Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2005-03-08-Speech-2-160"

Predicate	Value (sorted: default)
rdf:type	lpv_eu:Speech2
dcterms:Date	"2005-03-08"^^xsd:date2
dcterms:Is Part Of	lp_eu:Review of the Non-proliferation Treaty Nuclear arms in North Korea and Iran2
dcterms:Language	"pl"^^xsd:language2
lpv:document identification number	"en.20050308.20.2-160"2
lpv:hasSubsequent	lp_eu:2005-03-08-Speech-2-1612
lpv:speaker	lp:Marek Siwiec2
lpv:spokenAs	unknown; Sojusz Lewicy Demokratycznej - Unia Pracy (2004-07-20--2009-07-13)3 substitute; SEDE (2004-07-21--2007-01-14)3 substitute; Delegation for relations with Israel (2004-09-15--2007-03-13)3 member; Conference of Delegation Chairs (2004-09-22--2007-02-14)3 member; PES (2004-07-20--2009-07-13)3 chair; Delegation to the EU-Ukraine Parliamentary Cooperation Committee (2004-09-21--2007-02-14)3 member; AFET (2004-07-21--2007-01-14)3
lpv:translated text	"Mr President, this debate is proof that the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons is all bark and no bite. We can make use of this Treaty to threaten people and bark at them, but there is no question of us being able to bite anyone who fails to comply with it. Any important developments there have been have occurred outside the framework of the Treaty, or even in spite of it. India and Pakistan have acquired nuclear weapons and the secret blueprints for such weapons have been stolen from Pakistan, yet sanctions have not been imposed on either of these countries. Libya has abandoned its nuclear programme, yet the Treaty played no part in this. Iran and North Korea are not only building atomic bombs, they are now also developing means of delivering them, and there appears to be no chance of putting an effective stop to these programmes. Countries like these are engaging in negotiations under false pretences, in order to gain time and develop their nuclear programmes. What action should therefore be taken? Unless new and stricter control mechanisms are put in place, there is absolutely no point in continuing to talk in twentieth century terms, as though the countries that have the capacity to build nuclear weapons were still parties to the Treaty. There can be little hope of enforcing the Treaty without effective controls, and the requirement to abandon nuclear weapons must form part of the overall policy adopted towards a given country. On its own, the Treaty will get us nowhere. My final point relates to something that should be stated quite plainly. Unless we cooperate with the United States and engage in serious dialogue with our American partners, adopting a policy of coercion will be equally futile, whether in the case of Korea or Iran. This is because such countries are expert at playing the ‘good cop, bad cop’ game, whereby they hold talks with one party and are afraid of the other. There is little chance of the party they hold talks with, and of whom they are not afraid, being able to persuade them to make any real changes. I thank you."@en1

Named graphs describing this resource:

The resource appears as object in 2 triples

Context graph