Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2002-09-25-Speech-3-099"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20020925.5.3-099"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spoken text |
". – Mr President, I have been asked to respond to both the Brok and Titley reports and to make a statement on the Middle East as well. I should like to begin with the report by Mr Brok.
Regarding Iraq, I spoke to the House on this subject earlier this month and said that we must continue to press for full Iraqi compliance with the UN resolutions. The political action on Iraq at present is in New York and that is exactly where it should be.
Afghanistan is an issue I remain seriously concerned about. The assassination attempt on President Karzai and the bomb in central Kabul earlier this month are just the most recent examples of the fragility of Afghanistan. We must not spare efforts to help the central government extend its authority to the entire country. At the UN, in the margins of the General Assembly, I attended an important meeting of Afghanistan's principal aid donors at which we underlined the importance of delivering as rapidly as possible on our respective pledges.
The regional agenda, important as it is, must not stop us from thinking ahead. There are long-term strategic issues that we need to keep in sight. There is firstly, for example, the institutional framework for the Common Foreign and Security Policy. The architecture of the treaties is complex and our work on CFSP is right at the institutional frontiers. The work of the Convention will soon produce new proposals to improve the present arrangements. I look forward to participating in the discussions of the Dehaene Working Group.
Secondly, there are preparations for the consequences of enlargement on CFSP and ESDP. Enlargement will have a major impact on the Common Foreign and Security Policy. Together with the Danish Presidency, we have started thinking about the consequences of this. We have to make CFSP structures responsive enough to cater for 10 or more new Member States. Through the Wider Europe initiative we will look more closely into how to organise relations, and whenever possible, seek partnership with the 'near abroad' in the East, the South-East and the South.
Thirdly I should mention Crisis Management and Conflict Prevention which must become a cross-cutting issue for all CFSP and external relations initiatives. Our work on conflict indicators will be instrumental in gearing diplomatic action and aid programming towards conflict prevention and crisis management. We need to implement the Göteborg programme for the prevention of violent conflict and we need to further strengthen our human rights and democracy promotion policies.
There are many examples of how CFSP yields operational results when we effectively pool national and EU resources, both in the Commission and in the Council. I look forward to working with Parliament on improving our mechanisms for this and in extending full democratic control and accountability to the field of CFSP. But I must say, and I hope it will not be regarded as a revolutionary observation, that however much we discuss improving instruments, however much we discuss institutional architecture, in my judgment on the basis of three years' experience there is no substitute for political will.
Secondly, let me refer briefly to the admirable report by Mr Titley on the code of conduct on arms exports. That code is politically binding on the Member States, and the Commission has a limited role in this process. We nevertheless welcome progress made in the Council with respect to improving the implementation of the code and enhancing transparency provided through the annual report.
We welcome Parliament's intensive interest in this subject and in particular the constructive and very ambitious stance of Mr Titley’s report which encourages the Council to pursue and improve further its work in this area. We share several of the suggestions presented in the report, such as those referring to arms-brokering activities and the production of military goods under licence, as well as the control of the end user of arms exports. We also welcome the suggestions for all Member States to publish national annual reports for ensuring the maximum involvement of the accession countries in information exchange and denial notification as well as for promoting adherence to the principles of the code by third countries.
The Presidency has spoken about the Middle East and about the positive atmosphere at our Quartet meeting of 17 September. I am sure Parliament is aware of the huge amount of work the Danish Presidency put into the preparation of this meeting. It was constructive and the meeting served to set the basis for a possible peace plan, as well as for further international support for Palestinian reform.
Unfortunately the situation on the ground gives no reason to believe that things will get any better soon. There was a six-week period of calm – calm of a sort, at any rate, even though during that period 50 Palestinians were killed. Then there were the despicable suicide bombings. There was also the bombing of the Palestinian school and so the violence increased again.
This offers a very good overview of the progress achieved and the new challenges that emerged in 2001/2002. When we met here 11 months ago to discuss the previous CFSP Report, we had just been hit by the terrorist attacks in the United States and the war in Afghanistan. The picture today has changed dramatically. The impact of 11 September on world politics has been immense.
To be fair there were some signs of improvement which have passed largely unacknowledged. We were encouraged by the declaration of Fatah/Tanzim of their intention to stop attacks on Israeli civilians. Foreign Minister Shimon Peres called the Fatah document a 'first dawn of a different season, hopefully' he added, 'spring'. But this new understanding seems to have evaporated and the Palestinian Authority and President Arafat have again become the target of an assault in retaliation for suicide attacks by those who do not believe in peace.
Let me stress once again – as I have done on several occasions in this House – that we must continue insisting that the Palestinian Authority does everything possible to stop terrorism. We should exert the utmost pressure on the Palestinian Authority to prevent terror attacks and to bring terrorists to justice. But how does it help the cause of peace to deprive the Palestinian Authority of the power and means to do any of these things? How does it improve security to destroy the Palestinian Authority? How does the isolation and attempted humiliation of President Arafat and the Palestinian Authority contribute to the fight against terror? Or, for that matter, attempts to drive him into exile. No wonder the Secretary-General of the United Nations described Israeli policy this week as bankrupt, as being likely to increase extremism rather than reduce it.
