Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2008-05-07-Speech-3-060"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20080507.12.3-060"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
"I should like to join previous speakers, including the Commissioner and the President-in-Office of the Council, in expressing the concern we all share about the situation that has arisen in the region – specifically the Caucasus – regarding Georgia and the problems with South Ossetia and Abkhazia. Whereas until recently we were talking of frozen conflicts, the situation is now such that these risk becoming dormant conflicts; and we must of course all take care that they do not become open conflicts. The European Union, the UN and everyone capable of playing a role has a responsibility to defuse the situation.
We must of course reject the moves that have been made by Russia. These are – or at least appear to be – moves towards formalisation, towards a possible recognition of independence. Geostrategic interests play a major role in this regard, of course. I can imagine that there is frustration in Moscow about the recent NATO Summit, which agreed to allow Georgia to join NATO in the longer term, and that there is naturally also the requisite annoyance about the reaction of most EU countries to Kosovo’s declaration of independence. We think that such matters must be kept strictly separate from the situation in Georgia. In the past, agreements have been made on this in the OSCE, and we think that the UN, in particular, must endeavour to put the matter, the consultations and dialogue, back on the rails.
Now we are actually seeing a kind of escalation on both sides, an escalation in the war of words; a chess game, indeed, as the Commissioner says, but one that I fear will be without winners – which is no good to anyone.
On the one hand, there is the reaction of Russia, which is increasing the number of ‘peacekeepers’. On the other hand, Georgia is creating problems in the WTO negotiations on Russia’s membership. I believe that the nationalistic undertone discernible on both sides must be eliminated from the discussion.
All parties should show restraint, as many have said, and in the longer term there must of course be endeavours towards a structural solution. I believe that the European Union can play an important role in this regard, including in direct dialogue with Russia during the forthcoming EU-Russia Summit. This may present an opportunity to question the new president on what his country plans to do about these frozen conflicts, not only in the Caucasus but also in Transnistria; perhaps there the new president can indicate his intentions with regard to the agreements that were made in the OSCE back in 1999, I believe, regarding the situation in these breakaway countries, republics, states and so on.
Finally – and I agree with everyone who has criticised Russia’s interpretation of UN decisions – these ‘peacekeepers’ are not peacekeepers, of course; they should rather be seen as troops serving a Russian strategic military interest and certainly not UN objectives. New agreements must be made in this regard, and the European Union may be able to play a role in these.
In addition, of course, Georgia’s territorial integrity must be preserved, as must its respect for minorities and their problems – Mr Swoboda has said a few things about this – since the people on the ground risk being crushed between Moscow and Tbilisi. It is of course important that something be done to tackle the refugee problem. Perhaps the best way for the European Union to help is for it to invest in confidence-building measures to help both sides on the road to renewed dialogue."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples