Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2002-09-04-Speech-3-024"

Predicate	Value (sorted: default)
rdf:type	lpv_eu:Speech2
dcterms:Date	"2002-09-04"^^xsd:date2
dcterms:Is Part Of	lp_eu:Iraq2
dcterms:Language	"de"^^xsd:language2
lpv:document identification number	"en.20020904.1.3-024"2
lpv:hasSubsequent	lp_eu:2002-09-04-Speech-3-0252
lpv:speaker	lp:Martin Schulz2
lpv:spokenAs	member; Committee on Citizens' Freedoms and Rights, Justice and Home Affairs (2002-01-17--2004-07-19)3 substitute; Delegation to the EU-Cyprus Joint Parliamentary Committee (2002-02-07--2004-04-30)3 vice-chair; PES (2002-03-07--2004-07-19)3 member; Delegation to the EU-Armenia, EU-Azerbaijan and EU-Georgia Parliamentary Cooperation Committees (2002-02-07--2004-07-19)3 unknown; Sozialdemokratische Partei Deutschlands (1999-07-20--2004-07-19)3 substitute; Committee on Foreign Affairs, Human Rights, Common Security and Defence Policy (2002-01-17--2004-07-19)3
lpv:translated text	"Mr President, ladies and gentlemen, the subject we are discussing can basically be reduced to two different concepts. Can we respond to international threats by using international law and the mechanisms it provides? Even if these mechanisms are in need of reform, as Commissioner Patten has said, they still exist and they could be implemented in their present form. We believe that when it comes to dealing with international threats from states like Iraq – and there is no need for me to repeat what kind of threats we could be talking about – the only way to implement international law is through the United Nations. The alternative is to respond to these threats on a unilateral basis, which is the approach currently being adopted by the US. Mr Poettering is quite right in saying that there is an urgent need for this process to be completed, because there is also an internal debate, although a consensus is evidently starting to emerge around President Bush. The question that needs to be answered next is where Europe stands on this. The answer is that we do not support unilateralism, as we have already heard, as Commissioner Patten asked how we could stabilise the international coalition against terror. We will certainly not stabilise it if the United States undermines it by adopting a unilateral approach. That is where there is a really great danger, because what we are actually fighting – and I would like to remind Mr Van Orden that Mr Brie has already referred to this – is the Iraqi Government, which has been so heavily criticised here, yet where did they get the technology that has enabled them to constitute such an enormous threat today? From the United States – in the days when Iraq was still an ally in the battle against Islamic fundamentalism in Iran, which also demonstrates that the governing Baath Party in Iraq is not an Islamic fundamentalist party. We all know that the Muslim Brotherhoods that are persecuted in Iraq have been granted political asylum in Europe. I only wanted to remind you about that to make it clear how complicated and dangerous unilateralism is in practice. That is why, Mr Van Orden, we in Europe are united in saying 'no' to unilateralism and 'yes' to the implementation of international law."@en1
lpv:unclassifiedMetadata	"(Applause)"1

Named graphs describing this resource:

The resource appears as object in 2 triples

Context graph