Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2011-05-11-Speech-3-009-000"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20110511.4.3-009-000"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spoken text |
"Mr President, this will be the first of three contributions that I will make to honourable Members this morning, so I want to start by giving you my vision of the issues that face us and also to try and touch upon some of the detail of the issues that honourable Members have added to this debate, knowing the importance that you attach to them. Let me begin.
In our eastern neighbourhood – in Belarus – President Lukashenko failed to use last December’s presidential elections to show his readiness for change and a more open and democratic, European society. Not only did he not take this chance but, in using violence against peaceful demonstrators and multiplying the number of political prisoners, he has shown contempt for democracy and the rule of law. I met with the families of those who have been imprisoned and I know that he left us with no other option than to adopt strong sanctions in response, targeting those in the regime responsible for the crack-down, including President Lukashenko himself. I also know that we should step up our support for civil society and for people-to-people contacts.
Then there is our direct engagement in Camp Ashraf. What happened on 8 April is deplorable and has, and had, my strongest condemnation. I have been adamant that we need a strong united EU response. I have written to the Foreign Minister of Iraq and I spoke to him again yesterday. While I do not question Iraq’s sovereignty over all its territory, it has a duty to protect the human rights of Ashraf residents.
I have condemned that violence and called for an inquiry – an inquiry that has to be as thorough as it is independent and that should tell us exactly what happened. But, as honourable Members know from the letters I have received individually and collectively in this House and beyond, there is no simple solution here. Several options for a long-term solution are being considered, with the United Nations in the lead, all of them with challenges. I am very grateful for the work of this House, for the work of those who have travelled there and for the contributions I have received. We need to take this also to the Foreign Affairs Council and we need to discuss this with the UN High Commissioner for Refugees. Our Ambassador to Iraq arrives today, and she knows the importance that I attach to this issue. We need to pursue and make sure that we find the correct course of action here, but the inquiry and the condemnation are absolute.
In Yemen, too, the Gulf Cooperation Council has put forward its proposals and President Saleh has once again hesitated. I spoke to him not long ago. We talked about the discussions he had had with the opposition and the proposals on the table. I told him that he knew what he had to do – in the interests of his country – and that he should do it. In my meetings in the Gulf, I met with the King of Bahrain. We discussed the initiative there for the dialogue without preconditions that the Crown Prince has put forward, and I urged him to pursue that dialogue. The current course there is not the answer. We need to see fair and civil trials, if there are trials in Bahrain, and that the death penalty is avoided in all circumstances.
In all of these cases, it is about the direct engagement that we have and the pressure that we apply and the directness of our approach. Be under no illusion: we are very clear, I am very clear, with all of the leaders I speak to about what I believe needs to happen, and I do so with the support of this House and with the support of the Foreign Affairs Council of the 27 Member States.
Of course I want to talk about Libya. There are Members of this House who wish we had a stronger defence and security policy. I say to them this: in the last few weeks and months, we have seen how far we have come in some ways, but also how far we still have to go. We did engage together to plan the military support for humanitarian needs: ready at the request of the United Nations to support the people with resources from across Europe. Just as we did when the terrible earthquake struck in Haiti – military hospital ships, heavy lifting equipment, civilians and military working side by side in that case. Do not misunderstand: I know that humanitarian aid is apolitical and that humanitarian workers must not be put at risk but, in the primary objective of saving lives, sometimes it is only the military who have the equipment or people to achieve that – delivering aid at speed, putting in place the infrastructure – and that is why, should a UN request arrive, we will be ready to help.
We need to get faster and smarter in how we do this. I am the first person to say and admit that there is much more we need to do, and I will talk more of that later on this morning.
We are improving our collaboration with NATO, sharing details of our operations for the first time as part of continuing to develop our relations. Last Friday, I co-chaired with Secretary-General Rasmussen the meeting of the PSC Committee and the North Atlantic Council in our first ever discussion on Libya. There is also our collaboration with the African Union with President Jean Ping, and the Arab League with Amr Moussa and, of course, his successor, and with the Organisation of the Islamic Conference and Professor Insanoglu, under the leadership of the UN special envoy, Al-Khatib. It was in my discussions with Ban Ki-Moon that we agreed to bring together the regional organisations for a meeting in Cairo and to follow up after the contact group meeting in Rome.
We are discussing together how to play our part in the future of Libya – to support the national dialogue, to help with the constitution and to prepare for elections. I have sent two missions to Libya to meet with and work with young people and with the women in Libya. As the leader of my team said to me, it is the first time that they have ever discussed a constitution – words and arguments they have never known before. They talked of how they longed for the end of the regime, so let us also be clear: Gaddafi must go from power and must end his regime.
There are storms blowing across the countries we call our neighbours – Arab spring, winds of change, whatever imagery we use. None of us in this House know where it will end and what that end will bring. Aspirations are high and expectations too that the revolutions will have been worth the blood that has been spilt, worth the turmoil and fear, worth the economic havoc in a world already grappling with the worst economic problems for decades.
I intend to open an office in Benghazi so that we can move forward on the support we have discussed with the people …
… to support civil society, to support the interim transitional national council and Mr Jibril (we have had many meetings with him); to support security sector reform; to build on what the people told us that they wanted. They want help with education, with healthcare, with security on the borders, with the kind of support that we are able to give and want to give them. And with all that we do, the silver thread of human rights runs through our work.
Then, there is the new Neighbourhood Policy – a different level of ambition and vision. Mutual accountability is at its core: the EU and the neighbourhood are responsible to each other for delivering on the commitments that we make to the countries and to the people of our neighbourhood and to the people of Europe.
Building on what we have already talked about are mobility, market access and money, or the ‘three Ms’, as a simple way of describing it. Some things are extremely important to support these countries into the future. One example is the mobility of young people. These are young societies where young people long for greater opportunities, and the European Parliament has a big role to play in supporting those opportunities for young people to gain benefits and knowledge from Europe. So too with Member States: the opportunities to travel, to study.
For businessmen and women, it is important to have the chance to explore new markets, to sell their goods and services, and they are in the gift of our Member States, some of whom have long relationships with the countries concerned, but who now need to step up and provide those opportunities.
On market access, we know that we have a genuine contribution to make to stimulate economic growth and the recovery. You know the effect of this turmoil on the economies of the countries we are describing. Some of these countries rely on us as their major export market and the source of their imports. Allowing those countries to develop their markets could make a real difference, supporting not just the opening of markets but how they gain access to them, ensuring that they can reach our standards, and ensuring that they have real opportunities. Nowhere is that more true than in small businesses, but we have to have the political will to do it. We have to have the political will to be committed to ensuring that we make our markets available. That is a challenge. It is a challenge in any circumstances; it is a challenge in economic times, but I would argue it is a challenge we have to rise to because, if we do not, then the failure of the economies in our neighbourhood will have a direct impact on us.
Then there is money, or rather resources. Not just what we can do in direct support – although that is important – but what we can leverage. We have already hosted a meeting of senior officials from around the world and from the big financial institutions to discuss what we might be able to contribute if asked, and will, but in consultation with our neighbourhood, we have to do more to support resources coming together more effectively.
Nowhere will this policy matter more perhaps than in Tunisia. Prime Minister Essebsi’s speech on television may help as the country moves towards elections on 24 July, but he acknowledged the problems of a country where economic growth rates are down to between 0 and 1%. We have to ensure support to Tunisia, to its economy and its civil society, and that means thinking not just of the long term, not just of the importance of a new strategy, but of what we do now and how we support countries – Egypt, Tunisia and others – right now with the budgetary problems that they have. That is the reason we have started discussions with the financial institutions, with our Member States, with those who are engaged in wanting to support these countries, because helping them deal with deficits when tourism has collapsed, when the economy is not working properly, matters right now. Honourable Members must understand that there is an immediate urgency and there is a long-term strategy, and we need to have both in what we do.
On Egypt: I have been there three times in recent weeks and I have spent a lot of time with some of the young leaders from Tahrir Square, and also meeting some of the women. The women in particular are looking for the stronger voice that they believe they have been promised in the future of Egypt. I met one woman who will be a presidential candidate and who is determined to show that women have that role to play in Egypt. I have talked with many government ministers, and let me give you the example of the Planning Minister, Fayza Aboulnaga. She wants to build houses for people; she has a big vision of what building a million houses over twenty years could mean for Egypt.
The uprisings across North Africa and the Arab world pose great challenges for Europe, but also opportunities we cannot afford to miss. Two principles have to underpin what we do. The first is that we in Europe know how long and painful the journey towards liberty can be. Our own path to 20th century liberal democracy was a very slow one. The European Union itself was born in the ashes of conflicts that remind us how terrible life can be when democracy breaks down. Add into that the mixed record of Europe’s empires and some humility is in order, even as we assert that democracy is the necessary foundation of human progress.
We need to take these big visions from countries with whom we are working and translate them into what it is that we can provide and support. So, integrating training and education, infrastructure around housing programmes, opportunities for small businesses to grow, working with UN women – as I am – to consider how we build safer communities around the housing projects, how we work together to design a much bigger, grander vision that is built upon what the Egyptian people want. I am talking to the Foreign Minister of Egypt, Al-Araby, who is committed to working closely with us on the Middle East Peace Process, keen to develop the strength of the relationship that we already have, and keen to see us as partners in collaborating in the region.
There will be many challenges for Egypt in the coming months and years. We have to be there to support them through each of those challenges and be willing to put our resources, our knowledge, our expertise and our contacts in favour of supporting them.
I have always said in this House and beyond that the External Action Service is a force to prevent and resolve conflict, so let me just mention, too, that this is why our role in Serbia and Kosovo matters. It is why the vote that we won at the UN, the voice that we now have, can play its part. It is why we have to engage the leaders in Bosnia to get them to get their eyes off the floor, to get them from thinking only about their own communities to thinking about the needs of their country, and to see their future and to see the European Union.
It is why too we play a role in the Middle East Peace Process. Honourable Members know well that stability in the Middle East requires peace. The quest for a negotiated agreement has dominated the region for decades. We have brought new vigour to the Quartet in recent months. I hosted a Quartet principals meeting in February and the follow-up of the Quartet envoys has been working with the Israeli and Palestinian negotiators for the very first time since the Quartet was established.
I wanted another principals meeting in April, and we have prepared a substantial statement based on our position. I continue to believe a negotiated solution is the way forward, and we will stay engaged and have another envoys meeting later this month.
We, too, have been a strong supporter of Palestinian state-building, so when the ad hoc Liaison Committee meeting was hosted by us on 13 April, I listened to the praise for the work of Salam Fayyad, for his remarkable achievements in governance, the rule of law and human rights, education, health and social protection – sufficient for a functioning government according to the World Bank. I have acknowledged the importance of Palestinian reconciliation behind President Abbas as an opportunity and something that the European Union has called for for years.
What is happening now is the most serious effort so far to establish unity, which is, in itself, key to achieving the two-state solution. I have been in close contact with President Abbas and Prime Minister Fayyad, as well as with Egypt, the Arab League, the United States and with Israel. Non-violence, the continuation of state-building and abiding by existing commitments will be crucial, and we must judge this effort by its results. I do believe that Israel should hand over the tax revenues owed to the Palestinians, but I want to be clear that our position on Hamas has not changed and Israel’s security remains a key concern for all of us.
I also want to say that I do not consider a flotilla to be the right response to the humanitarian situation in Gaza. I have been there twice. I continue to highlight the plight of the people, especially asking for more access to enable the economy to start to develop. The situation there frankly, especially for the children, is awful. We have put forward proposals to Israel to support that greater access. I want to see the people of Gaza with a future, but I also want to see Gilad Shalit, captive for years in Gaza, given the chance to go home to his mother and father whom I have already met.
Europe’s experience tells us that true democracy is the necessary foundation of tolerance, of peace and of prosperity. In North Africa and the Arab world, that destination will not be reached quickly or without setbacks, but building deep democracy is the only way that destination will be reached at all. We have the experience to help every country that asks us now to help them make that journey to democracy. It is why I am proposing to support the endowment for democracy which will enable us, too, to use our resources to support opportunities, particularly for young people, to engage in political life, to support the development of political parties, to enable people to do what honourable Members in so many countries represented here had to do themselves – i.e. develop the political process by building those political parties, civil society, and deep roots that mean democracy flourishes and grows.
I often say when I visit these countries that it is not about electing a government so much as the right to be able to throw a government out. Democracy is about being able to say bye-bye as well as hello, and that is important: knowing that you have the right to use your ballot box, once, twice, three times, four times to change your government, to demand of your government, is critical, and you can only do that when democracy is deep and flourishing. It is why what we have seen happening in Cote d’Ivoire is so important, seeing President Ouattara finally take his place, and the role we have played has been significant in supporting that process. It is why it is good to see the Nigerian elections going well and Goodluck Jonathan now being appointed properly. It is good to see democracy begin to take hold and flourish and deepen, and that is what we have to support.
Second, democracy is, of course, about votes and elections – but it is also about far more than that. What we have learnt in Europe the hard way is that we need deep democracy: respect for the rule of law, freedom of speech, respect for human rights, an independent judiciary and impartial administration. It requires enforceable property rights and free trade unions, and is not just about changing governments but about building the right institutions and the right attitudes. In the long run, surface democracy – democracy that floats on the top with people casting their votes freely on election day and choosing their government – will not survive if deep democracy fails to take root.
Change does not necessarily ensure progress, but progress absolutely requires change. That means we have to be more determined to act. Some of the things I describe require Member States to act, some require the Commission to act, many need the support of this House, and we have to decide that we will all play our part. If we only do it when the media’s attention is on those countries or on us, then we will fail. We must be in this for the long haul and we have to be determined in saying to our neighbours not just that they should start the journey towards democracy, but that they should complete it.
There have been three excellent reports which I shall speak on in my next intervention, but I do want to thank the rapporteurs. I am going to end with a very small quote from an anthropologist, a woman I admire very much, Margaret Mead. She said: ‘Never doubt that a small group of thoughtful, committed citizens can change the world. Indeed, it is the only thing that ever has’.
But there is no certainty – not in the outcome in any country – and no quick fix or short-term solution that will create the world so many people want to see. Meanwhile, the spectre of religious intolerance casts its shadow – witness the recent events in Egypt – finding its excuse in uncertain times to play on fear and to wreak destruction. Freedom of religion or belief is a universal human right that must be protected everywhere. We need to condemn all those who seek to use religious belief as a means of oppression, and support those who advocate tolerance, whether in Syria, in Pakistan, in Egypt or elsewhere.
Europe has choices to make too. When we look at our neighbourhood, we have to be ready to rise to challenges that are being asked of us. I can make hundreds of statements – and I do. I deplore, I condemn, I urge, I demand, but we also need to act and that action has to come in different forms.
Let me mention sanctions. We impose sanctions against regimes that treat the lives of their citizens as worthless, with people killed at the hands of police or security services that they command. Sanctions on Syria were imposed yesterday – an embargo on arms, an asset freeze and a travel ban for 13 key individuals in the regime, the freezing of our association agreement and of our cooperation with Syria. Let us be blunt and clear, as I was with the Foreign Minister of Syria yesterday. What is happening in Syria is a popular aspiration for democracy and the rule of law – it is not some foreign plot. By failing to see what it is, the regime loses its legitimacy and estranges itself from the people and from the international community. Violent oppression and threats inside and outside are tools of an era that is long gone. Our concern, in this House and in the European Union, is with the people of Deraa where the UN has been refused access, in Baniyas where the crack-down continues, in Hama where the tanks have moved in. The Syrian people will not bow to tanks. We say to the regime to change course, and to change course now.
I said yesterday to Minister Moallem, the Foreign Minister of Syria: You must allow immediate and unhindered access to humanitarian support and to the media. Only then can your claims of support for peaceful protests be substantiated."@en1
|
| lpv:unclassifiedMetadata | |
| lpv:videoURI |
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples