Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2006-03-15-Speech-3-232"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20060315.21.3-232"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spoken text |
".
Mr President, as he is still here, let me commend Mr Brok for his important report. As he rightly said, enlargement is indeed one of the EU’s most powerful policy tools to pursue peace and prosperity, liberty and democracy. The eastern enlargement of 2004 sealed the peaceful reunification between Western and Eastern Europe. Now our energy is focused on a peaceful unification in south-east Europe. Our gradual and carefully managed accession process is based on three key principles.
The EU perspective is the key to a sustainable settlement for Kosovo and to democratic development in Serbia and the rest of the region. It is the foundation that keeps the region on a peaceful and reformist track. Therefore, for the sake of Europe, let us not shake this foundation, ensuring that the still fragile Balkans building does not collapse at our feet, in our own front yard!
First, we have consolidated our enlargement agenda. It means that we must be cautious before taking any new commitments, but likewise we must stick to our prevailing commitments towards candidate or potential candidate countries already in the process. Our consolidated enlargement agenda focuses on south-east Europe: Bulgaria and Romania, and Turkey and Croatia and the other countries of the western Balkans.
Secondly, we apply rigorous conditionality. Combined with a credible accession perspective, conditionality works. It has helped to transform Central and Eastern Europe into modern democracies. More recently, it has inspired bold and significant reforms in Turkey and increasingly in the western Balkans. This is also proven by some recent important events, as General Ante Gotovina is behind bars in The Hague, while the novelist Orhan Pamuk is free to express his opinions.
Enlargement policy and neighbourhood policy complement each other. Furthermore, the Commission is ready to deepen further and upgrade cooperation with our neighbourhood partners once the main priorities in the current action plans have been properly addressed.
At the same time, we should avoid the pitfalls of an overly theoretical debate on the final borders of Europe. As we now have a consolidated enlargement agenda, a theoretical discussion, for example about whether Ukraine should even join the European Union, would benefit neither us nor the Ukrainians, now that Ukraine’s future path and democratic development is at stake.
Certainly, the pace of enlargement must take into consideration the EU’s absorption capacity. The Commission has always had this view. Enlargement is about sharing a project based on common principles, policies and institutions. The Union must ensure that it can maintain its capacity to act and decide according to a fair balance within its institutions, respecting budgetary limits and implementing common policies that function well and achieve their goals.
For over three decades, the EU has successfully absorbed a very diverse set of countries, as we can see from the composition of this House, for instance, including the President in the Chair in charge of this debate and the Commissioner involved. By developing its policies and institutions, the Union has responded positively to new circumstances, such as the fall of dictatorships, the collapse of communism and the rise of economic globalisation. Enlargement has proven to be a successful shock absorber for Europe.
Thirdly, we need better communication. The report rightly calls for a communication strategy and, indeed, broad public support is essential for everything the Union does, including enlargement. I rely on the political and financial support of Parliament to pursue a well-informed debate on enlargement.
To conclude, consolidation was necessary to avoid overstretching on our enlargement commitments. But let us also keep in mind our own strategic interest: it would be utterly irresponsible to disrupt a valuable process that is helping to build stable and effective partners in the most unstable parts of Europe. If we were to go wobbly about the western Balkans’ European perspective, our beneficial influence, our political leverage, our impact would be seriously eroded, just when the region enters a difficult period of talks on Kosovo’s status."@en1
|
| lpv:unclassifiedMetadata |
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples