Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2003-10-22-Speech-3-101"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20031022.5.3-101"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spoken text |
".
Mr President, I would like to congratulate the rapporteur on his excellent report which he knows I have much enjoyed reading. I do not want in the five minutes that I have to repeat all the points that have been made with such eloquence and comprehensiveness by the Italian Presidency but I agree with all that the Minister said.
Perhaps I can just focus on four points very briefly and try to stick to my five minutes. First of all I want to say something about the institutional arrangements. We all know that the present institutional arrangements supporting and providing the infrastructure for CFSP are, to use a common term of art in the European Union, 'sub-optimal'. And we all know that changes in institutional arrangements, the sort of changes proposed in the Convention and being discussed in the IGC, can help to create political will to make things happen more effectively.
But changes in institutions can never be a substitute for political will. We did not have disagreements over Iraq because we lacked the adequate institutional arrangements. We had disagreements over Iraq because of a lack of sufficient political will. It is also fair to say that however much we improve the institutional arrangements – and this was a point touched on by the presidency – we cannot pay the bills with institutional arrangements. If we want to have a more effective international impact, if we want to be seen by the United States as people who are pulling our weight in the security field, we have to face up to the fact that we need to do more and we need to spend more. All the opinion polls show – and this is an interesting reflection of the current debate in Europe – that most of our voters in Europe want there to be a louder European voice politically on the international stage. But unfortunately there is hardly any country where voters are prepared to spend more money on our security in order to help sustain that larger European role. Therefore we have to tackle the present gap between the discussion on institutional arrangements and the discussion both on political will and on resources.
Second, I should like to mention security and the definition of security. We all know that security needs to be defined in much broader terms than has been conventional in foreign policy debate. One of the great bonuses of the draft security strategy which the High Representative has brought forward is that it demonstrates that security is about more than precision-guided munitions and airlift capacity. It is about issues from public health and disease to terrorism, to organised crime, all the issues where we in the European Union actually have the competence to develop a more coherent, comprehensive external relations policy than is possible in a lot of Member States and in a lot of nation-states. It is very important in my view, therefore, that when we come to construct a joint external service, we make sure that we combine the strengths of both Pillar I and Pillar II in the management and implementation of CFSP. It would be a great mistake if, on the one hand, we cut off the Foreign Minister from the Commission, or on the other hand, if we did the sort of things which would make people suspicious of the Commission being too involved in CFSP issues. So, we have to make sure that, as we design the joint external service, we use the strength of both the Council and the Commission to have the widest possible impact on external problems.
The third point I want to make is about the importance of the transatlantic partnership. We know that in the run-up to the military intervention in Iraq, Europe was bitterly divided. I have said before that I am not wholly surprised about that since the issues that we were facing in Iraq were extremely difficult and extremely serious. We also know that despite those divisions, by and large, most of the things we want to achieve as Europeans are more achievable if we work with the United States and it has to be said, most of the things the United States wants to achieve are more manageable if it works with the European Union. I hope we will see that now in Iraq with reconstruction.
I will be going from this Chamber to Madrid for the Iraq Reconstruction Conference, as will the presidency. We will there, I think, see the presidency able to announce a commitment from the European Union for the first year of reconstruction in Iraq which will be larger than the pledge that we were able to make for Afghanistan at Tokyo. I think we will be committing over the next months more in Iraq than we did on that occasion. We will be committing EUR 200 million from the European budget on top of the EUR 100 million that we have already pledged for humanitarian assistance.
I think the figure that we are proposing from the budget is a responsible figure: I think it is a serious figure. It has not obliged us to use up all our flexibility next year or to take money from other important programmes. I think it is far more important for us to be going to Madrid supporting the efforts of reconstruction with a serious contribution rather than a contribution which is merely a political reaction.
The fourth thing I want to say is that we often talk about effective multilateralism and sometimes we are asked to define it. I think what we have seen happen in the last 24 hours in Iran is a good example of effective multilateralism. We have embarked on a policy in Iran of tough-minded but constructive engagement. Engagement does not mean abandoning principle. We have strong views about the human rights situation in Iraq. We have strong views about terrorism. We have strong views about nuclear weapons. But we have been prepared to hold out a hand of friendship to Iran, recognising that it is a great pre-Islamic civilisation. We also recognise – this is certainly my view – that demography in Iran is on the side of democracy, giving Iran the opportunity to be drawn into the international community and not isolated from it. So yesterday's visit seems to me to be an excellent example of how much we can achieve in Europe when we work together and I think it is particularly important to recognise that France, Germany and Britain as well as the other Member States have to give a lead in working together.
I hope that we will see this sort of combined effort more often, using both the resources that can be provided by Member States and the resources that we have agreed to share in common and the competencies that we have agreed to share. I hope that we will see that sort of effective cooperation. I hope that we will not see too much institutional warfare. I certainly think that the issues that we have to deal with on the international stage are far too serious for that, as is made clear in this excellent report."@en1
|
| lpv:unclassifiedMetadata |
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples