Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2008-05-07-Speech-3-056"

PredicateValue (sorted: default)
rdf:type
dcterms:Date
dcterms:Is Part Of
dcterms:Language
lpv:document identification number
"en.20080507.12.3-056"2
lpv:hasSubsequent
lpv:speaker
lpv:spokenAs
lpv:translated text
". Madam President, Commissioner, Mr Lenarčič, I am also speaking for the delegation; I am in fact chairwoman of the European Parliament delegation to the three Caucasus countries. You are right to say that the situation is worrying and serious, and I do not think we can just stand by and watch this escalation in provocation. Personally, I would say it almost amounted to the annexation of one country by another. When Russia withdrew in March from the sanctions regime ordered by the CIS, it opened up for itself the possibility of giving military assistance to Abkhazia. On 16 April, Russia legalised the bilateral relations and official documents of Abkhazia and South Ossetia. Surely this means recognition, indirectly, of these two separatist regions? Then of course, on 24 April, Russia unilaterally increased the number of troops and sent armed equipment. We do not know. Even the UN, in the country, does not know how much Russia has increased its peacekeeping forces. As my colleagues have said, we were in Gali last week and apparently there was nothing that justified increasing these troops, up from 2 000 to 3 000 troops. For any fellow Members who do not know, this agreement dates from 1994 when Russia put itself forward as a mediator and suggested sending peacekeeping forces on to Abkhazian territory, between the Abkhazian area and the area of Abkhazia where the Georgian populations were living. Today, as the CIS talks about diversity, only Russian troops are present. As a mediator ourselves we might ask the question: what kind of result has this mediation achieved? I also want to ask what our responsibility is. I have, of course, heard all your suggestions, but I think that at the moment we need to stop the escalation of violence. I also heard the Council’s last two statements. The European Union is only supporting the restoration of trust. Mr Lenarčič, there is no trust today in this area. There is not even dialogue any more. Abkhazia broke off its dialogue with Georgia in 2006. As regards communication by the European Union, the Commission is also taking steps. It is saying that the European Union will only get involved in this conflict if both parties present ask for it. In response, I can say: that will never happen. Russia will never ask us to help sort out the problem because Russia has always said it was not a stakeholder in this conflict. Therefore, the issue of the European Union’s responsibility now arises. Though you also announce that there is UN support, we know very well that there is complete deadlock at the UN, and failure too, because when there was a call for a UN resolution, Russia did not respond. Russia is therefore also stalling this process. I believe that with this we have enough arguments, as well as the possibility of helping in a much more concrete way. This is no longer a question of conflict resolution; we are clearly at the stage of preventing a possible conflict. We therefore need to act, and that is why, in the context of the resolution we voted for in Tbilisi last week, we are considering, for example, suggesting that Russia share the burden of peacekeeping by sending a civil peace corps over there. I think we should remember the Balkans. I think history will not forgive us for failing to act a second time. The Balkan war should have been the last, and I think it is up to us to nip the conflict in the South Caucasus in the bud."@en1

Named graphs describing this resource:

1http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/rdf/English.ttl.gz
2http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/rdf/Events_and_structure.ttl.gz
3http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/rdf/spokenAs.ttl.gz

The resource appears as object in 2 triples

Context graph