Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2002-02-05-Speech-2-124"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20020205.6.2-124"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:translated text |
".
Mr President, ladies and gentlemen, it is not only my obligation, but also my desire, to begin by warmly congratulating you on your election last month to this extremely important post, which is a fundamental pillar of the European Union’s institutions.
You will remember perfectly that on 16 December President Arafat made a speech in his own language, broadcast by television stations, as requested by the Members of the European Union, in which he called for a cease-fire, for peace and for the terrorist groups to stop their violent acts on behalf of the Palestinian Authority. As I have said, there were a few days of peace, of hope, which were related to the Christmas celebrations. Even when President Arafat himself was not authorised to go to Bethlehem to celebrate Christmas.
Unfortunately, ladies and gentlemen, since 10 January we have a situation similar to the previous one. First of all violence broke out amongst Palestinians in one of the settlements, later Israeli forces murdered an important member of one of the Al Fatah groups and later there was the incident involving the vessel, the Karim A. I would like to talk about both things very briefly.
It was a terrible tragedy that violence should have broken out again in January. Because we had passed that crucial period of seven days of total calm and the opportunity was not taken to make a qualitative jump forward. I remember, and I will never forget, how, in Tel Aviv airport, on 6 December, late at night, together with the United States’ representative, General Zinni, we were thinking about the plan to implement the Tenet plan and the implementation of the Mitchell plan. We had agreed on a trilateral meeting between the Palestinian, Israeli and United States security services and subsequently a bilateral meeting between the Palestinians and the Israeli forces. Terrorism and violence from both sides destroyed the opportunity we had over those days. And it was complicated – as I said previously – by the famous episode of the Karim A. Please allow me to stop a moment and explain to you what the famous Karim A has meant.
As you know, the ship, which contained arms of a higher calibre than those normally used by the Palestinians, also had a strategic value for the Israeli leaders and for the United States, since it was the beginning of the relationship, not yet finally proved, but very possible, between ‘somebody’ in the Palestinian Authority and Iran. Ladies and gentlemen, the relationship between the Palestinian Authority and Iran has been practically non-existent for many years. If that relationship comes to be proven, it would significantly change what we might call the Middle Eastern landscape. There is no firm proof which I have been able to see physically, but there is no doubt that something of that nature has taken place.
As you can imagine, ladies and gentlemen, all of this has led to an increase in the already significant distrust between the two parties. If Camp David represented a break in the trust between the two parties, the situation of the early days of January this year have lead to huge further increase in that distrust.
What can we do from now on? How can we try to resolve the situation?
Remember the famous European Union declaration in Laeken, in the final days of December. It assigned clear responsibilities to the two parties and I believe it is one of the best declarations made by the European Union. We must continue in this direction, which was the one taken by the last General Affairs Council.
That Council, as well as making that declaration, sent me to the United States to try to find a common position between the European Union and the United States, above all in relation to the situation of the Palestinian Authority. As you will remember, President Arafat is practically a prisoner in Ramallah and the Israeli authorities are still claiming that the Palestinian Authority has become unnecessary and irrelevant.
You know that that is not the European Union’s position and that we believe we should maintain the Palestinian Authority and its President, for various reasons: firstly, because it has been elected by the Palestinian people and, secondly, because we firmly believe that there will be no military solution to this conflict and that therefore the only possible solution is dialogue, and that dialogue requires negotiators, and the negotiator elected by the Palestinians are the members of the Palestinian Authority, headed by President Arafat.
Mr President, I have said this in private, but please allow me to repeat it publicly. It is going to be a great pleasure for me to work with you, with the Presidency, and with Parliament, and rest assured, ladies and gentlemen, that whenever our complicated agendas allow it, I will be very happy to attend Parliament to explain the important actions the European Union is taking in the field of security and foreign policy.
Therefore, ladies and gentlemen, we are maintaining that position. And I have had the opportunity over recent days – I have spent the whole week in New York talking to the Secretary-General, Kofi Annan, and in Washington with Vice-President Cheney, Secretary of State Powell and the President’s adviser, Condoleezza Rice – to try to discover whether we are able to give further joint impetus in the face of this terrible situation in the Middle East.
I believe that these visits have some consequences. I do not want to talk about the influence of any one party, or the influence the European Union, but I will restrict myself to describing the facts.
Last Wednesday night when I was in the United States, Prime Minister Sharon, for the first time since saying that he would never again hold contacts with the Palestinian Authority, received three very important Palestinian leaders in his private residence: the President of the Parliament of the Palestinian Authority, Abu Ala; the person who is considered to be the number two in the Palestinian Authority, Mr Abu Mazen; and Mohamed Rachid, who is considered to be one of the most important people in the financial world within the Palestinian Authority. For the first time, Prime Minister Sharon received these people in his house. I can also tell you that yesterday and today Secretary of State Powell has received Abu Ala, President of the Palestinian Parliament, in Washington.
In other words, we are at a point where we can once again say that there is a tiny glimmer of light at the end of the tunnel. The aim of all this effort is to try to recover a political perspective. We can and must continue to fight against violence. We must continue to condemn terrorist attacks, but we must also be capable of giving the conflict a political perspective. That was the spirit of the Mitchell report. That was the spirit in which I participated as a representative of the European Union, and that is the spirit which must inspire all of us.
That is where we stand, ladies and gentlemen. I cannot tell you at this point that I have great hope. I have a little bit of hope. I began by saying that I was very frustrated, but I can also see that there is some possibility that we may inch forward a little. Any movement in the right direction is worth trying, however small it may be. Because, ladies and gentlemen, I do not know how many of you have been there recently, but the situation, from the citizens’ point of view, is truly horrendous. It usually took me twenty minutes to get from Jericho to Ramallah. At the moment it may take me three hours to make the same trip, owing to military and police controls.
Ladies and gentlemen, I believe that the European Union is doing all it can to try to bring a little hope to this process. I believe that the European Union must continue to work in conjunction with our friends in the United States, as well as the King of Jordan and President Mubarak.
A few hours ago I was with the King of Jordan, I also spoke a few hours ago with President Mubarak on the telephone and I have spoken to President Arafat this morning, and there is, as I have said, a little hope. I cannot say that there is a lot. We still have the rest of the week to carry on working. At the weekend, as you know, the Foreign Affairs Ministers will meet at Gymnich to deal almost exclusively with the issue of the Middle East.
What political initiatives can we bring to the table? Ladies and gentlemen, I would like you to participate in what I believe should now be our course of action: to help, to contribute to the successful outcome of the process of dialogue which has begun between the President of the Parliament of the Palestinian Authority and the Foreign Affairs Minister, Simon Peres. As you know, the negotiation mechanism which has now begun is as follows: to try, as soon as possible, to have the Palestinian State recognised, before the definitive borders are recognised. The idea is that the bases of the negotiation should be the 1967 borders, with exchange of territories if necessary, in order to compensate for some of the possible difficulties. To try not to enter at this point into a discussion of the more difficult issues: Jerusalem and the return of the refugees; and to begin to work with the mutual trust of two States which already recognise each other, although the second is not complete.
This is the idea we are working on. I cannot guarantee success. I must also tell you, very frankly, that Prime Minister Sharon told me that for him that was not the perfect solution but that he was going to let the Foreign Affairs Minister continue with the negotiation. That is to say that we cannot be sure that in the end the government of Prime Minister Sharon is going to accept it. But I believe we must continue working in that direction.
If there is no change, even the slightest change, in the current situation, the violence will continue to dominate the centre of the debate. And we must be able to prevent violence being at the centre of the debate, since politics must be there. I insist once again: this problem can only be resolved politically, by means of dialogue, and, therefore, sooner or later – let us hope that it is as soon as possible – arms and violence must disappear so that politics can prevail. There is no other solution.
Ladies and gentlemen, I have been asked to attend today to speak essentially about the Middle East and that is what I will focus on, but I would also like to take this opportunity to exchange a few words with you on the situation in Afghanistan and the Balkans, where – we must not forget – we have very serious commitments.
Ladies and gentlemen, just a few days ago, Simon Peres spoke in a restricted sitting of the General Affairs Council to the fifteen ministers and told them something which meant a lot to me, due to the way he expressed himself and the emotion with which he said it. He said more or less as follows: “I will never be in a government which does not have the objective of two States: Palestine and Israel. For a dreamer such as I, Simon Peres, who is very old and has always worked to achieve peace, it is impossible to imagine a situation in which there are not two States. If there are not two States, two negative things will happen, which I could not accept: one, Israel would not be a democratic State because we would be imposing ourselves on the Palestinians, or, on the other hand, Palestinian demography would win out and the State would not be a Jewish State ".
For all of these fundamental and profound reasons, which he expressed with great emotion, we must carry on fighting for two States, quickly, on the basis of the agreements of the United Nations Security Council, the two resolutions, and on the basis of those approaches which I referred to earlier.
Will we have success immediately? There is no guarantee of that. Is there the will to make every effort to do so? Yes. I can assure you that there is. However, ladies and gentlemen, neither the European Union nor anybody has a miraculous solution. To carry on working with the United Nations, with the United States, with Egypt, with Jordan, is – I believe – the best way to try to make progress in that direction.
Therefore, ladies and gentlemen, this is what we are doing. You can rest assured that both Miguel Ángel Moratinos and I will be working 24 hours a day, whenever necessary, to try to resolve this conflict, which is of profound concern to the Europeans. We are not talking about a distant problem, but a problem which is physically, geographically, close and which we feel in our hearts and in our heads. It is therefore our obligation to continue doing it.
Ladies and gentlemen, Mr President, please allow me very briefly to mention two issues which I had been asked to mention. The first is Afghanistan. Commissioner Patten will have more information to offer you, because it is he who has represented the European Union at the Tokyo meeting in a most dignified manner. I just wanted to say that we have a personal representative of mine in Kabul, and I am also rather proud to say something that we are not always able to acknowledge: the military forces defending Kabul at the moment, supporting the government which was approved at the Bonn Conference – also a European city – are mostly European forces.
Thirteen European Union countries have forces deployed there. I believe we have to say this very clearly: we must be proud that the people who are carrying out the peace and stabilisation process in Kabul are basically citizens of our countries.
Secondly, I will tell you that we have to work, and that we will do so in very difficult political circumstances during the remaining time between now and June, when, as you know, the Assembly will once again have to name the Grand Assembly which will have to meet to elect another government, which will not be easy. The present government has a certain degree of balance. To change those balances will not be easy, but it will certainly have to be done. Therefore, between now and June we will have to work very intensively with the representatives of Afghanistan and also the other three fundamental countries.
Firstly, Pakistan. Yesterday, both Chris Patten and I were with the Pakistani Foreign Affairs Minister. I believe that they are doing a fantastic job and we should congratulate them on it.
Secondly, Iran, the other key country for the stability of the region. We must recognise that, regardless of what is said or what can be said about Iran, its representatives behaved constructively in both the meeting in Bonn and the meeting in Tokyo. I believe that we must work with them.
And thirdly, Russia. These three countries are crucial to the external stability of Afghanistan. We are doing so and we are going to continue to do so, in order to try to ensure that this process, which will begin in June, and which was launched at the Bonn meeting, yields results.
Ladies and gentlemen, the first term I am going to use when talking about the situation in the Middle East is frustration. For those of us, like myself, who have spent years trying to find a formula for resolving the problems of the Middle East, the situation we are in can only be described, both from a personal point of view and from that of the parties involved, as highly frustrating. I first became involved in the problems in the Middle East at the Madrid Conference, which was the driving force that demonstrated that we needed a formula essentially based on the idea of ‘peace for territory, territory for peace’ and which subsequently gave rise to the Oslo process, which brought results, but not all the results we wanted, and which suffered from the enormously tragic assassination of Prime Minister Rabin.
The other issue I wanted to mention, very briefly, Mr President, is that of the Balkans. I would like to focus on three points, which in my judgment are the hottest, or potentially the hottest issues. The first relates to the FYROM, Macedonia and Skopje. I believe that, after the agreements signed in Ohrid, we are in an ideal situation, from a political point of view. The whole Constitution was changed and a few days ago the Law on Local Governments was approved, which was a fundamental element in terms of being able to implement the return and entry of police into areas they had been expelled from some months ago. We are therefore moving in the right direction. The situation is still not perfect, but I believe we will be able to spend the Spring in peace and calm.
At this moment, NATO military forces, led by Germany, are still there. The government has accepted an extension for another three months, which may become six. The European Union is considering the possibility of treating them as an actual European Union responsibility in the future. No decision has been taken, but it is being considered and therefore, in relation to Skopje, although this is not a time for great celebrations, I believe that things are moving in the right direction. The Conference of Donors, which Chris Patten will refer to, may work and may be a considerable help from an economic point of view.
Secondly, in Kosovo, as you know, there were elections which we should all be satisfied with. The elections took place very calmly, with no violence, and the Serbian minority also participated in them. They are now the second largest force in the Assembly.
What is happening now, at the beginning of February, is that they have not yet been able to reach agreement, and remember that the elections took place in November. They have not yet agreed either on electing the President, which really should be President Rugova, or on forming the government.
It also happens that the representative of a European MIC, which will continue to be European, had to leave for personal reasons and we have had a few weeks of vacuum. I was there trying to give a little impetus to the negotiations, which are absolutely essential, so that Rugova, who does not have the majority to govern, can do so with the others. Let us hope that over the next few days we will have an Assembly with a government in place, with the Presidency elected which has the ability to confront the real problems that that government will have to deal with.
The last point I would like to make relates to the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia. As you know, the talks between Podgorica (Montenegro) and Belgrade broke down on 24 October. I was called by Kostunica and by Yukanovic, to see whether we were able to keep those talks alive. We have managed it and we are continuing to work, to negotiate and to facilitate those talks as the European Union. I am going there as often as I can to talk to each of them. We will meet again on Sunday, when we will have another meeting to see whether it is possible, by means of constitutional reform, to prevent the referendum and the separation of Montenegro from Belgrade. We are working very intensely on that: there is total consensus between the Member States of the European Union that we should make every effort to achieve that objective.
There were certain doubts over whether the United States would take the same approach or not. After spending this week dealing with their leaders, I can tell you that they are taking the same approach and they are prepared to help us to achieve this reform of the Federation’s Constitution.
Ladies and gentlemen, I would like to end – and I believe, Mr President, that I have almost exceeded my speaking time, since I was told 30 minutes and this is my twenty-seventh minute – by referring once again to my first point: the Middle East. There is no doubt that it is, and must continue to be, our main concern. The European Union has great responsibilities and we must continue to work in that direction. It will not be easy, but we must not throw in the towel and we must continue to be resolute and determined. We will win this battle.
Today, unfortunately, ladies and gentlemen, we cannot talk of a peace process, since there is neither a process nor any peace. My first comment, ladies and gentlemen, is therefore to say how much I, as a person involved, regret the consequences of this lack of a peace process, as do the people who are suffering on both sides. Should we be pessimistic then? I would say not, and despite all the frustration, despite everything that is happening, we must retain a certain degree of optimism and a sense of future possibilities. I believe that the European Union is performing its task correctly by not throwing in the towel. We must stick vehemently to our principles and our commitment to this process.
Ladies and gentlemen, we must not just defend and help the Middle East peace process because of the principles and values which inspire the European Union, but also because, in this globalised world, the Middle East, the Mediterranean, is our home territory. We cannot conceive of a stable Europe, a progressive Europe, without a Mediterranean and a Middle East which are also progressing. It will be very difficult to achieve a stable and peaceful Europe, which is worthy of the status of a great world actor, if we are not also capable of having a Mediterranean which is peaceful, tranquil and prosperous.
Please allow me to say that, since I had the opportunity and the privilege to work on the drawing up of the Mitchell report, almost a year ago now, there have been many, too many, missed opportunities. Too many moments when something could have been done and it was not. Too many occasions when progress could have been made and it was not.
The European citizens and we in Parliament, their legitimate representatives, must collectively commit ourselves to never again allowing an opportunity to be missed. At this point there are certain opportunities which I would like to mention to you. But please allow me to go a little, not into the broader story, since we have had the opportunity to discuss that on several occasions in this House, but into more recent history. Please allow me to return to December of last year.
On 10 December, I was in the Middle East. I was able to be there and talk to all the political leaders. I also met with General Zinni, the representative of the United States there. There was a tough stage, as you will remember, but later there was also a moment of hope. And we must recognise that, thanks to the effort of Miguel Ángel Moratinos, the representative of the European Union
we achieved, from around 10 December, the most significant moment of peace for many, many months, which lasted until the middle of January. There was opportunity during that period, the most significant demonstration of which was the speech by President Arafat on 16 December."@en1
|
| lpv:unclassifiedMetadata |
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples