Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2001-10-02-Speech-2-129"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20011002.6.2-129"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
"Madam President, with regard to the humanitarian dimension of this disaster, I fully concur with Mr Van den Berg. However, I would like to add one more aspect, which is at the same time a question, a question to the Council, who are not here. I would therefore like to ask the Commissioner a question instead. A special area of concern when granting aid is the protection of the aid workers. It is extremely dangerous to grant the necessary aid. Is the Commission aware of any European countries being prepared to provide those aid workers military back-up?
Next, I should like to turn my attention to the political relationship between the EU and Afghanistan. What is that relationship not? Let us be clear about that too. It does not aim to arm the Northern Alliance. Neither does it aim to overthrow the Taliban by military force or play the role of Florence Nightingale, caring for the wounded and displaced once the American big brother has smashed everything to smithereens. So what is – or what should be – the role of the European Union? Allow me to quote three examples.
Firstly, I believe it would be beneficial if the European Union, as in the past two, three weeks, were to exercise its moderating influence on the United States, so as to prevent any unnecessary civilian victims from being claimed when the Taliban are brought down. This is an extremely important condition for any broad coalition in future.
Secondly, I strongly urge the United States and Europe not to make the same mistake as we did fifteen years ago, when we supported the mujahedin in the fight against the Russian presence in Afghanistan by filling the country with arms and then walking away. That is not acceptable. Mr Joschka Fischer, Germany’s Foreign Affairs Minister, put this across very articulately, in my opinion, when he said that we can no longer afford any black holes on the global map.
Next, I should like to move on to my most important point. In my opinion, any aid, whether it be military, financial, political or economic, now and in future, to the Afghan opposition, whether it be royal or not, should be typified by at least one aspect, namely that this aid should be conditional. It is not acceptable for Afghanistan to be lumbered with another regime which fails to observe democracy and human rights. As far as I am concerned, the lesson we should draw from the cold war is, or should be, that not every enemy of our enemy is our friend. It is friends, in particular, that need to be alerted in an open and critical manner to respecting democracy and human rights. And that should therefore apply to any aid to any Afghan opposition.
Finally, if the Taliban are fought or overthrown in the name of fighting a strange regime which has been repressing human rights for the past five years, for example where women’s rights are concerned, then that is a fair motivation for this fight in my view, but we then also need to be consistent, and this must also apply to other countries in the region. It is unacceptable for a country such as Saudi Arabia to escape our attention, because it now forms part of our coalition, for that country too violates human rights and operates an anti-democratic regime. In my opinion, the real consequences of 11 September can only be drawn if we display the honesty to tackle that country and that region. Only then will we have a truly justifiable argument against the objection which is currently being heard in that region that our anxiety with regard to Afghanistan would be one of selective indignation."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples