Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2006-10-25-Speech-3-284"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20061025.25.3-284"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spoken text |
". Mr President, first of all I think this is a very timely discussion. Thank you for putting it on the agenda.
Like the European Parliament, the Commission is a strong believer in dialogue. Therefore, I very much hope that the positive messages that we have received from Damascus lately will be transformed into deeds and that we will be able to restore a strong relationship with that country.
I have followed closely the discussions in the AFET Committee on Ms De Keyser’s substantive and comprehensive report. The report is a fair account of the internal and regional challenges facing Syria. I welcome this reflection by the European Parliament on the way forward with Syria. After the conflict in Lebanon and in the new context of United Nations Security Council resolution 1701 (2006), it is indeed the right moment to reassess where we are with our current policy.
Syria is a long-standing partner under the Barcelona process and is a potential candidate for the European Neighbourhood Policy in the medium term. I share your view that we have a strong interest in bringing that country closer to Europe. Syria, as we all know, is an essential player for stability in the Middle East. It is a key part of the puzzle when it comes to finding a long-term solution to the conflicts in the region and also in the implementation of resolution 1701 in full. In this critical moment for the peace process, Damascus has the power to be part of the solution and not part of the problem. This means that we expect Syria, as you have stated in the motion for a resolution, to pass the right messages to Hezbollah and Hamas, to prevent arms shipments into Lebanon, as our colleague from the Council has said, and to help with the settlement on the Shebaa Farms. As I have indicated, I believe that re-engaging with Syria should be part of our strategy. A different issue is then whether and how far we can re-engage here and now. The first thing we need in order to re-engage with Syria is for its leaders to show their commitment and their interest in moving forward and taking positive steps on a number of issues.
As you well know, lately we have gone through difficult times in our relationship with Syria. Ms De Keyser’s report addresses a number of the political divergences. Overcoming the political deadlock depends on the leadership’s ability to translate some of its words of goodwill into deeds of goodwill. Syria has a new opportunity at this critical time for the peace process to demonstrate that it is serious about contributing positively to regional stability.
In the absence of an association agreement, we have limited scope to tackle matters of concern. Nevertheless, we have tried where we can, and where we feel it is of interest for the people of Syria. We have tried to continue programmes in those areas that directly benefit the citizens of Syria. For example, on human rights, the European Union uses diplomatic channels to address the most serious violations, including, for instance, the cases of prisoners of conscience. We have also reacted to the limitations on freedom of expression and the wave of arrests that accompanied the publication of the Beirut-Damascus declaration last May. But it is not by cutting off contacts that we will achieve much progress. With no dialogue, we have no influence.
We should therefore turn the situation around, give a positive perspective to relations with Syria and set out the areas where we expect progress. We do so in part through our cooperation programmes. Syria now seems to be well engaged on the road to economic transition and we welcome the approval of Syria’s national agenda for reforms sponsored by Deputy Prime Minister Dardari last May. Support for the implementation of the reform process, including progressive steps to political opening, could be the focus of our action in the next few years, if things go well.
Cooperation under the ENPI – the European Neighbourhood Policy Instrument – will allow us to give Syria the medium-term prospect of full participation in the Neighbourhood Policy. The ENP will then bring additional benefits and, we hope, a more interesting package for them, when the time is ripe.
As for the association agreement, it is still on the table. We have finalised all technical preparations and we have initialled the agreement. Now, it is pending a decision on signature from the Council. Signature is a process. So far, political circumstances have not been right. Member States still expect Syria to take more positive and credible steps to make signature possible, including on regional issues such as Lebanon and Palestine.
Syria’s recent statements to facilitate the implementation of Security Council resolution 1701 may be encouraging signs in this respect, as are President Assad’s calls for resuming peace talks, which have had some positive echoes in Israel."@en1
|
| lpv:unclassifiedMetadata |
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples