Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2009-10-22-Speech-4-057"

Predicate	Value (sorted: default)
rdf:type	lpv_eu:Speech2
dcterms:Date	"2009-10-22"^^xsd:date2
dcterms:Is Part Of	lp_eu:Report of the Independent International Fact-Finding Mission on the Conflict in Georgia (debate)2
dcterms:Language	"de"^^xsd:language2
lpv:document identification number	"en.20091022.6.4-057"2
lpv:hasSubsequent	lp_eu:2009-10-22-Speech-4-0582
lpv:speaker	lp:Franz Obermayr2
lpv:spokenAs	substitute; EMPL (2009-07-16--2012-01-18)3 substitute; Delegation to the EU-Kazakhstan, EU-Kyrgyzstan and EU-Uzbekistan Parliamentary Cooperation Committees, and for relations with Tajikistan, Turkmenistan and Mongolia (2009-09-16--2014-06-30)3 unknown; Freiheitliche Partei Österreichs (2009-07-14--2014-06-30)3 member; Delegation for relations with Iran (2009-09-16--2012-02-12)3 member; REGI (2009-07-16--2012-01-18)3 member; NA (2009-07-14--2014-06-30)3
lpv:translated text	"Madam President, the conflict in the Caucasus in 2008, also called the 5-day war, was a regrettable armed military conflict on Georgian territory between Georgia and Russia, which also affected the so-called ‘renegade provinces’ of South Ossetia and Abkhazia. Due to what was unfortunately often one-sided reporting by the international media on the facts and background to the war, I should like to clarify a number of points: the US sharply condemned Russia’s military action, describing it a demonstration of pure intimidation and power and defended Georgia’s stance. The first thing that needs to said here is that Russia was not the aggressor and reacted to the war started by Saakashvili. He knew full well when he implemented his reunification programme that he was facing an all-powerful adversary, but he was counting on NATO and the US to cover his back, which is why he decided to wrest renegade provinces back by force. Russia’s reaction was doubtless excessive, but was taken in accordance with international law in a so-called self-defence situation. Thus, US support for Georgia was obviously not only aimed to protect the democratic right of self-determination, but also – it must be said – had military and political objectives, especially as Georgia was functioning as a strategic vassal state in the Caucasus on the Russian border. The Georgians should be cautious in allowing the US to cover their back. You only have to think of Hungary in 1956, when the US again offered their support, as we know. In any event, the outcome was devastating: the Hungarians were abandoned by the western world in their fight for freedom. Finally, I should like to refer to the report of 30 September 2009, in which the investigation committee set up by the EU Council of Ministers argued in detail that the justification under international law cited by the Georgians for the attack is invalid."@en1
lpv:videoURI	<go to Events_and_structure europarl>2

Named graphs describing this resource:

The resource appears as object in 2 triples

Context graph