On a less gloomy note, the Quartet reviewed the Palestinian reform process which seems to be on track in as much as this is possible under the current situation. The reform of financial and budgetary management is continuing with European Union support and under European Union pressure. In this context I welcome – as a positive first step – the decision by Israel to pay USD 45 million in frozen tax transfers to the Palestinian Authority through the same bank account and the same monitoring mechanism which was set up as a result of our support to the Palestinian Authority. I repeat: through the same bank account and using the same monitoring mechanism which was set up as a result of the efforts of the European Commission and the European Union. I hope that the irony of that remark is not lost on some of those who have been criticising the efforts that we have made in order to promote the cause of reform in the Palestinian Authority. And I hope that Israel will immediately release the remaining money.
A wide sector of Palestinian society regards elections as a crucial part of the reform process. The pressure for elections must be maintained. The events in the Palestinian Legislative Council over the past week and the resignation of the Palestinian Cabinet shows the emergence of a real democratic debate within Palestinian society. This is a very positive sign of parliamentary life. I sincerely hope that a new Palestinian Cabinet dedicated to the reform process is formed soon and that the achievements of the past few months are not destroyed.
The European Union is ready to provide assistance if there is a minimum guarantee that the elections will be free and fair. Whilst we fully support Palestinian elections and the need for Palestinian people to elect their own leadership, we continue to caution against elections if the legal, administrative and logistic framework for elections, including the political environment, is not in place. And how can those things be in place if there are closures, if there are curfews, if there are tanks in the streets?
But despite the progress on the reform agenda the humanitarian and economic situation continues to deteriorate.
This has been recently highlighted by UN envoy Catherine Bertini in her sobering report on the humanitarian situation in the Palestinian territories: two thirds of the population is under the poverty line and up to half of the population is currently unemployed. The situation must dramatically improve if we are to avoid a humanitarian catastrophe. But we must do much more than fighting the symptoms of the crisis. We must address its causes. Providing humanitarian assistance can only be a short-term approach – improving the economy must be our goal.
Let me mention here that the European Union's humanitarian work is severely affected by the restriction of movement, not just within the Palestinian Territories but on arrival at the border. This year so far we have had over 20 cases of Israel denying entry to EU humanitarian teams.
Finally, the Quartet agreed to hold in November a ministerial-level meeting of the Ad-Hoc Liaison Committee, involving the major donors in the international community. The meeting will review the economic and humanitarian situation in the West Bank and Gaza, as well as efforts to support and encourage the reform process in the Palestinian Authority, including the prospects for elections.
I should like to bring to Parliament’s attention the fact that donors will inevitably be asked to identify the possibilities of additional funding. I should warn Parliament I am likely to come back to Parliament and the Budgetary Authority as a whole on this in the near future.
I agree with Mr Brok that there are currently four major tasks for our Common Foreign and Security Policy. None of them are easily met: firstly there is our partnership with the United States. The complexity and diversity of this indispensable partnership inevitably generate a certain degree of friction. We stand united against terrorism, we share similar values. But our interpretation of these values is not always identical.
Over the last six months we have made some political progress. The perspectives are much clearer now; and the Palestinians and the donor community are working hard on building institutions and reforming existing structures. But there is a danger of this becoming a sort of virtual politics, while the real situation on the ground goes from bad to worse to appalling. Every day we talk of peace; every day people die – Palestinians, Israelis. How much longer must this go on? How much longer must Israelis and Palestinians live in Gethsemane?
United States leadership since the war has been based on two pillars, represented perhaps by the work of President Truman and General Marshall: first containment of threat; second the establishment of a global rule book and of global institutions which could encourage democracy, open markets and the rule of law, both on continents and internationally. That approach, which produced so much prosperity and stability for the last half of the last century, is still the right approach today. That is why all Members in this House are united in thinking that the right way of approaching the problem of Iraq is through the means of the United Nations.
In our cooperation with the US, but also more generally, the European Union has shown resolve in the pursuit of this multilateral approach to foreign policy. We strongly believe that multilateral arrangements and conventions, the UN, the G8, the OSCE and others are the key to tackling the security, development and environmental problems which confront the world.
The structures of ESDP and its relationship with NATO are of particular concern. I am worried that despite almost indefatigable efforts of many, the Berlin-plus issue remains unsettled with consequences, as we know, for our aspirations in the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia.
Finally, bilateral relations have continued to expand in the past year with virtually all major countries in the world. Among them, Russia is an increasingly important strategic partner. Today, we have an ambitious, comprehensive, bilateral agenda with Russia, including a structured and intensive dialogue on Common Foreign and Security Policy. This partnership also helps us to address sensitive issues like Chechnya.
I broadly agree with Mr Brok's remarks regarding the agenda of our regional policies. The report includes a series of proposals which are welcome, such as the creation of a Euro-Mediterranean parliamentary assembly, fresh initiatives for our partnerships with Asia and Latin America and support to the New Partnership for Africa's Development in sub-Saharan Africa (NEPAD).
There are four issues that I would like to touch on in particular. In the Western Balkans we need to ensure that we work together to preserve the integrity of the stabilisation and association process. Those agreements should not be seen as political goodwill signals. It is in no-one’s interest to finalise agreements with countries before the objective criteria for an agreement have been fulfilled."@en1
|
| lpv:unclassifiedMetadata |
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples