Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2007-03-29-Speech-4-010"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20070329.5.4-010"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:translated text |
".
Mr President, it is a pleasure for me to appear before this House. This is the first time that I have spoken under your Presidency. Allow me to congratulate you once again and wish your Presidency the greatest of success. I also hope the institutional relationship which we will undoubtedly maintain between us, with the Parliament over which you are presiding, will be a success. The evidence is there: in the short time that you have been President of Parliament, we have held several meetings, all of them productive, and I hope that that will be the normal pattern for our work to come.
To give you an idea, we currently have ten missions deployed in the world: from Kinshasa to Bosnia and from Gaza to Iraq. We are about to prepare a mission for Afghanistan and two missions in Kosovo, which will undoubtedly be the most difficult ones in view of their size and in view of the importance that Kosovo will have in relation to the future stabilisation of the Balkans.
I am sure that other missions will come later. There will be a demand for other missions later on, both from a civilian point of view and from a military point of view, or both. We must therefore be prepared for what is expected of us, for what is expected of the European Union. This also means having adequate resources, ladies and gentlemen, and our debates will be significant in this regard, because Parliament will undoubtedly have to play an important role here.
This morning I would like to debate the hottest issues – if you will excuse the expression – of international life, such as the Middle East, with all of its manifestations. I would like to say a few words about Iran and recent events. We will of course have to talk about the Balkans; and I would also like to talk to you about Africa and, briefly, about certain issues involving Eastern Europe that we are currently debating amongst ourselves.
I shall begin with the Middle East. As I have just pointed out, I believe that the Arab League Summit that took place yesterday and which has not yet finished, at which I had the honour of representing the European Union, may be one of the most important summits of the Arab League’s sixty-year history. Sixty years of history that were celebrated on 3 March, a few days ago; while our own Union celebrated fifty years of history last week.
During that period of time, we have undoubtedly had more than thirty years of close cooperation with the Arab League. I believe that it is important to stress this and I also believe that it is important to insist to you that that cooperation between the European Union and the Arab League is going to be increasingly important.
There were two significant elements to yesterday’s meeting that I would like to discuss with you. Perhaps the most striking one, in my view, having taken part in many of the Arab League’s meetings, was the clear leadership at all times of His Majesty the King of Saudi Arabia.
As you know, Saudi Arabia has been an important country in the region, but not one of the most active countries from a political point of view. It has been more important from an economic point of view. Today we have a King, Abdullah, who for a long time was, shall we say, acting king ─ because of the illness of his predecessor ─ and who has begun some rather important action within the Arab League with a view to resolving the problems faced by the Arab world, its people and its region.
The Arab League is being revitalised, therefore, and we believe that to be important, and extremely important issues are being dealt with. I would like to talk specifically about three of them essentially, and I shall refer to them in my speech.
The most important one, from the point of view of the peace process, is undoubtedly the revitalisation of the Arab League's initiative. The honourable Members will remember that, following the Beirut Summit of 2002, there was an Arab initiative offering mutual recognition between the Arab countries and Israel provided that there was complete withdrawal to the 1967 borders. That initiative, which has been discussed in many fora for several years, was not accepted entirely by Israel and today the Arab countries have put it back on the table with greater energy and determination.
As you know, we Europeans were able to introduce the Arab initiative into the famous road map, and that initiative is therefore a fundamental pillar of any possible final settlement of the Middle East problem and in particular the peace process as a whole, not just the peace process in Israeli-Palestinian terms, but also in relation to issues concerning Libya, Lebanon and Syria. This, therefore, is the first issue still being debated this morning in Riyadh; I believe that giving new impetus to that initiative may be of crucial importance in terms of giving new impetus to the peace process.
I would also like to congratulate the President of the Group of the European People’s Party (Christian Democrats) and European Democrats, who I have already had the opportunity to meet on one occasion, and also the new Chairman of the Committee on Foreign Affairs, who I was able to receive in my office just a short while ago. Congratulations, good luck and I hope that we will cooperate in the most fruitful possible way.
The issues relating to Lebanon have also been debated. It is interesting to note that the Arab League has also begun a debate on issues which are of shared concern to both the Arab League and the African Union: issues that have an African component and an Arab component, such as Sudan or Somalia. I shall speak briefly about those two issues in a moment.
I would like to say firstly, in relation to the Middle East, that the European Union is convinced that the Arab-Israeli conflict lies at the heart of the region’s problems; Europe has been entirely convinced of this for a long time, I am not saying anything new. We have supported the Mecca Agreement, also brokered by the King of Saudi Arabia; we believe that the Mecca Agreement makes a contribution towards putting an end to the conflict amongst Palestinians and finding a solution to the conflict which, as the honourable Members know, and as we have said many times, must involve an end to the occupation that began in 1967, the creation of two States and a broad and overall settlement for the region.
We unquestionably support the tireless efforts of President Abbas, with whom I spent a good hour yesterday morning, to achieve the objectives of the Palestinian people in accordance with the principles that he himself has repeated endlessly, on two key occasions in particular: the last United Nations General Assembly and, recently, when the new Palestinian Government took office on 17 May.
As you know, there are three of these principles, which the President listed: the first is respect for the agreements previously reached by the PLO and the Palestinian National Authority; the second, mutual recognition; and thirdly, renouncing violence and commitment to negotiation. As the honourable Members know, the European Union has not abandoned and will never abandon the Palestinian people. We have maintained this approach for a long time and we will continue to do so.
I truly believe that we have a new opportunity to give impetus to resolving the conflict. To try to get out of what we might call a crisis management phase and into a new conflict resolution phase. I believe that the objective conditions are in place to be able to enter this phase and to try to move this process forward, with the help of the members of the Quartet.
Ladies and gentlemen, with the establishment of the new Palestinian government of national unity we are going to be faced with various problems that we will have to discuss, that we will have to resolve. We will be faced with new problems such as how to deal with that government and how to fund that government. I would like to tell you very briefly what my position is, a position that I am prepared to defend at the weekend when the Foreign Ministers meet in Chemnitz under the German Presidency.
There are people in the new government, ladies and gentlemen, who we know, people who we have known well for a long time. There are other people who we do not know because they belong to Hamas and, since Hamas is on the list of terrorist organisations, we do not deal with them and we do not know them. But there are many people in that government who we know, and, as I have said, we have known them well for a long time; I know them and many of you know them.
To say that the new Finance Minister is unknown to us would not be true: we have been dealing with him for a long time. We have worked with him very effectively and it would be really absurd now to talk about him as if he were someone unknown to us.
The Foreign Minister is from Gaza, I have dealt with him for many years: he is a person who does not belong to any political formation, he is an intellectual man, and a man who has a passport from another country – not the country from which Palestinians usually have a passport – who for a long time has arranged numerous meetings between many of the honourable Members and members of the Palestinian Authority. I therefore believe that it would be a great mistake to entirely cut off all contacts with people who are part of the new government and with whom we have worked together closely for a long time.
If you were also to ask me what we should do or how we should use the funding resources, I do not believe that we should change our position with regard to funding overnight, but I do believe that, in any event, one of our objectives should be to listen to the Finance Minister, an old friend of ours, an honest person, a person whose political career we have known. To find out what he is thinking, to find out how to provide financial aid as effectively as possible so that it does not just contribute to greater wellbeing for the Palestinians, but also so that it can contribute to moving the peace process forward.
Mr President, ladies and gentlemen, I have just landed from Riyadh, where a very important meeting of the Arab League has taken place and where I believe the European Union has also played a significant role. The meeting has not yet ended and I hope that I will be able to give you the latest information on its progress during this sitting.
I believe that our position should be the one that we have stated within the Quartet. What is most important today is not words, but rather actions. To watch how the Palestinian Government behaves at this point and to act and adapt our action to the way it behaves, not just the words it uses.
I would also like to say that we are determined to make a leap towards resolving the conflict and to get out of the crisis management zone.
As you know, the Quartet has had more vitality recently, since the beginning of the year. We have met on several occasions and we have held some very important meetings, both with Abbas and with Olmert, and I would like to tell you that in the coming weeks we will have a meeting in the region with the countries with which we have closest affinity, with the countries with which we have the closest relationship with a view to resolving the problem, such as Egypt, Saudi Arabia, the Emirates and Amman. I believe that these are the countries with which we have had most involvement and we want to meet with them.
In the not too distant future, before the summer, we would like the Quartet, together with the four countries I have mentioned, to also be able to hold a meeting with the parties: that is to say, a meeting with the Palestinians and a meeting with Israel. That would be Israel’s first meeting with the Quartet. Israel has never had a meeting with the Quartet. The Palestinians have met with it, but Israel has not yet done so.
This is our work programme for the coming months. They are going to be extremely important months during which I know that the President of Parliament is going to travel to the region too. It seems to me absolutely crucial that we coordinate our efforts.
Since I am sure many of the questions and answers will relate to the Middle East, I shall say no more about the peace process and make a few comments about Iran.
Yesterday morning in Riyadh I had the opportunity also to meet with the Iranian Foreign Minister, Mr Motaki. I told him very firmly and frankly that the detention of the fifteen British sailors by the Iranian authorities was unacceptable to the European Union. There is no reason whatsoever for that action, nothing illegal had taken place, and the European Union must show solidarity with our British friends with a view to the release of those sailors.
A word about the nuclear programme: as the honourable Members know, last Saturday, 24 March, at night, while we were in Berlin, the United Nations Security Council adopted Resolution 1747 unanimously.
Resolution 1747 is now the third resolution that the Security Council has adopted unanimously on the subject of Iran, with a view to Iran complying with its obligations, obligations that have arisen from the Vienna reports or opinions, which Dr ElBaradei, as Director of the International Atomic Energy Agency, is passing to the Board of Governors for voting on.
I would like to point out that it is very significant that, at this last session, the vote was unanimous from the whole of the international community represented in the Security Council. Given the current make-up of the Security Council, the appreciation of the Iranian issue could, in principle, have been more complex than it was under the previous membership. The countries currently sitting on the United Nations Security Council include countries such as Qatar, Indonesia, an important Islamic country, and South Africa, which symbolically represents the non-aligned countries, as well as many other countries, including five European countries.
On this first appearance, I would like to tell you that I am extremely pleased to be here with you to debate the foreign policy issues that I know are of crucial importance to the European Parliament, which are of interest to you, in which you are involved and on which I would like to continue to work with the greatest possible dedication, as we have done previously.
I believe that we have the obligation to explain our position very clearly, so that there is no divergence amongst us in terms of our understanding of the difficulty that the non-proliferation issue presents to the world ─ not just to a particular kind of country, but the world in general ─ so that they understand it properly and so that we can have a good debate with them, with the non-aligned countries and with countries such as the ones I have just mentioned.
The fact that it was possible to reach a consensus on this Resolution so quickly represents a success. It sends a clear message to the Iranian authorities that their nuclear programme must be compatible with the resolutions of the Security Council.
At the same time that the Resolution was made public, a statement was made in Berlin, by myself on behalf of the European members and also of the permanent members of the Security Council, saying that we still believe that the best way to resolve this problem with Iran is by means of a political solution, and that we are still prepared to begin or continue a negotiation; and that a political solution is the only possible kind of solution.
48 hours later, I was able to talk to Dr Larajani, the Iranian interlocutor, not in order to resolve the problem, not in order to begin a negotiation or a pre-negotiation, but in order to communicate, at least, this clear message from us, a message that was well received by Dr Larajani. Let us hope that over the coming weeks the Iranian leaders have the good sense, not just to resolve their current problem with the United Kingdom, but also to restart negotiations that can lead to a definitive solution to this problem. Negotiation is the only solution, ladies and gentlemen, and we must return to it as soon as possible.
While we are on the subject of Iran, I would like to say a few words about non-proliferation. As I have said, the issue of non-proliferation is becoming an issue capable of dividing the international community. Nothing could be worse than for us to take a different view depending on whether we are northern countries or southern countries, developed countries or less developed countries, when it comes to such a crucial issue as non-proliferation. We must therefore make every possible effort to explain it well and to share our concerns with them. Non-proliferation is something that affects everybody, that affects the world as a whole.
I believe, ladies and gentlemen, that one of our obligations as Europeans – a fundamental one in my view – is to deal with the non-proliferation debate from three different points of view: firstly, non-proliferation itself. Secondly, the issue of disarmament: I believe that we have abandoned the issue of disarmament for too long, placing the emphasis essentially on the issue of non-proliferation, without placing it also on what the non-proliferation Treaty tells us about disarmament; it also says that the powers with nuclear capabilities must begin to consider how to disarm, so that nuclear weapons can begin to disappear from our planet. We must therefore insist – I believe that this is a fundamental principle that the Europeans must understand perfectly clearly – that the issue of disarmament is fundamental.
Thirdly, we must also incorporate the issue of technology transfer into this debate, since that is what makes certain countries feel that there are double standards in relation to the use of nuclear energy.
I believe that to produce a package containing these three elements, to begin a serious negotiation with other countries from outside of the European Union, led by the European Union, may represent the European Union’s great contribution to the construction of a peaceful world and a world in which arms begin to cease being a means of resolving problems and in which problems are resolved by means of words, dialogue and normal language, which is the language that the European Union advocates.
Mr President, ladies and gentlemen, I would like to provide you with a little information on the most recent events in the Balkans, particularly with regard to Kosovo and Serbia.
As you know, Martti Ahtisaari, the former President of Finland, a great person of whom we are all aware, who was a great President of Finland, was commissioned by the Secretary-General of the United Nations to try to resolve the problems over the final status of Kosovo. He has been working for a long time with both Serbia and Kosovo in the search for a negotiated solution.
In the time available to us this morning, which is quite a lot, I would like to debate with you some of the most burning issues, some of the most important issues of global foreign policy and which affect us as Europeans.
I would like to remind the honourable Members that the time limit for beginning the final stage of negotiations was extended until 21 February, in order to allow for the elections that were to take place in Serbia at that time.
President Ahtisaari’s final position, which now forms part of the formal document presented to the Secretary-General of the United Nations, more or less tells us that it is very difficult, not to say impossible, at least for him, to achieve a negotiated solution that is acceptable to both parties. The international community may therefore be obliged to seek a way to impose a solution.
As the honourable Members know, imposing a solution means a United Nations Security Council resolution under Chapter 7. This will require the commitment of all the members of the Security Council and, as you know, certain difficulties have begun to emerge amongst certain of its member countries. Essentially Russia, and very probably China as well. The process is therefore entering a new phase. Following the phase led by Mr Ahtisaari, we are entering the phase of debate within the United Nations Security Council.
As you know, the European Union has been in constant contact with Mr Ahtisaari. We have worked with him on several matters, though responsibility was his, and now we must establish our position.
So far our position has been to fully support President Ahtisaari and his process, and now we will have to take a decision on supporting the final position that he has adopted. At this point we must wait to see how events unfold in the United Nations Security Council.
I would, however, like to point out that the European Union is going to have a huge responsibility when the final status of Kosovo is defined. Kosovo is part of our continent. It has European prospects, and therefore whatever final resolution the Security Council adopts, we will have certain fundamental obligations: in relation to the office representing the international community in Kosovo; and we will also have a duty, in addition to the economic aspects of which the honourable Members are well aware, a common foreign and security policy duty, a policing and judicial duty, in relation to all aspects of the law and the implementation of the law in Kosovo.
This will undoubtedly be the European Union’s most important task so far since we have had our foreign and security policy. We will probably have more than 1 500 people deployed in these different areas that I have just mentioned.
Ladies and gentlemen, Parliament will have a huge responsibility in terms of seeing whether we are capable of finding the resources. We have resources, but maybe not everything required to make a success of this difficult job, which is surely the most difficult the European Union has faced in terms of management on the ground.
We cannot fail, ladies and gentlemen. If the European Union fails in relation to the stabilisation of the Balkans, if we fail in relation to the stabilisation of Kosovo and Serbia, that failure would have immense consequences, seriously restricting any other opportunities for European Union action that may arise in other parts of the world. If we are not capable of resolving the problems facing us in our neighbourhood quickly and effectively, it will be much more difficult to do so beyond our borders.
I would like to say a word about Serbia. Ladies and gentlemen, Serbia is a great Balkan country, a great country which we must support fully as well. Serbia is undoubtedly going to face some difficult times: the Montenegro referendum, the final solution to the Kosovo problem. I believe that we have the obligation to help Serbia in the most effective way possible.
I believe that this is a good time to do so, Mr President. A few days ago in Berlin, we adopted a Declaration on the 50th Anniversary of the European Union. It was a wonderful event at which Chancellor Merkel, who was here yesterday, presented us with a Declaration that I believe to be important and which can make way in the future for greater development of the European Union in all fields.
In Serbia, we must continue to negotiate the association and stabilisation agreement, but I would like us to make the most generous effort possible to help that country, ladies and gentlemen. As I have said, Serbia is a great country with a vocation and a desire to be part of the family of European countries.
You may have seen in the recent election campaign that the position of the current President Tadic, a person we respect and with whom we have very close relations, was an entirely pro-European position. Following what is going to happen during this period of time, I believe that we should be capable of helping the government, which has not yet been formed following the elections, as much as we possibly can to continue to be a pro-European government, a government that defends our values, a government that leads Serbia towards its rightful destiny, which is to have a European future.
We meet with President Tadic extremely often; he was here recently, he was also in Berlin for the 50th Anniversary of the Rome Treaties, he is a great friend of Europe and, as I have said, I see him relatively often. We discuss all of these issues extremely frankly and in the greatest detail.
I also have the opportunity to meet Mr Kostunica, who is currently Prime Minister of an acting government, it is true, but Prime Minister of the Government nevertheless, with whom President Tadic will undoubtedly sooner or later have to reach agreement on a coalition that can govern the country in the best possible way, in the most stable possible way, together with the G17 Group, the coalition that previously governed Serbia.
Another of Mr Tadic’s commitments during the election campaign has been full and effective cooperation with the International Criminal Court, because it is crucial that people who have been so clearly implicated in crimes – some were found guilty by the International Criminal Court in the Hague a few days ago – are found and brought to justice.
Ladies and gentlemen, we are no doubt going to have to carry on talking about the Kosovo issues every week: from now until the summer, important decisions about Serbia and Kosovo will have to taken practically every week. I would like to say to you that the European operation in Kosovo is ready to go and as soon as the Security Council resolution is approved we will be able to implement it.
We are not therefore worried about this issue, but we are worried about its duration and about whether there will be sufficient resources to carry it out fully and on time. I would like to assure you, however, that the work is done and ready, and as soon as the Security Council approves the resolution we will be in a position to play our role.
I would like to make a couple of comments on certain important issues involving Eastern Europe. Over recent days and weeks, I have had the opportunity to meet with the President and the Prime Minister of Ukraine. I would like to share my concern about developments in Ukraine with you, ladies and gentlemen.
As you know, following the elections, Ukraine took a long time to create a government. An unexpected coalition was achieved, but in the end it has been settled. The coalition is beginning to operate, but the issue of reforms and the issue of constitutional stability are still problems that should be of concern to us. Ukraine is an extremely important country for us, a large country from a physical point of view, a powerful country from an economic point of view, and also an important country from a strategic point of view. We must therefore attach the utmost importance to Ukraine. We must dedicate a proportion of our energies to it. I am trying to dedicate to this country the same energies I dedicate to resolving some of the frozen conflicts in the region.
The problem to which we are paying most attention is the problem of Transdnistria. At the last Summit we reached an agreement with President Putin; I hope that that agreement will be revitalised at the next Summit, also in cooperation with the Russian Federation, which will take place in May, in order to see whether within a relatively short space of time we can give impetus to resolving the problem of Transdnistria. There is a new blueprint for doing so, there is greater involvement by the two parties, there is also greater involvement by the Ukrainian Government and I hope that we can achieve some successes in resolving these frozen conflicts in the eastern part of Europe.
I have absolutely no doubt, Mr President, that a common foreign policy is one of the great challenges that the European Union has to face. There are many reasons for that. It is sufficient just to mention two of them. The first is that when one travels elsewhere in the world, one discovers a great desire for the European Union to play an increasingly prominent role in foreign policy. You have had particular opportunities to witness this when you too have travelled elsewhere in the world, and you are aware of it.
The same can be said of Belarus. Chancellor Merkel spoke about Belarus yesterday with great skill and warmth. She also did so on the 50th Anniversary. I entirely agree with what she has said.
Ladies and gentlemen, I believe that we cannot currently hold an exchange of opinions on foreign policy without talking about Africa, and essentially about two great problems that may have enormous humanitarian consequences. The first is the old, or at least getting old, problem of Darfur, to which we dedicated a good proportion of our time yesterday in Riyadh, because it is a problem with an African component, as I said previously, but also an Arab League component. The involvement of these two great unions, the African Union and the Arab League, in conjunction with the international community, is crucial.
We Europeans can feel, if not pride, because nobody can feel proud of what is happening there, then at least a degree of satisfaction at the fact that we have been committed to finding a solution to the Darfur question from the outset. We have worked hard towards the Abuja Agreements, we have funded the African Union force deployed on the ground as generously as possible, but, as you know, the situation is still extremely worrying.
We spoke again yesterday with President al-Bashir, President of Sudan, to look into the possibility of the United Nations taking over from the African Union security force in Darfur. A full agreement was not reached, but my hope, given that the Secretary-General of the United Nations, Mr Ban Ki-moon, was also in Riyadh yesterday, is that the decisions taken there may be decisions that move in the right direction.
In any event, for we Europeans, the issue of Darfur must be a number one concern from a humanitarian point of view, and not just from a humanitarian point of view, but also from the point of view of seeking a formula that leads to peace. This tackles the, shall we say, East-West problem of Darfur, but there is another fundamental problem that will be back on the table: the North-South problem.
With regard to the North-South problem, an agreement was reached, as you know, but we are still waiting for a referendum that may divide the country into two parts. If that is the final solution, we will be seeing the break-up of the big important country of Sudan, which has such crucial energy reserves, and it would be a great disaster for all of us.
Relations with China are fundamental in this regard, as are relations with India. Those two countries receive the majority, or at least a very significant proportion, of their oil supply from Sudan. The contribution of both countries to the stabilisation of Sudan is absolutely crucial and our foreign policy in relation to China and India must therefore be incorporated into all of our negotiations on this issue as well, an issue which is so important in terms of human rights and the stability of an important region of Africa.
I am not sure how much more time I have, ladies and gentlemen, but I would like briefly to mention two issues: firstly, the crisis management structure that we are creating, in relation to which the Council is implementing one of the most modern structural operations for crisis management. We have already put it to the test to a certain extent in the case of Kinshasa, with the generosity of our German friends in charge of the operation, but we are trying to create a structure which includes all the elements of possible crisis management from the outset, both civilian and military. We must therefore create a body for planning operations which, as I have said, incorporates all factors, so that we do not find ourselves in the kind of situations that we have seen in other places in the past, situations in which the civilian aspect is out of sync with the military aspect, or the economic aspect with the social construction aspect. Everything must be properly thought out from the outset.
In a special sitting, if you wish, or in the Committee on Foreign Affairs, it would be useful to provide a more detailed explanation of something that is in the forefront of the European Union’s current thinking and which goes further than what certain Member States of the European Union, or third countries outside of the European Union, are trying to do in this field.
Ladies and gentlemen, according to the title of this debate, you wished me to express my views on the issue of the missile defence system. I will be delighted to briefly express my views on this subject. No decision has yet been taken by the European Union. There will very probably be debates on this issue at forthcoming Councils, but I would like to sum up my views on three points that I believe to be very clear.
Our presence is being requested in the most diverse places and conflicts. They are calling for a European way of doing things, with a foreign policy that works, and they are asking for something that we all want to see. At the end of the day, I believe that we should all acknowledge that the fact that that is the case represents a success.
The first is that the European Union is not a military alliance – as we are very well aware – but it does have a foreign policy and security policy and it can and must debate this issue. I would therefore be in favour of this issue being debated within the European Union. I believe that it should be debated.
The second is that, as I said before, the European Union is not a defensive alliance and it is certainly not the place to take a decision on this subject, since it is a strictly military alliance issue, but I believe that it would be a mistake for us not to confront and discuss these issues amongst us in the clearest and most open way possible.
Thirdly, the whole system can affect our relations with a third country, Russia. Fortunately, there was a good development between Russia and the United States yesterday. For the first time, President Bush and President Putin discussed this issue.
The last thing I have to say is that, according to the Treaties in force, security issues still fall within the sovereignty of the countries, but in any event I believe it to be essential to make that right of sovereignty of the countries compatible with the European Union’s general interest in the field of security. I shall therefore recommend that we discuss the issue of the missile defence system not just here, but also, if necessary, within the Atlantic Alliance.
I believe that this is what the majority of the European Union's political leaders want and I believe that that is what we should do.
I shall end here, ladies and gentlemen. The foreign and security policy programme for this year, 2007, will be extremely dense. The months between now and the summer will be extremely important, with just the four or five issues I have mentioned to you: immensely important. Furthermore, I believe that, if with the will of the Presidency and of the Chancellor we are able to give impetus also to the institutional issues, we must also make a significant effort to give the greatest possible support to the foreign and security policy.
Ladies and gentlemen, I would like to end by saying that we will do everything we possibly can, in cooperation with the European Parliament, to ensure a good outcome to all of these important issues, which are undoubtedly increasingly affecting us. The European Union was founded fifty years ago as a project of peace and it must continue to be so. It was founded as a project of peace amongst us and henceforth it must be a project of peace not just amongst us, but throughout the world. We have values, we have resources, we have capacities, we have sufficiently high levels of wealth, and we must not therefore close our eyes to what is happening in the world.
We therefore have a fundamental obligation to be increasingly active and cohesive players in the international community, in this global world in which we live. If we are not able to do so, I believe that it would be a great failure for the European Union, something that none of us want to see; we all want success.
But our own citizens are also calling for the same thing. There is no question that a regular look at the Eurobarometer demonstrates that the European citizens also have a particular desire for the European Union’s foreign policy to be as European as possible, as common as possible, as coordinated as possible and as visible as possible. Ladies and gentlemen, those are the things I wished to talk about, and I believe that it represents a success that the European Union should be moving in that direction and it should be recognised as such."@en1
|
| lpv:unclassifiedMetadata |
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples