Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2002-11-19-Speech-2-117"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20021119.2.2-117"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
"Mr President, Mr President-in-Office of the Council, Commissioner, I confess to having been somewhat sceptical about the meeting with our colleagues from the candidate countries here in Strasbourg today, which could have been misunderstood as sending a message along the lines of, ‘all our problems have been solved, and enlargement is going fine.’ Thank God that was not the case.
It was truly moving to meet all these colleagues speaking different languages and to get the point across to them that there remains much to be done, and that there are still problems and tasks outstanding. It was also a good opportunity to set before them the fact that we too have a public to whom we have to explain the results of the negotiations and whom we have to win over. The process of adapting to the European Union's rules, the acquis communautaire, must be proceeded with.
This Parliament makes a good lobby for enlargement, but the conditions – including the financial ones – have to be right. Enlargement is, then, not a charitable act or a work of mercy. It is an attempt at constructing a shared Europe, and that on the basis of the European Union's progress to date, which has been the result of shared political endeavour. It is about reversing the effects of Yalta. It is also about overturning the wartime and post-war order, and I believe that to be in the interests of all of us.
To take an actual example, I do think that the Czech Republic, too, should be able to examine the past in a critical light and look to the future, just as everyone else should refrain from making political capital out of post-war events that, while comprehensible, are very much open to criticism. If we can convince both sides of this, then we can really build a new future.
I turn now to Turkey, a country which, during the summer, enacted a range of measures to set in motion real progress towards the rule of law and fully-fledged democracy. Admittedly, the legal measures do not go far enough and have not yet been put into effect, but the government has declared its willingness to do so and also wants to demonstrate its European orientation and its acceptance of the European norm whereby religion and the state are kept separate. Most of all, we look to this government to resolved the Cyprus problem.
Mr Elles, I consider it a dangerous initiative at this stage to do as one amendment proposes and put Turkey's chair outside the door and talk only in terms of a special relationship. Both Muslim citizens and citizens of Turkish descent have a place in the European Union.
I do not believe that we can decide today whether there are to be actual negotiations with Turkey or when they should take place. It is very much in the interest of all of us to encourage Turkey, and to demonstrate that Islam and a modern democracy can be put on an equal footing, and I reject anything that might be understood to be a disincentive to them to do so.
I will conclude by saying that I was in the Balkans at the beginning of this week, where I saw how enlargement evokes in people a degree of fear – fear of being left out, fear of being left behind. I ask the Commission and the Council to consider how, in the course of the next six months, they can generate signals that show that the Balkans will have a part in the enlargement process – not today, not tomorrow, but perhaps the day after that, if they do as the candidate countries have done and fulfil the same requirements. It would be a very positive step to send them a clear signal to this effect!"@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples