Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2003-11-19-Speech-3-150"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20031119.6.3-150"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:translated text |
".
Mr President, Mr President-in-Office of the Council, ladies and gentlemen, in the preparatory political dialogue for this summit, which took place on 28 October in Moscow, I considered it necessary and right to describe the state of our relations as follows: we have very many action plans but hardly any action. We have grand strategies but small deeds. We have visions but little practice. That is my assessment, and the Russian side agreed with it. The common intent that came out of that preparatory meeting was to become rather more practical in our relations and perhaps to develop fewer great new ideas, but instead to try for once actually to put into practice the ideas we already have. I agree with what the President-in-Office of the Council has already said here. In that respect, the Rome Summit was really almost the beginning of a new form of cooperation because really very precise and clear results were achieved.
In the matter of
the freezing of a large proportion of
shares has created much instability and uncertainty on financial markets, and the Commission has made clear, both in the political dialogue in Moscow and at the summit in Rome, that the Russian authorities must in every case apply the laws fairly and without discrimination, observing the principle of proportionality.
In relation to Chechnya, we found that the security situation there has deteriorated further since the constitutional referendum in March and the presidential elections in October. The European Union has issued two statements expressing its concern about allegations of ballot rigging. The facts make clear that a political solution to the problem has still not been found. We will continue to press for a more workable political solution, but that will not be possible without full respect for human rights. That also includes those responsible for serious human rights violations being called to account.
For obvious reasons, the Commission raised the question of humanitarian aid both in the political dialogue and at the summit and noted that humanitarian aid is being hampered by the fact that our personnel are unable to be active on the ground. Talks on this subject have not resulted in a satisfactory outcome as yet. I would like to stress, however, that the Commission still considers it a priority to be present in the region itself with its resources and personnel in order to be able to provide assistance when and where it is needed. We are, after all, the largest provider of humanitarian aid in this conflict.
What conclusions can we draw from all this? Firstly, if we want to build a genuine strategic partnership, the European Union’s policy towards Russia must be balanced and consistent. Selecting topics that are only to the advantage of one partner is not a sufficient basis for a strategic partnership.
Secondly, we must also try to ensure that the Member States and the Union as a whole pursue jointly defined objectives. Questions of visa policy and of a readmission agreement that we want to conclude with our partner Russia ought to be discussed as a common objective under the Union’s umbrella. Let me be perfectly clear: I do not think it is helpful when individual Member States pursue their own policies with Russia in these matters before we have a common policy.
Thirdly, relations between the Union and Russia are of the utmost importance for the future of both partners. We must not allow initiatives that would be to the advantage of both sides, such as extending the Partnership and Cooperation Agreement or cooperation in fighting crime and in environmental matters, to come to grief because of bureaucratic obstacles. It is therefore very important for the European Union and Russia to call the Permanent Partnership Council into being in order to intensify cooperation between respective ministers.
Fourthly and lastly, we should place particular stress on developing a tailored concept, together with Russia as part of our new neighbourhood policy, which will give expression to the importance of the special relationship and the strategic partnership between the European Union and Russia and provide the space to substantially improve and deepen that relationship. I am pleased to be able to say in conclusion that talks have shown that Russia is willing to cooperate in the context of the European Union’s new neighbourhood policy and that we can therefore meaningfully combine our existing strategy with the new neighbourhood policy.
Of course, the summit in many respects confirmed the complexity of relations between the European Union and Russia. We reaffirmed the interest of both sides in fostering long-term integration by creating a number of common spaces both within the framework of the Partnership and Cooperation Agreement and in the context of the Wider Europe initiative.
I think it is very important that the concept of the common economic space was given really concrete form at the summit and that the High Level Group was in fact able to make concrete proposals, such as the start of a common programme for the approximation of laws and facilitation of trade. That will now be put into practice very quickly and will be made easier by Russia’s impending accession to the WTO, which we anticipate for 2004. The Commission is very much in favour of Russia joining the WTO, not least in order to drive forward and consolidate economic reform in Russia.
We have extended the Agreement on Scientific and Technological Cooperation, seeing it as one of the most important factors for the growth of our cooperation, building on Russia’s significant scientific and research capacities. Russia is also becoming increasingly involved in European Union initiatives to promote cooperation in research and education.
The President-in-Office of the Council has already drawn attention to the signing of the agreement between Europol and the Russian interior ministry. The Commission welcomes that because it will encourage cooperation in fighting terrorism and organised crime. There will be a joint declaration on cooperation in political and security matters. Those are quite clearly areas of common interest.
We have also, however, seen that there are things that separate the European Union and Russia today and that there are subjects on which we need to intensify our efforts in order to make progress and arrive at common results. I will begin with environmental problems. It is quite clear that we need to do more to deal with common challenges jointly such as climate change.
So far as the Kyoto Protocol is concerned, I see the situation roughly as follows. It is probably realistic to assume that progress in Russia’s preparation for when it will sign the Kyoto Protocol will run parallel to its progress on joining the WTO. Although there is no formal link, it is quite realistic to think that there will be some parallelism between the two processes.
It is also most important that we should be able to reach agreement on matters of safety for maritime shipping and of nuclear safety.
The Commission sees a need for talks concerning Russia’s OSCE obligation to withdraw troops from Transnistria by the end of this year and on extending the Partnership and Cooperation Agreement to the acceding Member States. So far as Transnistria in particular is concerned, I think we can expect significantly more pressure from Russia to get OSCE policy implemented."@en1
|
| lpv:unclassifiedMetadata |
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples