Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2004-12-14-Speech-2-042"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20041214.5.2-042"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
"Mr President, Mr President of the Commission, I should like to make a few observations about external policy. I have no doubt that we will have many meetings discussing the EU’s external policy and security policy in the coming years. In my view, the Commission, and also its President, play a major role in controlling policy cohesion and must ensure that the Commission’s tasks and the Council’s responsibilities are coordinated effectively. What is important in this is, of course, the correct use of all instruments which the European Union has at its disposal.
To date, we relied on the excellent relationship between Commissioner Patten and High Representative Solana. However, we are now heading for a slightly different scenario, one that has been provided for in the Constitution. What we mainly expect, and ask, from the Commission is, pending the adoption and ratification of the Constitution, is that it should continue to work in the same spirit and now to look for a model of integration in which the scope of the different pillars, namely the first, second and third pillars, can be combined.
The second point that is of importance to us is the EU’s commitment to promoting effective multilateralism. This has to do with the Commission’s contribution to the EU’s international relations. We would also like the Commission to devote much of its attention to fleshing out the civilian aspects of the EU’s security policy; I should also like the Commission to return to pledges it has made in the past with regard to reinforcing the EU’s action in conflict prevention. Furthermore, I think it is important to enter into a debate with the United States about the UN’s future. That is a very topical issue, in respect of which the Commission can be expected to make an active contribution. That should be a new element in the transatlantic dialogue. As far as we are concerned, making the world more democratic – starting with Europe, of course – is the leitmotif.
I can be brief about the third point. The EU’s enlargement and the Commission’s commitment to negotiations with Turkey, which we discussed this week, will be important tasks in the years to come.
The fourth point concerns the relationship with Russia, a resolution on which will be adopted this week. How can we develop the relationship with that country along twin tracks, on the one hand, economic cooperation and working on common energy policy, and on the other hand, an open debate about values, democracy and the developments in Russia in this area? In our view, a lively debate about the relationship between the EU and Russia is inevitable, as well as a discussion about the neighbours we have in common, which should touch on Russia, Moldova, the Caucasus and Ukraine.
I should like to end with a remark in connection with the new neighbours. We believe that the people in Ukraine have sent out a clear message. What will be the EU’s response after the third round of the presidential elections? We see the new neighbourhood policy, in its current set-up, is an inadequate match for what is developing over there. I think that the EU’s action plans, in the framework of the new neighbourhood policy, must be linked more closely to the European aspirations that were very prominent in Ukraine. I think that that requires a fresh debate in Parliament. In short, with regard to the new neighbours, there is a need for a more comprehensive concept, a European
."@en1
|
| lpv:unclassifiedMetadata |
"Ostpolitik"1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples