Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2001-09-05-Speech-3-149"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20010905.5.3-149"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
".
Mr Brok’s assumption is based on close ties between NATO and the European Union. It is true that Poland, the Czech Republic and Hungary were recently persuaded to join NATO with the prospect of a possible acceleration in the accession process to the EU. This line of thinking takes no account of the fact that four current EU member states, namely Ireland, Sweden, Finland and Austria, do not belong to NATO and neither do they have any ambitions in this direction. I am opposed to the idea that NATO must be seen as a military organisation of five member states, being the US, the European Union, Canada, Norway and Turkey. Moreover, in my opinion, Mr Brok’s views are not only problematical in respect of NATO. The enlargement of the EU can heighten national contradictions, partly because many of the companies still existing in the east fail to meet the environmental
for which we can, at best, expect typical, temporary low-wage industries modelled on the Mexican example in return. The new Member States will be plagued by the problems of the former DDR on the one hand, and of Mexico, which serves as the US’s poor backyard, on the other. Mr Brok’s optimism ultimately leads to a Europe full of unsolved problems, partly because he disregards all the social issues."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples