Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2010-01-19-Speech-2-086"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20100119.5.2-086"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spoken text |
"Mr President, I think this has been an extremely important and timely debate, first of all, because we have reiterated the commitment that we have in the European Union to the importance of the values of human rights.
We do, as a result specifically of the action of this Parliament, have Euronews beginning its broadcasts in Farsi in the middle of 2010. That is important, too, in terms of communication and looking at how we use communication and technology effectively.
It is difficult to think about blocking access if, at the same time, we block the access to the information that people wish to get, and that, I think, is something we have to be mindful of.
And in terms of looking at what we do for the future, honourable Members have made it clear what they wish us to consider. As I have said, the E3+3 is already considering these options. We have the Foreign Affairs Council. I have indicated we want to look at smart, intelligent sanctions as we consider this dual track. I have made it clear, and I continue to make it clear, that I am open and ready to have the dialogue – and I described in my opening remarks the potential of this great country – but we do so in the certain knowledge that we cannot continue to use dialogue as a way of preventing action.
I have to end by saying I was very struck by the phrase that President Obama used in his Nobel Prize reception speech when he said that, when we look at the value of continuing with engagement, ‘engagement with repressive regimes lacks the satisfying purity of indignation. But [...] no repressive regime can move down a new path unless it has the choice of an open door’.
The door is open for that meaningful dialogue in order to move forward but, in saying that, I am absolutely committed to recognising the twin track that my predecessors laid out and to pursuing that as necessary.
And indeed, in our dialogue with Iran, we ask nothing more than that they live up to the international agreements which they have willingly and voluntarily signed, and that is a fundamental part of the way in which we have to approach these questions, and Members have, both by naming individuals and by describing events in Iran, highlighted the issues which are of the greatest concern to us.
Members, too, have made the point that in the end, as you said, Mr Gualtieri, the dialogue must be inevitable. It is very important that we continue to offer the approach that says ‘meaningful dialogue’. But I do so recognising that my predecessor, Javier Solana, spent six years in dialogue, six years offering to continue that debate; so, dialogue, but not as an excuse for inaction on behalf of Iran, but rather as a means of making sure that we develop the strength of that relationship and that we achieve what we believe to be important.
And as part of that, the talks on World Trade Organisation membership, which have been going nowhere for a long time, could be a way in which we could find the kind of debate and discussion and support to enable the regime to move forward.
Many Members have talked about the importance of sanctions, but I think particularly – intelligent, smart sanctions: the critical importance to all of us of ensuring, as we begin to think about what next, and, if we do, and as we do, consider the possibility of sanctions, that we do so recognising that they must be aimed and targeted specifically to achieve what we wish and that no one in this House wishes to see ordinary people in Iran suffer as a consequence of that.
That makes that debate very important, but also requires us to invest energy and time within it. The E3+3 senior officials met in New York on Saturday and we were able to have the dialogue, including, of course, with Russia, on that issue.
There is no doubt, as I have said, that, though we wish to take forward the meaningful relationship with Iran through dialogue, ultimately, if Iran rejects this, then, under the dual-track policy that we have, the question of sanctions arises and, indeed, as a consequence of that meeting, consideration of the appropriate further measures has already begun.
This, too, will be an item for discussion at the Foreign Affairs Council on Monday, and that is partly why I was so keen to hear honourable Members’ views as I prepare for those discussions too.
In terms of the delegation going to the country, Mrs Lochbihler, you are indeed the chair of the delegation. It is very important that it has not yet officially been cancelled. I think it would be important to consider whether we should pursue that. I hope that meeting can take place soon, again in the spirit of trying to keep the dialogue open."@en1
|
| lpv:unclassifiedMetadata | |
| lpv:videoURI |
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples