Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2003-01-29-Speech-3-108"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20030129.5.3-108"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spoken text |
"Madam President, I would like to thank the Council and the Commission for that very insightful analysis of what has been going on. This resolution is an important step forward in favour of international law and the rule of law. As we speak, there are some 48 civil conflicts around the world – the majority of them in Africa – being conducted largely in the promotion of one or more supposed sectional or tribal interests. Sub-Saharan Africa has seen millions of people massacred, genocide committed, whole tribes ethnically cleansed in the last 20 years.
Ostensibly, these conflicts have been based, as in Angola or Rwanda, on so-called historic divisions. But the reality is that an underlying factor in most of these cases has been commercial gain, based on supposed tribal protection. Various sectional and commercial interests, some of them based in Europe, have tried to exploit these differences for commercial gain to procure the supply of diamonds, timber, oil, gold, cobalt, titanium and vanadium.
Africa is supposed to be one of the richest continents in the world, inhabited by the poorest people in the world. How can this be so? This is so because the rule of law and international law has not operated in Africa for a long time. The Democratic Republic of Congo has been exploited, looted and robbed. Its people have been set against one another, encouraged to massacre each other and sometimes to commit genocide, so that powerful vested interests outside Africa can collude and gain advantage.
This report by the United Nations Security Council is a seminal report in that it sets out for the first time to establish that international law incorporates a moral right to a concept of shared sovereignty, that sovereignty is not merely what is defined in the Montevideo Convention or President Wilson's 14-point rule, and that in a global trading environment as we see now with the WTO and global rules on trade, we have to share our sovereignty when the rule of law becomes paramount.
If we can penalise the United States for doing something wrong with its steel, why is it that we are not able to do something in the Democratic Republic of the Congo, where millions of people have been exploited and killed for commercial gain?
So I welcome this resolution and I commend it."@en1
|
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:unclassifiedMetadata |
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples