Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2006-10-25-Speech-3-236"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20061025.23.3-236"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
".
Mr President, not long ago we were applauding the peaceful revolution in Georgia and encouraging its young leaders to establish true democracy in their country. Today, as we know, Georgia is experiencing difficulties in resolving conflicts with its separatist regions, and the escalating provocations from both sides are certainly not helping to resolve those conflicts peacefully. What is worse, armed intervention could embroil the entire Caucasus, which is something of which we are all conscious. That is why we must strongly urge the Georgian authorities to take a conciliatory approach and to constructively relaunch the peace process in South Ossetia.
However, there are extenuating circumstances in Georgia: its neighbour, Russia, is not playing the conciliation game. For example, when, in Lahti last week, he compared South Ossetia to Kosovo, Mr Putin was adding fuel to the flames in the Caucasus, at the very time when he was expected to re-establish trust by normalising relations with his neighbours in Georgia. Whatever Russia may say, it certainly is involved in this conflict. Did it not issue Russian passports to the Georgian population of South Ossetia? How valid can a referendum be if 80% of the participants were Russian citizens? How neutral can we expect the peace-keeping forces in South Ossetia to be when they are predominantly Russian? I will not even mention the unilateral Russian embargo or the ongoing deportations of Georgians in Russia, which are evidence of a desire to destabilise Georgia.
So, then, the neighbourhood policy and greater cooperation with Russia are, of course, tools for us, but you will forgive me if I cannot share the Council's position on the replacement of the peace-keeping forces. I think, ladies and gentlemen, that we really do need to ask ourselves how the neutrality and impartiality of these forces can be guaranteed. We should perhaps – or should I say, definitely – be prepared to make a contribution, should it prove necessary, to the replacement of the peace-keeping forces."@en1
|
| lpv:unclassifiedMetadata |
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples