not allowed into Macedonia. But if the government refuses to negotiate with the rebels, who
negotiate with them? Is the Commission involved behind the scenes, or has it been party to negotiations? Is the Council involved? Someone will have to make the link between the governmental agreement and the rebels. I have no sympathy at all for the rebels and believe they should put an end to their violence but, whether we like it or not, an agreement which does not include an agreement with the rebels is not worthy of the name. The governmental agreement therefore needs to be linked to an agreement with the rebels. My question to the Council and the Commission is: who is prepared to make that link?"@en1
|
| lpv:unclassifiedMetadata |
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples