Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2003-12-17-Speech-3-043"

Predicate	Value (sorted: default)
rdf:type	lpv_eu:Speech2
dcterms:Date	"2003-12-17"^^xsd:date2
dcterms:Is Part Of	lp_eu:Removal of the EU embargo on arms sales to China2
dcterms:Language	"de"^^xsd:language2
lpv:document identification number	"en.20031217.3.3-043"2
lpv:hasSubsequent	lp_eu:2003-12-17-Speech-3-0442
lpv:speaker	lp:Georg Jarzembowski2
lpv:spokenAs	member; EPP-ED (1999-07-20--2004-07-19)3 vice-chair; Delegation for relations with Japan (2002-02-07--2004-07-19)3 substitute; Committee on Foreign Affairs, Human Rights, Common Security and Defence Policy (2002-01-17--2004-07-19)3 chair; Temporary committee on improving safety at sea (2003-11-26--2004-04-21)3 member; Committee on Regional Policy, Transport and Tourism (2002-01-17--2004-07-19)3 unknown; Christlich Demokratische Union Deutschlands (1999-07-20--2004-07-19)3
lpv:translated text	"Mr President-in-Office of the Council, Commissioner, the Group of the European People’s Party (Christian Democrats) and European Democrats firmly rejects the latest attempts by the German Chancellor, Gerhard Schröder, to lift the arms embargo on the People’s Republic of China. I am glad that the Council representative made it clear that the Council currently maintains the line that the arms embargo must be retained. You described the situation, Commissioner, but I urge you to be cautious. The 1989 European Council was right to impose the arms embargo after the peace demonstrations in Tiananmen Square were put down in such a bloody fashion. Commissioner, we too believe that there have been improvements in the human rights situation in China since then, but they have not been sufficient. Only recently, on 13 October, the Council reconsidered the situation in China and, just as Parliament had done in the same month, noted that the current human rights situation in China, as regards fundamental civil, cultural and political freedoms did not meet even the international standards recognised by China. That being so, although we want progress in China, we should wait before it is achieved, and so it would send completely the wrong message if the embargo were to be lifted at the present time. On the contrary, we should be telling our Chinese friends that they need to make perceptible progress where human rights in China are concerned. There is a second reason why we should do this. You will be aware that presidential elections are to be held in Taiwan on 20 March next year, and the People’s Republic of China has, over recent weeks, been adopting a positively hostile stance towards Taiwan. As long ago as 23 October, this House stated its view that China should withdraw the rockets it had stationed in the coastal provinces opposite Taiwan and should commence peaceful dialogue across the Strait of Taiwan, which amounts to a flash point. That is the second reason why lifting the arms embargo makes no sense whatever. I therefore hope that we will not now send the wrong message, even if only by editing what we say, in the belief that we can lift the arms embargo because everything is laid down in the code of conduct. On the contrary, I believe that the tensions and the human rights situation, which is still unsatisfactory, mean that we have to maintain it."@en1
lpv:unclassifiedMetadata	"(Applause)"1

Named graphs describing this resource:

The resource appears as object in 2 triples

Context graph