Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2001-10-02-Speech-2-236"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20011002.9.2-236"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
"Commissioner, Mr President, the final declaration and action programme adopted in Durban was only possible due to the constructive and essential role played by the European Union. It was also due to the Belgian Foreign Affairs Minister, Mr Louis Michel’s diplomacy and ability to draw together many points of view, not to mention his natural gift for reconciling the views of all sides. I sincerely believe that the European Union fulfilled its role perfectly, and we can only welcome the work that has been done. I deplore the fact, however, despite Mrs De Palacio’s apologies, which I accept, that the European Commission was not present. I think that at least one commissioner could have represented you at Durban. I also regret the fact that few industrialised countries were represented, and I believe that many countries interpreted this as a lack of interest in the conference. Had they been there, it might have prevented the American and Israeli delegations from leaving. This is even more of a shame because racist violence and support for the populist and xenophobic vote have increased in Europe over recent years; the Freedom Party (FPÖ) led by Jörg Haider in Austria is only one illustration of this. Other political forces masquerading as NGOs have rushed into the void that has been left. Since, although the overwhelming majority of NGOs played a decisive role in preparing for the conference, and made several proposals formulating demands, I still do not agree with Mrs Boumediene-Thiery who tries to play down what happened. This is because a small number of NGOs have been busy trying to equate Zionism with racism, and, even worse, have distributed texts and writings, examples of which I have shown to Mr Michel, in which they patently extolled the merits of the Holocaust. And this is something that Parliament cannot play down. These NGOs, or so-called NGOs, these pseudo-NGOs, were not at Durban to defend the Palestinians, they were not there to defend the anti-racists, they were not even there in favour of peace between Israelis and Palestinians. In my view, it is a positive sign that the final declaration acknowledges the right of Palestinians to their own land and that, at the same time, we reject any equation of Zionists with racists, in the same way as in Durban.
I must therefore ask, as you did, Commissioner, that we know exactly who these NGOs are, what their purpose is and how they are funded before we hold another conference. The over-representation of some delegations leads me to question how they are funded. But this conference provided, above all, an opportunity to weigh up the importance of some demands. And in relation to this, I strongly challenge what my fellow Members, Mr Cornillet and Baroness Ludford said. I think that acknowledging slavery and the slave trade as crimes against humanity was one of the key aims of the conference, and this is a good thing, and we are merely doing justice by acknowledging that 350 years of deprivation, raids, deportations and humiliations are crimes against humanity. This is the least we could have done at this conference. And I hope that all countries and former colonial powers follow the example of France acknowledge slavery and the slave trade, or are made to acknowledge it by their national parliaments, as a crime against humanity. Personally speaking, I am still dubious about financial reparations, as Mr Michel said, I believe. Especially when we know that there are powerful lobbies of American lawyers hiding behind the African Americans’ legitimate demand. On the contrary, there is in fact a consensus that the continent that suffered most from slavery and colonisation, should be helped with the cancellation of its debt, and by urgently and proactively pursuing policies to combat AIDS and illiteracy. We owe at least this to the African continent. In addition, we have – and Mr Michel pointed this out – valuable counterparts in Africa, who are committed, through the New African Initiative, to good governance. This is, therefore, the time to seize their demand to respond with practical measures and start talking.
Lastly, I regret that there was no mention of the death penalty in the United States, and part of the reason the United States delegation left was because it did not want to talk about racism in its own country. I regret that discrimination on the ground of sexual orientation was not discussed. I regret that the concept of castes was not discussed, and I regret that the statement has no binding character.
The European Union’s task is, first of all, to carefully monitor the use of new technologies, such as the Internet, which can be used to incite racial hatred; to speed up the implementation of Article 13; to explain the annihilation of the American Indians, slavery, colonialism and the Holocaust in our textbooks and history books, and also the Sabra and Chatila massacres. I believe that racism and anti-Semitism have one aspect in common with terrorism. On the one hand, there are those who carry out the act itself and, on the other hand, there are those who supply them with the ideological weapons. We must also combat the group made up of the Vlaams Blok, the National Front, the FPÖ and other parties, which supply ideological weapons to those carrying out the act itself and who themselves end up attacking the physical integrity of individuals. We have a responsibility to do this as well."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples