Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2003-01-15-Speech-3-013"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20030115.1.3-013"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
"Mr President, four months ago we took part in another debate about Afghanistan in this very room, with some of the same people. I have just re-read the report and must come to the conclusion that a large number of subjects dealt with at the time are regrettably still highly topical, such as the position of women. To be honest, I have little to add to Baroness Nicholson’s impressive arguments on that point. I do, however, think that the time has come to do more than just acknowledge that the position of women has deteriorated over the past year. The UN Human Rights Committee, which has a special rapporteur for the position of women, should really go and carry out targeted investigations in places where we all know the position of women has deteriorated, like in Herat, for example. The time has also come for the international community, including the European Union, to make it clear that aid depends on progress with regard to the position of women, and that deterioration will have long-term consequences.
Another subject that we dealt with four months ago – and this has also been mentioned now by a number of fellow Members – was the extension of the ISAF’s mandate outside Kabul. Kofi Annan has described this extension as a precondition for continuing stability in Afghanistan. In his response to our contribution four months ago, the Commissioner himself stated at the time, and I quote: the Member States will certainly take note of the comments of many MEPs. Mr Yiannitsis, I would like to once more ask the question I also put to your Danish counterpart at the time: is the Council prepared to make money and troops available in order to enable this extension to happen? If not, please tell me; then we will not have this illusion hanging over our heads. I am convinced that this is necessary, otherwise there will be no stability anywhere at all in Afghanistan.
Why is it so necessary to extend the ISAF’s mandate? That has everything to do with what I would call the perverse return of the warlords. I again refer to what Mr Patten said on 4 September: we must not use the warlords in the fight against Al-Qaida again. Regrettably this is still happening. Some of the warlords are still being supported financially but also with weapons in the context of the fight against terrorism. This must come to an end. Otherwise everything we have been discussing here about reforms will simply have no chance at all. Take, for example, the fact that many warlords and generals are governors at the same time. This must not be allowed to continue. This only advances their standing; this really must come to an end.
The position of the ISAF has started to suffer, even in Kabul. There are increasing numbers of incidents, and the present Turkish commanding officer has rightly warned that this situation will only worsen in the event of an attack on Iraq. Understandably, there is increasing concern in Germany and the Netherlands, the countries taking over command of the ISAF, that the warlords, together with Al-Qaida, are very likely to use an attack on Iraq to turn people against all Westerners, not only soldiers but aid workers as well. If the ISAF’s mandate is not extended, if the role of the warlords is not diminished, the reforms will simply have no chance at all. Then the human rights violations will continue and – let us not forget this – the credibility of the international community and that of the European Union will be called into question. This must not be allowed to happen."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples