Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2009-01-14-Speech-3-292"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20090114.16.3-292"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
"Mr President, Commissioner, I should like to start by echoing the words of Mr Cohn-Bendit. It is despair that grips us today; this war is a tragedy. The images of suffering and of death that have flashed across our screens non-stop for three weeks now are unbearable, as are, I hasten to add, all the images of war, all the conflicts, including those that are spoken of much less, if at all, such as Congo, Darfur, Zimbabwe and, before that, Chechnya, the horrors of which took place amid a deafening media and, I would stress, political, silence.
I have already stressed on several occasions in this House the fact that the indignation of some of my fellow Members varies according to circumstances. However, as Mrs Morgantini has also often pointed out, there are no accounts to be kept when it comes to people dying; there is no hierarchy in suffering; every casualty, be it a man, woman or child, from whichever side, is one victim too many.
So, what should we do now to ensure that our debate today is not what it often is – a somewhat pointless, futile confrontation? Continuing to hurl abuse at each other about the historic responsibilities of the different parties seems to me to be a perfect example of such futility.
I have taken the floor late in this debate, so the arguments have been heard. Questions can certainly be asked about the scale of the Israeli crisis and of the Israeli counterattack, but not, under any circumstances, about Israel’s right to security. Which of our western governments would agree to watch thousands of missiles fall on its citizens without reacting? The question answers itself.
Above and beyond the call for an essential negotiated ceasefire, for a guarantee, of course, of the delivery of humanitarian aid, and for an end to the supply of weapons via the tunnels, the real issue, today, is necessarily aimed at the future. The fundamentals of peace are well-known: they have already been identified at Taba, Camp David and Annapolis. Mrs Ferrero-Waldner has made this point. Most, though not all, of course, of the elements are on the table, and this involves sacrifices being made on both sides. And, when I talk of sacrifice, I agree with Mr Schulz, who is not in the Chamber at present. It is not a question of knowing whether a dialogue will be held with Hamas, but of knowing how it will be held, and under what conditions.
Most of my fellow Members have exceeded their speaking time by 50 seconds, so allow me to finish, Mr President
The answer is that given by Yasser Arafat, in May 1989, when he declared his freedom-destroying and deadly charter null and void. Those words, moreover, have become part of the Palestinian vocabulary. Inter-Palestinian reconciliation, above all, comes at this price, and our role as the European Union is to get the protagonists in Palestine and Israel, but also their Arab neighbours, Egypt and Jordan, to become partners of a lasting peace agreement."@en1
|
| lpv:unclassifiedMetadata | |
| lpv:videoURI |
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples