Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2002-05-15-Speech-3-034"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20020515.2.3-034"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
"The ties between Europe and America are old and deep, comparable to a friendship between two school friends that goes back many years. Despite this, the school friends seem to be growing apart a little. There has been growing irritation over the past few years. Disagreements between the US and EU are on the increase.
The European Parliament plays a modest role in the transatlantic relationship, but that does not stop the House from holding strong views. The criticism levelled at the United States for adopting a unilateralist, hegemonic attitude is widespread and is also included quite expressively in Mr Elles' resolution. It is true that the behaviour of our partners on the other side of the Ocean sometimes gives us cause for concern. Especially in the area of trade, the US attracts the criticism that it takes little notice of international agreements. In addition, I hope that the United States will change its mind about the Kyoto Protocol. I can support the resolution on these scores.
The criticisms levelled at the States by this Parliament, however, go further. In all kinds of ways, the EP is hauling the United States over the coals, the alleged unilateralism displayed by the US being designated as the main culprit.
It does not befit the EU, however, to play the role of moralist if the EU itself is unable to pursue an effective and consistent foreign policy. The EU may have extremely high ambitions, but they still hardly ever materialise in practice. Pleas for more integration have never been fruitful; the interests of the Member States are simply too diverse for this. In this light, the criticism in the resolution loses some of its essence. Indeed: what real alternative does the European Union offer? And why should this alternative be attractive to the United States? These questions remain unanswered.
Additionally, it is questionable whether the European Member States always sail the right course. All we want to do is enter into consultation, thereby avoiding the root of the conflict, as is illustrated in the background to those fatal events of 11 September last year. Delaying until everyone can strike a weak compromise; is this always preferable to taking action? The criticism of unilateralism ignores the fact that in many cases, the United States only has the choice between acting on its own or not acting at all. Especially in the light of the fact that the current threats may require vigorous action. I gladly refer to the ongoing danger which the regime of Saddam Hussein in Iraq represents for us.
Even a friendship that goes back many years is not immune to deep rifts. This would be very detrimental to transatlantic relations. This is why I regret, finally, that the resolution does not have a good word to say about the different forms of transatlantic dialogue. Precisely in situations where there is a difference of opinion, these dialogues can help foster mutual understanding and work towards solutions. I will therefore support the amendments that moderate this criticism, for it is important to nurture friendships. After all, friendship can never be taken for granted."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples