Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2003-04-09-Speech-3-269"

PredicateValue (sorted: default)
rdf:type
dcterms:Date
dcterms:Is Part Of
dcterms:Language
lpv:document identification number
"en.20030409.5.3-269"2
lpv:hasSubsequent
lpv:speaker
lpv:spokenAs
lpv:translated text
"Madam President, I would like to begin by congratulating Mr Morillon on his report, which is the usual balanced blend of imagination and realism, vision and pragmatism. Indeed, I wish for his sake that even our fellow Member Mr Korakas would actually read it, for then he would arrive at a different view. The real question facing us, of course – to put it in provocative terms – is this: should the European Union become a military power? I agree with the previous speaker, Mr Laschet: in recent weeks or months, Europe has, unfortunately, not played any global role at all. That is a fact. Of course, it is primarily a matter of will, as Commissioner Patten always says. Are we actually willing to take on a role? I believe – and the Morillon report, which has after all been adopted by a large majority, bears this out – that here in this House, we do have the will to play a proper role in world affairs. Can a military capability help us? The answer, in my view, is ‘yes’. A military capability can help us if there is a common foreign and security policy. It cannot be a substitute for the common foreign and security policy, but it can certainly support and underpin it. I too, however, am sceptical about an arms race. It would be quite grotesque to argue that in the past, we were involved in the arms race because we had to keep pace with an opponent, and now we have to compete in the arms race because we have to keep pace with a partner, namely the United States of America. But if we read it correctly, the Morillon report states primarily – not exclusively, but primarily – that the task must be to coordinate our defence spending so that, initially, we achieve a far greater impact and more efficiency with the same amount of money. Secondly, it is certainly also important to identify where there are gaps which we Europeans can close. In reality, there are two alternative options to be considered. To my mind, leaving things as they are is not an option. The first option is for us to become a military power like the USA, albeit rather less powerful, less imperialist and less efficient. I see that as unacceptable. The other option is to acquire a military capability to underpin a common foreign and security policy, just as Mr Morillon outlines in his report, so that we have the capacity to act efficiently within the framework of a multilateral policy. We do not have this capacity at present. The Morillon Report identifies ways for us to act efficiently in a multilateral framework. That is why we are clear and unequivocal in our endorsement of the Morillon Report."@en1

Named graphs describing this resource:

1http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/rdf/English.ttl.gz
2http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/rdf/Events_and_structure.ttl.gz
3http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/rdf/spokenAs.ttl.gz

The resource appears as object in 2 triples

Context graph