Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2003-12-17-Speech-3-131"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20031217.4.3-131"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:translated text |
".
Even though it is impossible to disagree with the condemnation of the concept of ‘
’ and of the political murders committed in its name, we have not voted to approve this report.
On the one hand, it glosses over the culpability of successive French governments, which, following a long period of colonial oppression, supported Houphouët-Boigny’s dictatorship and then the authoritarian regime of his successor Bédié, who, in the course of his struggle for power with his rivals, devised the rabble-rousing concept of ‘
.
Even today, the French army maintains a presence in Côte d’Ivoire to protect, not the people, but French capitalist interests.
In any case, what is meant by ‘the restoration of the state’s authority’ if no means are provided to put a stop to ‘poverty, the unequal distribution of wealth, social injustice, violations of human rights, and the oppression of minorities…’
which the report itself sees as destabilising influences and as having been factors in bringing about the present conflicts?
As for what are claimed to be peacekeeping forces, for example those of ECOWAS, previous experience in Sierra Leone and Liberia has demonstrated that, in general, they did nothing other than add one more armed gang to those that are already preying on the population. Using our votes to endorse such a hypocritical document would have served only to enable Members of the European Parliament to appease their consciences."@en1
|
| lpv:unclassifiedMetadata |
"ivoirité’"1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples