Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2004-11-16-Speech-2-013"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20041116.7.2-013"6
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spoken text |
".
First of all, I apologise for appearing in front of the House for yet another farewell appearance. I am starting to know what Frank Sinatra must have felt like, as he staggered on making farewell appearances until he was into his seventies. I hope this really is the last afternoon that the House will have to endure me, but that is in Parliament's hands.
I commend the rapporteur for putting together a substantial document which merits very careful attention. It challenges Member States to attain more stringent standards on the control of arms exports. Amongst other things, it asks for more transparency, not something that is normally immediately associated with the arms trade. It also seeks further controls and limitations on such trade, inherently difficult areas for those Member States with significant arms industries.
Whilst the report focuses primarily on improvement in European practice, its scope is global. Recognising the European Union’s potential to promote best practice around the world, it advocates, among other things, an international arms trade treaty.
We should not forget – and I am sure Parliament has not – the sobering fact that around half a million people die each year as a result of violence linked to small arms and light weapons. As you are well aware, the Commission is regularly involved, with other international organisations and NGOs, in dealing with the consequences of inappropriate or illegal arms sales. We are also implementing some specific projects to reduce destabilising accumulations of weapons around the world. A pilot project initiated by the European Parliament is under way to see what else can be done. More certainly needs to be done. I particularly support the idea of an international agreement to strengthen the control of conventional arms sales. That is why the Commission has, as part of wider EU efforts, strongly supported the adoption of an international Code of Conduct on arms exports based on the European Union’s initiative.
Member States are currently considering how to improve the Code of Conduct and we are encouraging these efforts to strengthen EU controls on conventional arms sales. The success of this endeavour will be a factor in the ongoing China arms embargo debate.
We all know the importance of China as an economic partner and a political player in the world in the coming decades. China is, to a considerable extent, regaining the position that it had in the world until the middle of the 19th century, when it was still responsible for probably 30% of global GDP. The historic recovery we are witnessing is, on the whole, extraordinarily beneficial to the rest of the world. China's integration as an open economy into the world economy is good for all of us.
It is not in any way demeaning to us or the Chinese if we regularly make it clear that there are other issues that concern us, such as issues of human rights. I am sure we shall in due course see an improvement as the political situation in China matches the economic one. It is impossible these days for any country to remain completely self-contained. It is impossible for a country to open up its economy whilst keeping politics under absolutely rigid control.
I look forward to a more intimate relationship with China in the years ahead. I hope China will continue to play a positive role in the international community. I look forward to a serious dialogue with China about human rights, leading to improvements of which I am sure Mr Sun Yat-Sen would have approved.
As Members know, given the way in which the common foreign and security policy operates, this is not an issue on which the Commission takes a lead. Nevertheless, we have an obvious interest in the overall development of our relations with China, which by and large are excellent, and the arms embargo naturally operates in that context. As Parliament knows, the embargo was imposed by the European Council in 1989, following the events in Tiananmen Square, the early stages of which I was able to witness at first hand as the then vice-chairman of the Asia Development Bank.
This year, China has intensified its campaign to have the ban lifted. That campaign continues in the run-up to the summit between the European Union and China next month. The Chinese authorities consider the embargo to be evidence of discrimination against them; they argue that the ban is obsolete. They claim that it severely hinders the further development of bilateral relations.
Whilst we have acknowledged that positive change has occurred and that the political situation in China has moved on since Tiananmen, China's observance of some basic human rights, notably in the area of political and civil rights, continues to fall well short of international norms. Without making any direct link we have, therefore, consistently told the Chinese authorities at the highest level that the lifting of the embargo would be greatly assisted if they could take the sort of concrete steps in the field of human rights that would convince the European public that that was an appropriate course of action.
I know that a number of Member States are favourably disposed towards lifting the embargo and have made that view public. Others believe that it is premature, citing concerns about human rights. Human rights were an issue that figured prominently in the resolution passed by this House last year against lifting the ban.
Those Member States arguing for lifting the ban use the rationale that the controls introduced in the 1998 EU Code of Conduct on arms sales render it nugatory. I acknowledge that this argument is not without substance.
I am very keen to move forward with our important strategic partnership with China, a country that is rapidly emerging as a global player across the board, and is now, amongst other things, our second largest trading partner. That is one of our top foreign policy goals in the years to come.
That said, given the underlying logic of the embargo and the significant political and symbolic issues involved for both sides, it is understandable that some Member States argue that the lifting of the ban should take place against a background of positive and tangible steps by China to improve its human rights situation.
I should also like to say a few words on the European Parliament’s report on the operation of the EU’s Code of Conduct on arms exports. The strength of the Code of Conduct is closely related to the China embargo debate, since it will guide Member States' export practice if the ban is lifted. Responsibility for the arms trade currently rests with Member States, but the Commission is fully associated with its consideration under the common foreign and security policy."@en4
|
| lpv:translated text |
"First of all, I apologise for appearing in front of the House for yet another farewell appearance. I am starting to know what Frank Sinatra must have felt like, as he staggered on making farewell appearances until he was into his seventies. I hope this really is the last afternoon that the House will have to endure me, but that is in Parliament's hands.
I commend the rapporteur for putting together a substantial document which merits very careful attention. It challenges Member States to attain more stringent standards on the control of arms exports. Amongst other things, it asks for more transparency, not something that is normally immediately associated with the arms trade. It also seeks further controls and limitations on such trade, inherently difficult areas for those Member States with significant arms industries.
Whilst the report focuses primarily on improvement in European practice, its scope is global. Recognising the European Union’s potential to promote best practice around the world, it advocates, among other things, an international arms trade treaty.
We should not forget - and I am sure Parliament has not - the sobering fact that around half a million people die each year as a result of violence linked to small arms and light weapons. As you are well aware, the Commission is regularly involved, with other international organisations and NGOs, in dealing with the consequences of inappropriate or illegal arms sales. We are also implementing some specific projects to reduce destabilising accumulations of weapons around the world. A pilot project initiated by the European Parliament is under way to see what else can be done. More certainly needs to be done. I particularly support the idea of an international agreement to strengthen the control of conventional arms sales. That is why the Commission has, as part of wider EU efforts, strongly supported the adoption of an international Code of Conduct on arms exports based on the European Union’s initiative.
Member States are currently considering how to improve the Code of Conduct and we are encouraging these efforts to strengthen EU controls on conventional arms sales. The success of this endeavour will be a factor in the ongoing China arms embargo debate.
We all know the importance of China as an economic partner and a political player in the world in the coming decades. China is, to a considerable extent, regaining the position that it had in the world until the middle of the 19th century, when it was still responsible for probably 30% of global GDP. The historic recovery we are witnessing is, on the whole, extraordinarily beneficial to the rest of the world. China's integration as an open economy into the world economy is good for all of us.
It is not in any way demeaning to us or the Chinese if we regularly make it clear that there are other issues that concern us, such as issues of human rights. I am sure we shall in due course see an improvement as the political situation in China matches the economic one. It is impossible these days for any country to remain completely self-contained. It is impossible for a country to open up its economy whilst keeping politics under absolutely rigid control.
I look forward to a more intimate relationship with China in the years ahead. I hope China will continue to play a positive role in the international community. I look forward to a serious dialogue with China about human rights, leading to improvements of which I am sure Mr Sun Yat-Sen would have approved.
As Members know, given the way in which the common foreign and security policy operates, this is not an issue on which the Commission takes a lead. Nevertheless, we have an obvious interest in the overall development of our relations with China, which by and large are excellent, and the arms embargo naturally operates in that context. As Parliament knows, the embargo was imposed by the European Council in 1989, following the events in Tiananmen Square, the early stages of which I was able to witness at first hand as the then vice-chairman of the Asia Development Bank.
This year, China has intensified its campaign to have the ban lifted. That campaign continues in the run-up to the summit between the European Union and China next month. The Chinese authorities consider the embargo to be evidence of discrimination against them; they argue that the ban is obsolete. They claim that it severely hinders the further development of bilateral relations.
Whilst we have acknowledged that positive change has occurred and that the political situation in China has moved on since Tiananmen, China's observance of some basic human rights, notably in the area of political and civil rights, continues to fall well short of international norms. Without making any direct link we have, therefore, consistently told the Chinese authorities at the highest level that the lifting of the embargo would be greatly assisted if they could take the sort of concrete steps in the field of human rights that would convince the European public that that was an appropriate course of action.
I know that a number of Member States are favourably disposed towards lifting the embargo and have made that view public. Others believe that it is premature, citing concerns about human rights. Human rights were an issue that figured prominently in the resolution passed by this House last year against lifting the ban.
Those Member States arguing for lifting the ban use the rationale that the controls introduced in the 1998 EU Code of Conduct on arms sales render it nugatory. I acknowledge that this argument is not without substance.
I am very keen to move forward with our important strategic partnership with China, a country that is rapidly emerging as a global player across the board, and is now, amongst other things, our second largest trading partner. That is one of our top foreign policy goals in the years to come.
That said, given the underlying logic of the embargo and the significant political and symbolic issues involved for both sides, it is understandable that some Member States argue that the lifting of the ban should take place against a background of positive and tangible steps by China to improve its human rights situation.
I should also like to say a few words on the European Parliament’s report on the operation of the EU’s Code of Conduct on arms exports. The strength of the Code of Conduct is closely related to the China embargo debate, since it will guide Member States' export practice if the ban is lifted. Responsibility for the arms trade currently rests with Member States, but the Commission is fully associated with its consideration under the common foreign and security policy."@cs1
"Jeg vil først og fremmest undskylde, at jeg nu skal holde endnu en afskedsaftale her i Parlamentet. Jeg begynder at forstå, hvordan Frank Sinatra må have haft det, da han blev ved og fortsatte sine afskedsforestillinger, til han var godt op i halvfjerdserne. Jeg håber virkelig, at det er den sidste eftermiddag, Parlamentet skal tåle mig, men det er jo helt op til Parlamentet.
Jeg mener, at ordføreren har gjort en prisværdig indsats og udarbejdet et værdifuldt dokument, som fortjener indgående opmærksomhed. Medlemsstaterne opfordres til at skærpe deres krav til kontrollen med våbeneksport. Betænkningen indeholder bl.a. krav om større gennemskuelighed, hvilket er noget, der ikke umiddelbart forbindes med våbeneksport. Den foreskriver desuden yderligere kontrol med og begrænsning af denne handel, hvilket nødvendigvis er vanskelige spørgsmål for medlemsstater med en betydelig våbenindustri.
Betænkningen er især fokuseret på forbedringer af europæisk praksis, men har også et globalt sigte. I erkendelse af at EU har mulighed for at fremme bedste praksis på verdensplan, indeholder betænkningen bl.a. argumenter til fordel for en international traktat om handel med våben.
Vi må ikke glemme - og det er jeg sikker på, at Parlamentet ikke gør - den nedslående kendsgerning, at der hvert år dør omkring en halv million mennesker som følge af vold forbundet med håndskydevåben og lette våben. Som bekendt er Kommissionen i samarbejde med andre internationale organisationer og ngo'er regelmæssigt involveret i sager vedrørende følgerne af upassende eller ulovligt våbensalg. Vi gennemfører også nogle specifikke projekter, der har til formål at reducere den destabiliserende akkumulering af våben i verden som helhed. Europa-Parlamentet er i færd med at udarbejde et pilotprojekt, der skal klarlægge, hvad der ellers kan gøres eller rettere skal gøres. Jeg går især ind for tanken om en international aftale om skærpet kontrol med salg af konventionelle våben. Det er årsagen til, at Kommissionen som led i den mere generelle indsats fra EU's side har støttet vedtagelsen af en international adfærdskodeks for våbeneksport baseret på EU's initiativ.
Medlemsstaterne overvejer i øjeblikket, hvordan adfærdskodeksen kan forbedres, og vi støtter bestræbelserne på at skærpe EU-kontrollen med salg af konventionelle våben. Resultatet af disse bestræbelser vil få stor betydning for den igangværende debat om våbenembargoen mod Kina.
Vi er alle klar over, hvor stor betydning Kina vil få som handelspartner og politisk aktør i verden i de kommende årtier. Kina er i vid udstrækning ved at genvinde den stilling, landet havde i verden indtil midten af det 19. århundrede, hvor det stadig tegnede sig for antagelig 30 % af det globale BNP. Den historiske vækst, vi er vidne til, er som helhed yderst gavnlig for resten af verden. Kinas integration i verdensøkonomien som en åben økonomi gavner os alle.
Det er på ingen måde nedværdigende for os eller for kineserne, at vi regelmæssigt gør det klart, at der er andre emner, vi finder væsentlige, herunder menneskerettighederne. Jeg er overbevist om, at vi med tiden vil konstatere en forbedring, efterhånden som den politiske situation i Kina kommer på højde med den økonomiske. Nu om dage kan intet land forblive fuldstændigt isoleret. Det er umuligt for et land at åbne økonomien og samtidig holde det politiske liv under fuldstændig ubøjelig kontrol.
Jeg håber, at vi vil nærme os Kina i de kommende år, og at Kina fortsat vil spille en positiv rolle i det internationale samfund. Forhåbentlig kan vi få en seriøs dialog med Kina om menneskerettighederne, der kan føre til forbedringer, som jeg er sikker på, at hr. Sun Yat-Sen ville have tilsluttet sig.
Som bekendt betyder den fælles udenrigs- og sikkerhedspolitiks opbygning, at dette ikke er et emne, hvor Kommissionen indtager en fremtrædende rolle. Ikke desto mindre har vi en indlysende interesse i den generelle udvikling i vores forbindelser med Kina, som i det store og hele er udmærkede, og våbenembargoen spiller naturligvis en rolle i denne sammenhæng. Som Parlamentet er bekendt med, blev embargoen indført af Det Europæiske Råd i 1989 efter begivenhederne på Tiananmenpladsen, hvis indledende fase, jeg var førstehåndsvidne til, idet jeg dengang var næstformand i Den Asiatiske Udviklingsbank.
Kina har i år intensiveret sin kampagne for at få forbuddet ophævet. Kampagnen fortsætter op til topmødet mellem EU og Kina i næste måned. De kinesiske myndigheder betragter embargoen som et bevis for den diskrimination, de udsættes for. De hævder, at forbuddet er forældet. De gør gældende, at det udgør en alvorlig hindring for den videre udvikling af de bilaterale forbindelser.
Vi erkender, at der er sket en positiv udvikling, og at den politiske situation i Kina har bevæget sig siden Tiananmen. Men Kinas respekt for nogle af de grundlæggende menneskerettigheder, især de politiske og borgerlige frihedsrettigheder, lever stadig ikke op til de internationale standarder. Uden at henvise direkte hertil har vi til stadighed over for de kinesiske myndigheder på højeste plan tilkendegivet, at det ville lette ophævelsen af embargoen betydeligt, hvis de kunne tage konkrete skridt på menneskerettighedsområdet, der kan overbevise den europæiske offentlighed om, at det ville være en passende foranstaltning.
Jeg er bekendt med, at flere medlemsstater stiller sig positivt over for en ophævelse af embargoen og har tilkendegivet dette offentligt. Andre finder det forhastet under henvisning til den foruroligende menneskerettighedssituation. Menneskerettighederne var et emne, der indtog en fremtrædende plads i den beslutning imod en ophævelse af forbuddet, som Parlamentet vedtog sidste år.
De medlemsstater, der går ind for en ophævelse af forbuddet, anfører, at det er blevet overflødigt som følge af de kontrolforanstaltninger, der blev indført med adfærdskodeksen for våbeneksport fra 1998. Jeg erkender, at dette argument ikke er uden vægt.
Jeg er meget opsat på at komme videre med vores vigtige strategiske partnerskab med Kina, som skyder hurtigt frem som en global aktør, og som nu bl.a. er vores næststørste handelspartner. Det er et af vores fremmeste udenrigspolitiske mål i de kommende år.
Når det er sagt, er det i betragtning af embargoens iboende logik og de betydelige politiske og symbolske spørgsmål, der er involveret for begge parter, forståeligt, at visse medlemsstater anfører, at en ophævelse af forbuddet bør ske som reaktion på positive og konkrete skridt fra kinesisk side til forbedring af landets menneskerettighedssituation.
Jeg vil også sige et par ord om Europa-Parlamentets betænkning om gennemførelsen af EU-adfærdskodeksen for våbeneksport. Adfærdskodeksens styrke er nært forbundet med debatten om den kinesiske embargo, eftersom det er den, der kommer til at opstille retningslinjerne for medlemsstaternes eksport, hvis forbuddet ophæves. I dag ligger ansvaret for våbenhandel hos medlemsstaterne, men Kommissionen inddrages fuldt ud i behandlingen heraf under den fælles udenrigs- og sikkerhedspolitik."@da2
".
Zunächst möchte ich mich dafür entschuldigen, dass ich vor dem Parlament wieder einmal zu einer Abschiedsvorstellung erscheine. Langsam kann ich nachvollziehen, wie sich Frank Sinatra gefühlt haben muss, als er sich von einem letzten Auftritt zum nächsten schleppte, bis er über 70 Jahre alt war. Ich hoffe, dies ist wirklich der letzte Nachmittag, an dem mich das Parlament ertragen muss, aber dies liegt in den Händen des Parlaments.
Ich spreche dem Berichterstatter mein Lob für die Erarbeitung eines aussagefähigen Dokuments aus, das sehr große Aufmerksamkeit verdient. Dadurch werden die Mitgliedstaaten vor die Aufgabe gestellt, strengere Normen für die Kontrolle der Waffenausfuhren aufzustellen. Unter anderem wird darin mehr Transparenz gefordert, also etwas, das in der Regel nicht unbedingt mit dem Waffenhandel in Verbindung gebracht wird. Ferner werden weitere Kontrollen und Beschränkungen für diesen Handel angestrebt – naturgemäß schwierige Bereiche für die Mitgliedstaaten mit einer größeren Rüstungsindustrie.
In dem Bericht liegt der Schwerpunkt zwar hauptsächlich auf der Verbesserung der europäischen Praxis, doch ist er von seinem Ansatz her global angelegt. In Anbetracht der Möglichkeiten der Europäischen Union, erfolgreiche Konzepte in der ganzen Welt zu fördern, wird unter anderem ein internationales Waffenkontrollabkommen befürwortet.
Wir sollten nicht die ernüchternde Tatsache vergessen – und ich bin sicher, dass das Parlament dies auch nicht tut –, dass ungefähr eine halbe Million Menschen infolge von Gewalttaten sterben, die mit Kleinwaffen und leichten Waffen verübt werden. Wie Ihnen wohl bekannt ist, beschäftigt sich die Kommission gemeinsam mit anderen internationalen Organisationen und NRO regelmäßig mit den Auswirkungen von unerwünschten oder illegalen Waffenverkäufen. Wir führen auch einige besondere Projekte durch, um destabilisierende Waffenansammlungen in der ganzen Welt zu verringern. Zur Ermittlung weiterer Maßnahmen wurde vom Europäischen Parlament ein Pilotprojekt auf die Wege gebracht. Auf alle Fälle muss mehr unternommen werden. Ich unterstütze insbesondere die Idee eines internationalen Abkommens, um die Kontrolle des Verkaufs konventioneller Waffen zu verschärfen. Daher setzte sich die Kommission im Rahmen einer breiter angelegten Initiative nachdrücklich für die Annahme eines internationalen Verhaltenskodexes für Waffenausfuhren ein, der auf der Initiative der Europäischen Union beruht.
Die Mitgliedstaaten untersuchen derzeit mögliche Verbesserungen des Verhaltenskodexes, und wir unterstützen diese Bemühungen, die EU-Kontrollen beim Verkauf konventioneller Waffen zu verschärfen. Der Erfolg dieser Anstrengungen wird bei der fortlaufenden Debatte über das Waffenembargo gegenüber China eine Rolle spielen.
Uns allen ist bewusst, welche Bedeutung China in den kommenden Jahrzehnten als Wirtschaftspartner und politischer Akteur in der Welt zukommt. China gewinnt in beträchtlichem Maße die Stellung zurück, die es in der Welt bis Mitte des 19. Jahrhunderts einnahm, als auf dieses Land vermutlich 30 % des weltweiten BIP entfielen. Der historische Aufschwung, den wir derzeit erleben, ist im Großen und Ganzen für die übrige Welt außerordentlich förderlich. Chinas Integration als offene Marktwirtschaft in die Weltwirtschaft kommt uns allen zugute.
Weder wir noch die Chinesen vergeben sich etwas, wenn wir regelmäßig klarstellen, dass uns auch andere Fragen wie die Menschenrechtsproblematik am Herzen liegen. Sicherlich werden im Laufe der Zeit in dem Maße Verbesserungen erfolgen, wie sich die politische Lage in China an die wirtschaftliche Situation angleicht. Heutzutage ist kein Land mehr in der Lage, vollkommen autark zu bleiben. Ein Land kann einfach nicht seine Wirtschaft öffnen und gleichzeitig den politischen Bereich weiterhin aufs Strengste kontrollieren.
Ich sehe einem engeren Verhältnis zu China in den kommenden Jahren erwartungsvoll entgegen. Ich hoffe, dass China weiterhin eine positive Rolle in der internationalen Gemeinschaft spielen wird. Ich erhoffe mir einen ernsthaften Dialog mit China über das Thema Menschenrechte, der zu Verbesserungen führen wird, die sicherlich auch Sun Yatsen gebilligt hätte.
Wie den Abgeordneten bekannt ist, hat die Kommission aufgrund der Funktionsweise der gemeinsamen Außen- und Sicherheitspolitik in dieser Frage nicht die Federführung inne. Dennoch haben wir ein offensichtliches Interesse an der Gesamtentwicklung unserer Beziehungen zu China, die im Großen und Ganzen ausgezeichnet sind, und das Waffenembargo gehört natürlich dazu. Wie dem Parlament bekannt ist, verhängte der Europäische Rat das Embargo im Jahre 1989 nach den Ereignissen auf dem Platz des Himmlischen Friedens, deren erste Phase ich als damaliger stellvertretender Direktor der Asiatischen Entwicklungsbank vor Ort miterlebte.
In diesem Jahr hat China seine Kampagne zur Aufhebung des Embargos verstärkt. Diese Kampagne wird im nächsten Monat im Vorfeld des Gipfels zwischen der Europäischen Union und China fortgeführt. Die chinesischen Behörden betrachten das Embargo als Zeichen der Diskriminierung. Ihrer Meinung nach ist das Embargo überholt. Sie behaupten, dass es die weitere Entwicklung der bilateralen Beziehungen stark behindert.
Wir berücksichtigen zwar die positiven Veränderungen und die Entwicklung der politischen Lage in China seit den Vorfällen auf dem Platz des Himmlischen Friedens, doch die Einhaltung grundlegender Menschenrechte durch China, insbesondere im Bereich der politischen und bürgerlichen Rechte, entspricht bei weitem noch nicht den internationalen Normen. Ohne einen direkten Zusammenhang herzustellen, haben wir daher immer wieder auf höchster Ebene den chinesischen Behörden gegenüber zum Ausdruck gebracht, dass es für die Aufhebung des Embargos sehr förderlich wäre, wenn sie im Bereich der Menschenrechte konkrete Schritte ergreifen würden, mit denen sich die europäische Öffentlichkeit vom Sinn einer solchen Maßnahme überzeugen ließe.
Mir ist bekannt, dass einige Mitgliedstaaten die Aufhebung des Embargos befürworten und diese Meinung in der Öffentlichkeit geäußert haben. Andere wiederum halten diesen Schritt für übereilt und führen ihre Sorge um die Menschenrechte an. Die Menschenrechte stellten eine Frage dar, die im vergangenen Jahr bei der von diesem Parlament verabschiedeten Entschließung gegen die Aufhebung des Embargos an oberster Stelle stand.
Die Mitgliedstaaten, die sich für eine Aufhebung des Embargos aussprechen, begründen dies damit, dass durch die im Jahre 1998 in den EU-Verhaltenskodex für Waffenverkäufe aufgenommenen Kontrollen das Embargo gegenstandslos geworden sei. Ich räume ein, dass dieses Argument nicht ganz von der Hand zu weisen ist.
Mir ist sehr viel daran gelegen, unsere wichtige strategische Partnerschaft mit China voranzutreiben – einem Land, das auf allen Gebieten als globaler Akteur in Erscheinung tritt und nunmehr unter anderem unser zweitgrößter Handelspartner ist. Dies stellt eine der wichtigsten Ziele unserer Außenpolitik in den kommenden Jahren dar.
Angesichts des eben Gesagten, der Beweggründe für das Embargo und der bedeutenden politischen und symbolischen Fragen, die damit für beide Seiten verbunden sind, ist es verständlich, dass sich einige Mitgliedstaaten für die Aufhebung des Embargos unter der Bedingung aussprechen, dass China konkrete und greifbare Maßnahmen zur Verbesserung der dortigen Menschenrechtslage durchführt.
Ich möchte auch einige Worte zum Bericht des Europäischen Parlaments über die Funktionsweise des EU-Verhaltenskodexes für Waffenausfuhren verlieren. Die Stärke des Verhaltenskodexes zeigt sich insbesondere im Zusammenhang mit der Debatte über das Embargo gegenüber China, denn er wird den Mitgliedstaaten bei einer Aufhebung des Embargos als Leitlinie in der Ausfuhrpraxis dienen. Derzeit liegt die Verantwortung für den Waffenhandel bei den Mitgliedstaaten, aber bei der Behandlung dieser Frage im Rahmen der gemeinsamen Außen- und Sicherheitspolitik ist die Kommission voll einbezogen."@de9
"Πρώτα από όλα, ζητώ συγγνώμη που παρουσιάζομαι στο Κοινοβούλιο για ακόμη μία αποχαιρετιστήρια εμφάνιση. Αρχίζω να καταλαβαίνω πώς πρέπει να αισθανόταν ο Φρανκ Σινάτρα, στις αποχαιρετιστήριες εμφανίσεις που έκανε τρικλίζοντας μέχρι τα εβδομήντα του. Ελπίζω ότι αυτό θα είναι το τελευταίο απόγευμα που θα πρέπει να με ανεχτείτε, αλλά αυτό εναπόκειται στο Κοινοβούλιο.
Συγχαίρω τον εισηγητή για τη σύνταξη ενός σημαντικού εγγράφου το οποίο αξίζει την επισταμένη προσοχή μας. Προτρέπει τα κράτη μέλη να θεσπίσουν πιο αυστηρές προδιαγραφές σε σχέση με τον έλεγχο των εξαγωγών όπλων. Μεταξύ άλλων, απαιτεί περισσότερη διαφάνεια, κάτι το οποίο κανονικά δεν συνδέεται αυτομάτως με το εμπόριο όπλων. Ζητά επίσης περαιτέρω ελέγχους και περιορισμούς για το εν λόγω εμπόριο, τομείς εγγενώς δυσχερείς για τα κράτη μέλη με σημαντικές βιομηχανίες όπλων.
Αν και η έκθεση εστιάζει πρωτίστως στη βελτίωση της ευρωπαϊκής πρακτικής, η εμβέλειά της είναι παγκόσμια. Αναγνωρίζοντας τη δυνατότητα της Ευρωπαϊκής Ένωσης να προωθήσει τις βέλτιστες πρακτικές παγκοσμίως, συνηγορεί υπέρ, μεταξύ άλλων, μίας διεθνούς συνθήκης για το εμπόριο όπλων.
Δεν πρέπει να ξεχνάμε –και είμαι σίγουρος ότι το Κοινοβούλιο δεν έχει ξεχάσει– το θλιβερό γεγονός ότι περίπου μισό εκατομμύριο άνθρωποι πεθαίνουν κάθε χρόνο ως αποτέλεσμα βίας η οποία συνδέεται με τη χρήση μικρών και ελαφρών όπλων. Όπως καλά γνωρίζετε, η Επιτροπή καλείται τακτικά, μαζί με άλλες διεθνείς οργανώσεις και ΜΚΟ, να αντιμετωπίσει τις συνέπειες της ανάρμοστης ή παράνομης πώλησης όπλων. Εφαρμόζουμε επίσης ειδικά προγράμματα για τη μείωση των αποσταθεροποιητικών συσσωρεύσεων όπλων παγκοσμίως. Ένα πιλοτικό πρόγραμμα το οποίο έχει εισηγηθεί το Ευρωπαϊκό Κοινοβούλιο προκειμένου να εξεταστεί τι άλλο μπορεί να γίνει βρίσκεται σε εξέλιξη. Απαιτούνται βέβαια περισσότερα. Υποστηρίζω ιδιαίτερα την ιδέα μίας διεθνούς συμφωνίας για την ενίσχυση του ελέγχου πωλήσεων συμβατικών όπλων. Αυτός είναι ο λόγος για τον οποίο η Επιτροπή έχει, στο πλαίσιο των ευρύτερων προσπαθειών της ΕΕ, υποστηρίξει σθεναρά την υιοθέτηση ενός διεθνούς Κώδικα Συμπεριφοράς σχετικά με τις εξαγωγές όπλων βάσει της πρωτοβουλίας της Ευρωπαϊκής Ένωσης.
Τα κράτη μέλη εξετάζουν επί του παρόντος τρόπους βελτίωσης του Κώδικα Συμπεριφοράς και ενθαρρύνουμε αυτές τις προσπάθειες για την ενίσχυση των ελέγχων της ΕΕ στις πωλήσεις συμβατικών όπλων. Η επιτυχία αυτής της προσπάθειας θα αποτελέσει παράγοντα της υπό εξέλιξη συζήτησης για το εμπάργκο όπλων στην Κίνα.
Όλοι γνωρίζουμε τη σπουδαιότητα της Κίνας ως οικονομικού εταίρου και παγκόσμιου πολιτικού παράγοντα τις ερχόμενες δεκαετίες. Η Κίνα ανακτά, σε σημαντικό βαθμό, τη θέση που κατείχε στον κόσμο μέχρι τα μέσα του 19ου αιώνα, όταν ήταν ακόμη υπεύθυνη για το 30% του παγκόσμιου ΑΕγχΠ. Η ιστορική ανάκαμψη της οποίας είμαστε μάρτυρες είναι στο σύνολό της εξαιρετικά ωφέλιμη για τον υπόλοιπο κόσμο. Η ένταξη της Κίνας ως ανοιχτής οικονομίας στην παγκόσμια οικονομία είναι καλή για όλους μας.
Δεν είναι επ’ ουδενί υποτιμητικό για μας ή για τους Κινέζους εάν καθιστούμε σαφές τακτικά ότι υπάρχουν άλλα θέματα τα οποία μας απασχολούν, όπως τα θέματα των ανθρωπίνων δικαιωμάτων. Είμαι βέβαιος ότι εν καιρώ θα δούμε βελτίωση, καθώς η πολιτική κατάσταση στην Κίνα συναγωνίζεται την οικονομική. Είναι αδύνατο στις μέρες μας για μία χώρα να ανοίξει την οικονομία της ενώ κρατεί την πολιτική υπό απόλυτα αυστηρό έλεγχο.
Προσμένω με χαρά μία πιο στενή σχέση με την Κίνα τα επόμενα χρόνια. Ελπίζω ότι η Κίνα θα συνεχίσει να διαδραματίζει θετικό ρόλο στη διεθνή κοινότητα. Προσμένω με χαρά έναν σοβαρό διάλογο με την Κίνα σχετικά με τα ανθρώπινα δικαιώματα, ο οποίος θα οδηγήσει σε βελτιώσεις τις οποίες είμαι σίγουρος ότι ο Sun Yat-Sen θα ενέκρινε.
Όπως γνωρίζουν οι βουλευτές, δεδομένου του τρόπου με τον οποίο λειτουργεί η κοινή εξωτερική πολιτική και πολιτική ασφαλείας, αυτό δεν είναι ένα θέμα στο οποίο η Επιτροπή δεν διαδραματίζει ηγετικό ρόλο. Παρόλα ταύτα, εξετάζουμε με προφανές ενδιαφέρον τη συνολική εξέλιξη των σχέσεων μας με την Κίνα, οι οποίες είναι σε γενικές γραμμές εξαιρετικές, και το εμπάργκο όπλων λειτουργεί φυσικά σε αυτό το πλαίσιο. Όπως γνωρίζει το Κοινοβούλιο, το εμπάργκο επιβλήθηκε από το Ευρωπαϊκό Συμβούλιο το 1989, συνεπεία των γεγονότων στην Πλατεία Τιενανμέν, τα αρχικά στάδια των οποίων μπόρεσα να παρακολουθήσω ως ο τότε αντιπρόεδρος της Τράπεζας Ανάπτυξης της Ασίας.
Φέτος, η Κίνα έχει εντείνει την εκστρατεία της για την άρση της απαγόρευσης. Αυτή η εκστρατεία συνεχίζεται τις παραμονές της Διάσκεψης Κορυφής μεταξύ της Ευρωπαϊκής Ένωσης και της Κίνας τον επόμενο μήνα. Οι κινεζικές αρχές θεωρούν το εμπάργκο ένδειξη διακρίσεων εις βάρος τους· υποστηρίζουν ότι η απαγόρευση είναι παρωχημένη. Ισχυρίζονται ότι παρεμποδίζει σοβαρά την περαιτέρω ανάπτυξη των διμερών σχέσεων.
Αν και έχουμε διαπιστώσει ότι έχει σημειωθεί θετική αλλαγή και ότι η πολιτική κατάσταση στην Κίνα έχει μεταβληθεί μετά τα γεγονότα της Πλατείας Τιενανμέν, ο σεβασμός εκ μέρους της Κίνας ορισμένων βασικών ανθρωπίνων δικαιωμάτων, κυρίως στον τομέα των πολιτικών και ατομικών δικαιωμάτων, εξακολουθεί να υπολείπεται αρκετά των διεθνών κανόνων. Χωρίς να το συνδέουμε άμεσα επισημαίνουμε, ωστόσο, διαρκώς στο υψηλότερο επίπεδο των κινεζικών αρχών ότι η άρση του εμπάργκο θα διευκολυνόταν ιδιαίτερα εάν θα μπορούσαν να ληφθούν συγκεκριμένα μέτρα στον τομέα των ανθρωπίνων δικαιωμάτων τα οποία θα έπειθαν την ευρωπαϊκή κοινή γνώμη ότι βρίσκονται στην ενδεδειγμένη κατεύθυνση δράσης.
Γνωρίζω ότι κάποια κράτη μέλη διάκεινται θετικά στο ενδεχόμενο άρσης του εμπάργκο και έχουν κοινοποιήσει αυτή την άποψη. Άλλα θεωρούν ότι είναι πρόωρο, παραθέτοντας ανησυχίες σχετικά με τα ανθρώπινα δικαιώματα. Τα ανθρώπινα δικαιώματα ήταν ένα θέμα το οποίο πρωτοστάτησε στο ψήφισμα το οποίο εγκρίθηκε από το Κοινοβούλιο πέρυσι κατά της άρσης της απαγόρευσης.
Τα κράτη μέλη τα οποία υποστηρίζουν την άρση της απαγόρευσης χρησιμοποιούν τη λογική ότι οι έλεγχοι που εισήχθηκαν στον Κώδικα Συμπεριφοράς της ΕΕ του 1998 όσον αφορά τις πωλήσεις όπλων την καθιστούν άνευ αντικειμένου. Αναγνωρίζω ότι το εν λόγω επιχείρημα δεν είναι αβάσιμο.
Υποστηρίζω ένθερμα την προώθηση της σημαντικής εταιρικής μας σχέσης με την Κίνα, μία χώρα η οποία αναδεικνύεται ταχέως σε παγκόσμιο παράγοντα σε όλους τους τομείς, και είναι τώρα, μεταξύ άλλων, ο δεύτερος μεγαλύτερος εμπορικός εταίρος μας. Αυτός είναι ένας από τους κορυφαίους στόχους μας στην εξωτερική πολιτική για τα επόμενα χρόνια.
Ανεξαρτήτως αυτού, δεδομένης της βαθύτερης λογικής του εμπάργκο και των σημαντικών πολιτικών και συμβολικών θεμάτων που άπτονται και των δύο πλευρών, είναι κατανοητό ότι ορισμένα κράτη μέλη υποστηρίζουν ότι η άρση της απαγόρευσης θα έπρεπε να πραγματοποιηθεί σε ένα πλαίσιο θετικών και απτών αλλαγών εκ μέρους της Κίνας προκειμένου να βελτιώσει την κατάσταση των ανθρωπίνων δικαιωμάτων της.
Θα ήθελα επίσης να πω λίγα λόγια σχετικά με την έκθεση του Ευρωπαϊκού Κοινοβουλίου όσον αφορά την εφαρμογή του Κώδικα Συμπεριφοράς της ΕΕ για τις εξαγωγές όπλων. Η ισχύς του Κώδικα Συμπεριφοράς συνδέεται άρρηκτα με το θέμα του εμπάργκο προς την Κίνα, εφόσον θα κατευθύνει την πρακτική εξαγωγών των κρατών μελών εάν αρθεί η απαγόρευση. Η ευθύνη για το εμπόριο όπλων ανήκει στα κράτη μέλη, αλλά η Επιτροπή συμμετέχει πλήρως στην εξέτασή της στο πλαίσιο της κοινής εξωτερικής και πολιτικής ασφαλείας."@el10
".
Ante todo, me disculpo por aparecer otra vez ante esta Cámara para una nueva despedida. Estoy empezando a saber cómo tuvo que sentirse Frank Sinatra cuando apareció en un acto de despedida tras otro hasta bien entrada la edad de setenta años. Espero que esta sea de verdad la última tarde que la Cámara tenga que soportarme, aunque eso depende del Parlamento.
Felicito al ponente por haber elaborado un documento sustancioso que merece ser leído con gran atención. En él se insta a los Estados miembros a que apliquen criterios más rigurosos en el control de las exportaciones de armas. Entre otras cosas, reclama más transparencia, cosa que no suele asociarse con el comercio de armas. Propone también más controles y limitaciones a dicho comercio, lo cual ya plantea de por sí dificultades a los Estados miembros que cuentan con una importante industria armamentística.
Aunque el informe se centra principalmente en la mejora de las prácticas europeas, su alcance es mundial. Reconociendo la posibilidad de que la Unión Europea promueva buenas prácticas en todo el mundo, se propone, entre otras cosas, la adopción de un tratado internacional sobre el comercio de armas.
No debemos olvidar –y estoy convencido de que el Parlamento no lo olvida– el hecho indiscutible de que casi medio millón de personas mueren todos los años a causa de la violencia relacionada con la utilización de armas cortas y ligeras. Como bien saben ustedes, la Comisión afronta periódicamente, junto con otras organizaciones y ONG internacionales, las consecuencias de la venta indebida o ilegal de armas. Hemos emprendido también algunos proyectos específicos para reducir la acumulación desestabilizadora de armas en todo el mundo. Está en marcha un proyecto piloto iniciado por el Parlamento Europeo para ver qué más se puede hacer. Porque, desde luego, hay que hacer algo más. Yo, personalmente, apoyo la idea de un acuerdo internacional para reforzar el control de las ventas de armas convencionales. Por eso la Comisión ha apoyado plenamente, en el marco de los esfuerzos de la UE en sentido más amplio, la aprobación de un Código de conducta internacional sobre las exportaciones de armas basado en la iniciativa de la Unión Europea.
Los Estados miembros se plantean actualmente la manera de mejorar el Código de conducta y nosotros alentamos sus esfuerzos por reforzar los controles de la Unión Europea sobre las ventas de armas convencionales. El éxito de esta iniciativa será un factor importante en este debate sobre el embargo de armas impuesto a China.
Todos sabemos la importancia que tendrá China como socio económico y como potencia política mundial en las próximas décadas. China está recuperando en gran medida la posición que ocupaba en el mundo hasta mediados del siglo XIX, cuando todavía acaparaba probablemente el 30% del PIB mundial. La recuperación histórica que estamos presenciando es, en conjunto, extraordinariamente beneficiosa para el resto del mundo. La integración de China como una economía abierta en la economía mundial es buena para todos.
Pero no por eso debemos renunciar a decir claramente que hay otras cuestiones que nos preocupan, como las relacionadas con los derechos humanos. Estoy convencido de que con el tiempo veremos una mejora a medida que la situación política en China se sitúe a la altura de la económica. En nuestros días ningún país puede permanecer completamente cerrado. Ningún país puede abrir su economía y al mismo tiempo mantener un control absolutamente rígido sobre la política.
Espero que las relaciones con China se estrechen en los próximos años. Espero que China siga desempeñando un papel positivo en la comunidad internacional. Espero que se entable un diálogo serio con China sobre los derechos humanos gracias al cual se consigan mejoras que estoy seguro que el señor Sun Yat-Sen habría aprobado.
Como saben sus Señorías, la Política Exterior y de Seguridad Común funciona de manera que no es la Comisión quien lleva las riendas en esta cuestión. No obstante, está claro que el desarrollo general de nuestras relaciones con China, que en general son excelentes, nos interesa, y lógicamente el embargo de armas se sitúa en ese contexto. Como sabe el Parlamento, el embargo fue impuesto por el Consejo Europeo en 1989 tras los acontecimientos de la Plaza de Tiananmen, y yo pude ser testigo directo de las fases iniciales de dicho embargo como vicepresidente que era entonces del Banco Asiático de Desarrollo.
Este año, China ha intensificado su campaña para conseguir el levantamiento del embargo. La campaña prosigue mientras se prepara la cumbre entre la Unión Europea y China prevista para el mes que viene. Las autoridades chinas consideran que el embargo es una prueba de discriminación contra ellos y sostienen que el embargo es obsoleto. Alegan además que dificulta seriamente el desarrollo ulterior de las relaciones bilaterales.
Aunque nosotros hemos reconocido que se han producido cambios favorables y que la situación política en China ha mejorado desde Tiananmen, la situación de algunos derechos humanos fundamentales en China, sobre todo en el ámbito de los derechos políticos y civiles, sigue sin estar ni mucho menos a la altura de las normas internacionales. Sin establecer ninguna relación directa, hemos advertido por tanto reiteradamente a las más altas instancias chinas que el levantamiento del embargo se vería muy facilitado si pudieran tomar medidas concretas en el ámbito de los derechos humanos para convencer a la opinión pública europea de que han enfilado un rumbo adecuado.
Sé que algunos Estados miembros son partidarios de levantar el embargo y que han manifestado públicamente esa opinión. Otros creen que eso sería prematuro y citan problemas relacionados con los derechos humanos. La cuestión de los derechos humanos tuvo un gran peso en la resolución aprobada por esta Cámara el año pasado contra el levantamiento del embargo.
Los Estados miembros partidarios de levantar el embargo argumentan que los controles introducidos en el Código de conducta de la Unión Europea de 1998 sobre la venta de armas restan toda eficacia al embargo. Reconozco que en ese argumento hay algo de razón.
He tratado por todos los medios de avanzar en nuestra importante alianza estratégica con China, un país que se está convirtiendo rápidamente en una potencia mundial y que ya es, entre otras cosas, nuestro segundo socio comercial en importancia. Este es uno de los objetivos prioritarios de nuestra política exterior para los próximos años.
Dicho esto, si consideramos la lógica que justifica el embargo y las importantes cuestiones políticas y simbólicas que están en juego para ambas partes, es comprensible que algunos Estados Miembros crean que el levantamiento del embargo debe producirse en respuesta a las medidas positivas y tangibles que está adoptando China para mejorar la situación de los derechos humanos en su país.
Quiero referirme también brevemente al informe del Parlamento Europeo sobre el funcionamiento del Código de conducta de la Unión Europea sobre las exportaciones de armas. La importancia del Código de conducta tiene mucho que ver con el debate sobre el embargo impuesto a China, puesto que regirá las exportaciones de los Estados miembros en el caso de que se levante el embargo. La responsabilidad sobre el comercio de armas recae actualmente en los Estados miembros, pero la Comisión es totalmente partidaria de que se considere en el marco de la Política Exterior y de Seguridad Común."@es20
"First of all, I apologise for appearing in front of the House for yet another farewell appearance. I am starting to know what Frank Sinatra must have felt like, as he staggered on making farewell appearances until he was into his seventies. I hope this really is the last afternoon that the House will have to endure me, but that is in Parliament's hands.
I commend the rapporteur for putting together a substantial document which merits very careful attention. It challenges Member States to attain more stringent standards on the control of arms exports. Amongst other things, it asks for more transparency, not something that is normally immediately associated with the arms trade. It also seeks further controls and limitations on such trade, inherently difficult areas for those Member States with significant arms industries.
Whilst the report focuses primarily on improvement in European practice, its scope is global. Recognising the European Union’s potential to promote best practice around the world, it advocates, among other things, an international arms trade treaty.
We should not forget - and I am sure Parliament has not - the sobering fact that around half a million people die each year as a result of violence linked to small arms and light weapons. As you are well aware, the Commission is regularly involved, with other international organisations and NGOs, in dealing with the consequences of inappropriate or illegal arms sales. We are also implementing some specific projects to reduce destabilising accumulations of weapons around the world. A pilot project initiated by the European Parliament is under way to see what else can be done. More certainly needs to be done. I particularly support the idea of an international agreement to strengthen the control of conventional arms sales. That is why the Commission has, as part of wider EU efforts, strongly supported the adoption of an international Code of Conduct on arms exports based on the European Union’s initiative.
Member States are currently considering how to improve the Code of Conduct and we are encouraging these efforts to strengthen EU controls on conventional arms sales. The success of this endeavour will be a factor in the ongoing China arms embargo debate.
We all know the importance of China as an economic partner and a political player in the world in the coming decades. China is, to a considerable extent, regaining the position that it had in the world until the middle of the 19th century, when it was still responsible for probably 30% of global GDP. The historic recovery we are witnessing is, on the whole, extraordinarily beneficial to the rest of the world. China's integration as an open economy into the world economy is good for all of us.
It is not in any way demeaning to us or the Chinese if we regularly make it clear that there are other issues that concern us, such as issues of human rights. I am sure we shall in due course see an improvement as the political situation in China matches the economic one. It is impossible these days for any country to remain completely self-contained. It is impossible for a country to open up its economy whilst keeping politics under absolutely rigid control.
I look forward to a more intimate relationship with China in the years ahead. I hope China will continue to play a positive role in the international community. I look forward to a serious dialogue with China about human rights, leading to improvements of which I am sure Mr Sun Yat-Sen would have approved.
As Members know, given the way in which the common foreign and security policy operates, this is not an issue on which the Commission takes a lead. Nevertheless, we have an obvious interest in the overall development of our relations with China, which by and large are excellent, and the arms embargo naturally operates in that context. As Parliament knows, the embargo was imposed by the European Council in 1989, following the events in Tiananmen Square, the early stages of which I was able to witness at first hand as the then vice-chairman of the Asia Development Bank.
This year, China has intensified its campaign to have the ban lifted. That campaign continues in the run-up to the summit between the European Union and China next month. The Chinese authorities consider the embargo to be evidence of discrimination against them; they argue that the ban is obsolete. They claim that it severely hinders the further development of bilateral relations.
Whilst we have acknowledged that positive change has occurred and that the political situation in China has moved on since Tiananmen, China's observance of some basic human rights, notably in the area of political and civil rights, continues to fall well short of international norms. Without making any direct link we have, therefore, consistently told the Chinese authorities at the highest level that the lifting of the embargo would be greatly assisted if they could take the sort of concrete steps in the field of human rights that would convince the European public that that was an appropriate course of action.
I know that a number of Member States are favourably disposed towards lifting the embargo and have made that view public. Others believe that it is premature, citing concerns about human rights. Human rights were an issue that figured prominently in the resolution passed by this House last year against lifting the ban.
Those Member States arguing for lifting the ban use the rationale that the controls introduced in the 1998 EU Code of Conduct on arms sales render it nugatory. I acknowledge that this argument is not without substance.
I am very keen to move forward with our important strategic partnership with China, a country that is rapidly emerging as a global player across the board, and is now, amongst other things, our second largest trading partner. That is one of our top foreign policy goals in the years to come.
That said, given the underlying logic of the embargo and the significant political and symbolic issues involved for both sides, it is understandable that some Member States argue that the lifting of the ban should take place against a background of positive and tangible steps by China to improve its human rights situation.
I should also like to say a few words on the European Parliament’s report on the operation of the EU’s Code of Conduct on arms exports. The strength of the Code of Conduct is closely related to the China embargo debate, since it will guide Member States' export practice if the ban is lifted. Responsibility for the arms trade currently rests with Member States, but the Commission is fully associated with its consideration under the common foreign and security policy."@et5
".
Ensinnäkin pyydän anteeksi, että tulen parlamenttiin jälleen yhdelle jäähyväiskäynnille. Alan ymmärtää, miltä Frank Sinatrasta täytyi tuntua, kun hän hoiperteli aina uusiin jäähyväiskonsertteihin vielä yli 60-vuotiaana. Toivon, että tämän iltapäivän jälkeen parlamentin ei enää tarvitse sietää minua, mutta se on parlamentin päätettävissä.
Kiitän esittelijää siitä, että hän on laatinut asiapitoisen mietinnön, joka kannattaa ottaa hyvin tarkasti huomioon. Siinä jäsenvaltiot haastetaan valvomaan asevientiä tiukemmin. Mietinnössä vaaditaan muun muassa suurempaa avoimuutta, jota ei tavallisesti yhdistetä suoralta kädeltä asekauppaan. Siinä pyritään myös tehostamaan asekaupan valvontaa ja lisäämään asekauppaan liittyviä rajoituksia. Nämä ovat luonnostaan vaikeita alueita niille valtioille, joissa aseteollisuutta on huomattavan paljon.
Samalla kun mietinnössä keskitytään etupäässä Euroopan käytäntöjen parantamiseen, sen aihepiiri on kuitenkin yleismaailmallinen. Mietinnössä tunnustetaan Euroopan unionin mahdollisuus edistää parhaita käytäntöjä kaikkialla maailmassa, ja siinä kannatetaan muun muassa kansainvälistä asekauppasopimusta.
Emme saisi unohtaa – ja olen varma, ettei parlamentti ole unohtanutkaan – sitä vakavaa tosiasiaa, että puoli miljoonaa ihmistä kuolee vuosittain pien- ja kevytaseisiin liittyvän väkivallan seurauksena. Kuten hyvin tiedätte, komissio osallistuu säännöllisesti muiden kansainvälisten organisaatioiden ja kansalaisjärjestöjen kanssa ei-toivotun ja laittoman asekaupan seurausten selvittämiseen. Toteutamme myös erityisiä hankkeita, joilla pyritään estämään tasapainoa horjuttavaa aseiden kasautumista kaikkialla maailmassa. Euroopan parlamentin käynnistämässä pilottihankkeessa pyritään selvittämään, mitä muuta voidaan tehdä. Enemmän on ilman muuta tehtävä. Kannatan erityisesti ajatusta kansainvälisestä sopimuksesta, jolla vahvistetaan tavanomaisten aseiden viennin valvontaa. Sen vuoksi komissio on osana laajempia EU:n toimia kannattanut voimakkaasti aseiden vientiä koskevien Euroopan unionin aloitteeseen perustuvien kansainvälisten käytännesääntöjen hyväksymistä.
Jäsenvaltiot pohtivat parhaillaan, miten käytännesääntöjä voidaan parantaa, ja me kannustamme näitä ponnistuksia tavanomaisten aseiden vientiä koskevien EU:n valvontatoimien tehostamiseksi. Onnistuminen näissä ponnistuksissa vaikuttaa käynnissä olevaan keskusteluun Kiinaa koskevasta asevientikiellosta.
Tiedämme kaikki Kiinan merkityksen talouskumppanina ja poliittisena toimijana maailmassa tulevien vuosikymmenten aikana. Kiina on suurelta osin saavuttamassa taas maailmassa sen aseman, jossa se oli 1800-luvun puoliväliin asti, jolloin maan osuus maailman bruttokansantuotteesta oli noin 30 prosenttia. Maan historiallisella toipumisella, jota saamme todistaa, on kokonaisuudessaan erittäin hyödyllisiä vaikutuksia muuhun maailmaan. Kiinan liittyminen avoimena kansantaloutena maailman talouteen on hyväksi meille kaikille.
Emme halvenna millään tavoin kiinalaisia tai itseämme, jos teemme säännöllisesti selväksi, että on myös muita huolestuttavia asioita, esimerkiksi ihmisoikeuskysymys. Olen varma, että näemme kehitystä tapahtuvan ajan mittaan, kun Kiinan poliittinen kehitys saavuttaa talouskehityksen tason. Nykyisin mikään maa ei voi pysyä täysin itsenäisenä. Yksikään maa ei voi avata talouttaan ja pitää samalla politiikkaansa ehdottoman tiukassa hallinnassa.
Odotan kovasti, että tulevina vuosina suhteemme Kiinaan lähenee. Toivon, että Kiina säilyttää myönteisen asemansa kansainvälisessä yhteisössä. Odotan kovasti, että voimme käydä Kiinan kanssa ihmisoikeuksista vakavaa vuoropuhelua, joka johtaa sellaisiin parannuksiin, jotka Sun Yat-Sen olisi varmasti hyväksynyt.
Hyvät parlamentin jäsenet, kuten tiedätte, yhteisen ulko- ja puolustuspolitiikan toteutustavan vuoksi komissio ei voi asettua tässä kysymyksessä johtajan asemaan. Olemme kuitenkin ilman muuta kiinnostuneita Kiinan suhteidemme – jotka ovat kaiken kaikkiaan erinomaiset – yleisestä kehityksestä, ja tämä on se tilanne, jossa asevientikieltoa sovelletaan. Kuten parlamentti tietää, Eurooppa-neuvosto määräsi kiellon vuonna 1989 Taivaallisen rauhan aukion tapahtumien seurauksena. Todistin näiden tapahtumien alkuvaiheita aitiopaikalta silloisena Aasian kehitysrahaston varapuheenjohtajana.
Tänä vuonna Kiina on tehostanut kampanjaansa asevientikiellon kumoamiseksi. Kampanja jatkuu ensi kuussa pidettävän Euroopan unionin ja Kiinan välisen huippukokouksen valmistelujen aikana. Kiinan viranomaiset pitävät kieltoa todisteena heihin kohdistuvasta syrjinnästä. He väittävät, että kielto on vanhentunut. He väittävät, että kielto on vakavana esteenä kahdenvälisten suhteiden kehittymiselle.
Vaikka olemme myöntäneet, että myönteistä muutosta on tapahtunut ja että Kiinan poliittinen tilanne on kehittynyt Taivaallisen rauhan aukion tapahtumien jälkeen, tiettyjen perusihmisoikeuksien ja erityisesti poliittisten oikeuksien ja kansalaisoikeuksien kunnioittamisen alalla Kiina ei täytä vielä läheskään kansainvälisiä vaatimuksia. Esittämättä mitään suoria vaatimuksia olemme sen vuoksi jatkuvasti todenneet Kiinan korkeimmille viranomaisille, että asevientikiellon kumoamista helpottaisi huomattavasti se, että Kiina ryhtyisi sellaisiin konkreettisiin toimiin ihmisoikeuksien alalla, jotka saisivat Euroopan kansalaiset vakuuttumaan siitä, että tämä olisi oikea toimintatapa.
Tiedän, että monet jäsenvaltiot ovat halukkaita kumoamaan asevientikiellon, ja ne ovat myös todenneet sen julkisesti. Toiset pitävät sitä ennenaikaisena ja ovat huolissaan ihmisoikeustilanteesta. Ihmisoikeuskysymys nousi selvästi esiin parlamentin viime vuonna hyväksymässä päätöslauselmassa, jossa vastustettiin kiellon kumoamista.
Ne jäsenvaltiot, jotka kannattavat kiellon kumoamista, perustelevat kantaansa sillä, että aseiden vientiä koskevissa Euroopan unionin käytännesäännöissä vuonna 1998 käyttöön otetut valvontatoimet tekevät kiellon tarpeettomaksi. Myönnän, ettei tämä väite ole täysin perusteeton.
Haluan todella, että EU:n ja Kiinan välisessä tärkeässä strategisessa kumppanuudessa edistytään. Kiinasta on nopeasti kasvamassa maailmanlaajuinen toimija kaikilla sektoreilla, ja se on tällä hetkellä muun muassa toiseksi suurin kauppakumppanimme. Tämä on yksi tärkeimmistä ulkopoliittisista päämääristämme tulevina vuosina.
Näin ollen, kun otetaan huomioon asevientikiellon taustalla olevat syyt sekä asiaan liittyvät kumpaakin osapuolta koskevat tärkeät poliittiset ja symboliset näkökohdat, on ymmärrettävää, että tiettyjen jäsenvaltioiden mielestä aseiden vientikielto olisi kumottava vasta sitten, kun Kiina on ensin toteuttanut myönteisiä ja konkreettisia toimia ihmisoikeustilanteensa parantamiseksi.
Haluaisin myös sanoa muutaman sanan Euroopan parlamentin mietinnöstä, jossa käsitellään aseiden vientiä koskevien Euroopan unionin käytännesääntöjen soveltamista. Käytännesääntöjen vahvuus liittyy läheisesti keskusteluun Kiinaa koskevasta asevientikiellosta, sillä nämä säännöt ohjaavat jäsenvaltioiden asevientiä, mikäli kielto kumotaan. Vastuu asekaupasta on tällä hetkellä jäsenvaltioilla, mutta komissio kannattaa täysin asekaupan tarkastelua yhteisen ulko- ja turvallisuuspolitiikan näkökulmasta."@fi7
".
Permettez-moi tout d’abord de m’excuser de me présenter devant cette Assemblée pour un nouveau discours d’adieux. Je commence à savoir ce que Frank Sinatra a dû ressentir en faisant des tournées d’adieux à répétition jusqu’à l’âge de soixante-dix ans. J’espère que c’est réellement la dernière fois que ce Parlement doit me subir, mais c’est aux députés d’en décider.
Je félicite le rapporteur, qui a élaboré un document d’une importance capitale méritant une attention très minutieuse. Il met au défi les États membres d’appliquer des normes plus rigoureuses en matière de contrôle des exportations d’armements. Il réclame notamment une transparence accrue, un élément qui, en général, n’est pas directement associé au commerce des armes. Le rapport cherche également à augmenter le nombre de contrôles et de restrictions dans ce domaine, un point qui revêt une difficulté intrinsèque pour les États membres disposant d’industries d’armement développées.
Bien que se concentrant essentiellement sur l’amélioration des pratiques européennes, le rapport a une portée mondiale. Reconnaissant le potentiel de l’Union européenne en matière de promotion des meilleures pratiques dans le monde entier, il défend notamment l’idée d’un traité international sur le commerce des armes.
Nous ne devons pas perdre de vue - et je suis persuadé que le Parlement garde ce fait à l’esprit - qu’un demi-million de personnes environ meurent chaque année des suites de la violence liée aux armes de petit calibre et légères; c’est un fait à méditer. Vous n’ignorez pas que la Commission gère régulièrement, en collaboration avec d’autres organisations et ONG internationales, les conséquences des ventes d’armes inadéquates ou illégales. Nous mettons également en œuvre des projets spécifiques visant à réduire les accumulations d’armes présentant un caractère déstabilisateur à travers le monde. Un projet-pilote lancé par le Parlement européen est actuellement en cours. Il a pour objet d’étudier d’éventuelles actions supplémentaires. Il faut certainement en faire davantage. Je soutiens en particulier l’idée d’un accord international visant à renforcer le contrôle des ventes d’armes conventionnelles. C’est pourquoi la Commission a, dans le cadre d’actions communautaires plus générales, soutenu énergiquement l’adoption d’un Code de conduite international en matière d’exportations d’armes qui se fonde sur l’initiative de l’Union européenne.
Les États membres étudient actuellement la manière d’améliorer le Code de conduite et nous encourageons ces efforts visant à renforcer les contrôles communautaires sur les ventes d’armes conventionnelles. Le succès de cette initiative influencera l’actuel débat relatif à l’embargo sur les ventes d’armes à la Chine.
Nous connaissons tous l’importance de la Chine en tant que partenaire économique et acteur politique mondial dans les décennies à venir. La Chine revient, dans une très large mesure, à la position qui était la sienne jusqu’au milieu du XIXe siècle, lorsqu’elle représentait probablement 30% du PIB mondial. La relance historique à laquelle nous assistons est, dans son ensemble, extraordinairement bénéfique au reste du monde. L’intégration de la Chine en tant qu’économie ouverte dans l’économie mondiale est une opportunité pour nous tous.
Il n’est en aucun cas humiliant pour nous ou pour la Chine d’indiquer clairement de façon régulière que d’autres questions nous intéressent, celle des droits de l’homme par exemple. Je suis persuadé que nous verrons en temps utile une amélioration, à mesure que la situation politique de la Chine s’adapte à la situation économique. De nos jours, il est impossible qu’un pays reste totalement isolé. Il est impossible qu’un pays ouvre son économie tout en soumettant sa politique à un contrôle totalement rigide.
Je me réjouis de l’instauration de relations plus personnalisées avec la Chine dans les années à venir. J’espère que la Chine continuera à jouer un rôle positif dans la communauté internationale. J’attends avec impatience un dialogue sérieux avec la Chine au sujet des droits de l’homme, menant à des améliorations que M. Sun Yat Sen aurait sans aucun doute approuvées.
Les députés savent, compte tenu du fonctionnement de la politique étrangère et de sécurité commune, qu’il ne s’agit pas d’un dossier dans lequel la Commission prend les devants. Toutefois, le développement global de nos relations - excellentes dans l’ensemble - avec la Chine est clairement dans notre intérêt et l’embargo sur les armes s’inscrit naturellement dans ce contexte. Le Parlement n’ignore pas que l’embargo a été imposé par le Conseil européen en 1989, à la suite des événements de la place Tienanmen - aux prémices desquels j’ai pu assister aux premières loges puisque j’étais alors vice-président de la Banque asiatique de développement.
Cette année, la Chine a intensifié sa campagne en vue de la levée de l’embargo. Cette campagne se poursuit dans le cadre de la préparation du sommet Union européenne - Chine du mois prochain. Les autorités chinoises considèrent l’embargo comme une preuve de discrimination à leur égard. Elles affirment que l’interdiction n’a plus lieu d’être et entrave gravement le développement des relations bilatérales.
Même si nous avons reconnu l’émergence d’un changement positif et l’évolution de la situation politique en Chine depuis Tienanmen, le respect de certains droits de l’homme essentiels par Pékin, dans le domaine des droits politiques et civils notamment, reste nettement inférieur aux normes internationales. Par conséquent, sans faire de lien direct, nous répétons en permanence aux hauts dirigeants chinois que la levée de l’embargo serait grandement facilitée s’ils mettaient en œuvre, dans le domaine des droits de l’homme, des actions concrètes qui convaincraient le public européen de l’opportunité de cette démarche.
Je sais que plusieurs États membres sont favorables à la levée de l’embargo et l’ont déclaré publiquement. D’autres estiment que c’est prématuré et font part de leurs inquiétudes en matière de droits de l’homme. Ceux-ci étaient à l’avant-plan de la résolution adoptée par cette Assemblée l’année dernière contre la levée de l’interdiction.
Les États membres appelant à la levée de l’embargo partent du principe que les contrôles instaurés par le Code de conduite de l’Union européenne en matière de ventes d’armements, datant de 1998, rendent cette interdiction inutile. Je reconnais que cet argument n’est pas sans fondement.
Je suis très désireux de faire progresser notre important partenariat stratégique avec la Chine, un pays qui, d’une manière générale, devient rapidement un acteur mondial et qui est notamment notre second partenaire actuel en termes de volume d’échanges commerciaux. C’est l’un de nos principaux objectifs de politique étrangère pour les années à venir.
Ceci dit, compte tenu de la logique sur laquelle repose l’embargo et des importantes questions politiques et symboliques concernant les deux parties, il est compréhensible que certains États membres souhaitent que la levée de l’interdiction découle de démarches positives et concrètes de la Chine visant à améliorer sa situation en matière de droits de l’homme.
Je voudrais également dire quelques mots sur le rapport du Parlement européen concernant le fonctionnement du Code de conduite de l’Union européenne en matière d’exportations d’armements. La force du Code de conduite est étroitement liée au débat sur l’embargo frappant la Chine, car il orientera les pratiques des États membres en matière d’exportation si l’interdiction est levée. Les États membres sont actuellement compétents dans le domaine des exportations d’armes, mais la Commission s’associe pleinement à son examen dans le cadre de la politique étrangère et de sécurité commune."@fr8
"First of all, I apologise for appearing in front of the House for yet another farewell appearance. I am starting to know what Frank Sinatra must have felt like, as he staggered on making farewell appearances until he was into his seventies. I hope this really is the last afternoon that the House will have to endure me, but that is in Parliament's hands.
I commend the rapporteur for putting together a substantial document which merits very careful attention. It challenges Member States to attain more stringent standards on the control of arms exports. Amongst other things, it asks for more transparency, not something that is normally immediately associated with the arms trade. It also seeks further controls and limitations on such trade, inherently difficult areas for those Member States with significant arms industries.
Whilst the report focuses primarily on improvement in European practice, its scope is global. Recognising the European Union’s potential to promote best practice around the world, it advocates, among other things, an international arms trade treaty.
We should not forget - and I am sure Parliament has not - the sobering fact that around half a million people die each year as a result of violence linked to small arms and light weapons. As you are well aware, the Commission is regularly involved, with other international organisations and NGOs, in dealing with the consequences of inappropriate or illegal arms sales. We are also implementing some specific projects to reduce destabilising accumulations of weapons around the world. A pilot project initiated by the European Parliament is under way to see what else can be done. More certainly needs to be done. I particularly support the idea of an international agreement to strengthen the control of conventional arms sales. That is why the Commission has, as part of wider EU efforts, strongly supported the adoption of an international Code of Conduct on arms exports based on the European Union’s initiative.
Member States are currently considering how to improve the Code of Conduct and we are encouraging these efforts to strengthen EU controls on conventional arms sales. The success of this endeavour will be a factor in the ongoing China arms embargo debate.
We all know the importance of China as an economic partner and a political player in the world in the coming decades. China is, to a considerable extent, regaining the position that it had in the world until the middle of the 19th century, when it was still responsible for probably 30% of global GDP. The historic recovery we are witnessing is, on the whole, extraordinarily beneficial to the rest of the world. China's integration as an open economy into the world economy is good for all of us.
It is not in any way demeaning to us or the Chinese if we regularly make it clear that there are other issues that concern us, such as issues of human rights. I am sure we shall in due course see an improvement as the political situation in China matches the economic one. It is impossible these days for any country to remain completely self-contained. It is impossible for a country to open up its economy whilst keeping politics under absolutely rigid control.
I look forward to a more intimate relationship with China in the years ahead. I hope China will continue to play a positive role in the international community. I look forward to a serious dialogue with China about human rights, leading to improvements of which I am sure Mr Sun Yat-Sen would have approved.
As Members know, given the way in which the common foreign and security policy operates, this is not an issue on which the Commission takes a lead. Nevertheless, we have an obvious interest in the overall development of our relations with China, which by and large are excellent, and the arms embargo naturally operates in that context. As Parliament knows, the embargo was imposed by the European Council in 1989, following the events in Tiananmen Square, the early stages of which I was able to witness at first hand as the then vice-chairman of the Asia Development Bank.
This year, China has intensified its campaign to have the ban lifted. That campaign continues in the run-up to the summit between the European Union and China next month. The Chinese authorities consider the embargo to be evidence of discrimination against them; they argue that the ban is obsolete. They claim that it severely hinders the further development of bilateral relations.
Whilst we have acknowledged that positive change has occurred and that the political situation in China has moved on since Tiananmen, China's observance of some basic human rights, notably in the area of political and civil rights, continues to fall well short of international norms. Without making any direct link we have, therefore, consistently told the Chinese authorities at the highest level that the lifting of the embargo would be greatly assisted if they could take the sort of concrete steps in the field of human rights that would convince the European public that that was an appropriate course of action.
I know that a number of Member States are favourably disposed towards lifting the embargo and have made that view public. Others believe that it is premature, citing concerns about human rights. Human rights were an issue that figured prominently in the resolution passed by this House last year against lifting the ban.
Those Member States arguing for lifting the ban use the rationale that the controls introduced in the 1998 EU Code of Conduct on arms sales render it nugatory. I acknowledge that this argument is not without substance.
I am very keen to move forward with our important strategic partnership with China, a country that is rapidly emerging as a global player across the board, and is now, amongst other things, our second largest trading partner. That is one of our top foreign policy goals in the years to come.
That said, given the underlying logic of the embargo and the significant political and symbolic issues involved for both sides, it is understandable that some Member States argue that the lifting of the ban should take place against a background of positive and tangible steps by China to improve its human rights situation.
I should also like to say a few words on the European Parliament’s report on the operation of the EU’s Code of Conduct on arms exports. The strength of the Code of Conduct is closely related to the China embargo debate, since it will guide Member States' export practice if the ban is lifted. Responsibility for the arms trade currently rests with Member States, but the Commission is fully associated with its consideration under the common foreign and security policy."@hu11
".
Innanzi tutto, scusatemi se mi presento in Aula per l’ennesimo discorso di addio. Sto cominciando a capire cosa deve aver provato Frank Sinatra, trascinandosi da un concerto d’addio all’altro fino all’età di settant’anni. Spero proprio che questo sia l’ultimo pomeriggio in cui l’Assemblea mi dovrà sopportare, ma si tratta di una decisione che spetta al Parlamento.
Mi congratulo con il relatore per avere elaborato un documento di rilievo che merita di essere esaminato con attenzione. Riuscire a ottenere
più rigidi sul controllo delle esportazioni di armi costituisce una sfida per gli Stati membri. A tal fine, tra l’altro, è necessaria una maggiore trasparenza, requisito che di solito non viene immediatamente associato al commercio di armi. E’ inoltre necessario effettuare altri controlli e imporre ulteriori limiti a tale commercio, settori intrinsecamente difficili per gli Stati membri dotati di importanti industrie degli armamenti.
La relazione s’incentra soprattutto sul miglioramento delle prassi in Europa, ma la sua portata è globale. Riconoscendo che l’Unione europea è dotata del potenziale atto a promuovere migliori prassi in tutto il mondo, la relazione sostiene inoltre l’elaborazione di un Trattato internazionale sul commercio delle armi.
Non dobbiamo dimenticare – e di certo il Parlamento se ne ricorda bene – che ogni anno circa mezzo milione di persone muore per atti di violenza commessi con armi di piccolo calibro e armi leggere, fatto che dovrebbe farci riflettere. Come ben sapete, la Commissione si occupa regolarmente, assieme ad altre ONG e organizzazioni internazionali, delle conseguenze della vendita di armi improprie o illegali. Stiamo inoltre attuando alcuni progetti specifici per ridurre i destabilizzanti accumuli di armi a livello mondiale. E’ in corso un progetto pilota avviato dal Parlamento europeo che ha lo scopo di valutare quali ulteriori iniziative si possano intraprendere. Sicuramente sono necessari altri interventi. Sono particolarmente favorevole all’idea di elaborare un accordo internazionale volto a rafforzare il controllo delle vendite di armi convenzionali. Ecco perché la Commissione, nell’ambito di più ampi sforzi da parte dell’Unione europea, ha vivamente sostenuto l’adozione di un codice di condotta internazionale sulle esportazioni di armi basato sull’iniziativa dell’Unione europea.
Attualmente gli Stati membri stanno valutando il modo di migliorare il codice di condotta e noi incoraggiamo gli sforzi tesi a rafforzare i controlli dell’Unione europea sulle vendite di armi convenzionali. Il successo di questo sforzo sarà determinante nel dibattito in corso sull’
sulle armi imposto alla Cina.
Conosciamo tutti l’importanza che avrà la Cina nel mondo come
economico e attore politico nei prossimi decenni. La Cina sta riguadagnando, in maniera considerevole, la posizione che occupava nel mondo fino alla metà del XIX secolo, quando probabilmente era ancora responsabile del 30 per cento del PIL globale. La storica ripresa alla quale stiamo assistendo è, nel complesso, straordinariamente salutare per il resto del mondo. L’integrazione della Cina nell’economia mondiale come economia aperta è vantaggiosa per tutti noi.
Il fatto di ribadire regolarmente il nostro interesse anche per altre questioni, come quella dei diritti umani, non è assolutamente degradante né per noi né per i cinesi. Sono certo che a tempo debito assisteremo a un miglioramento, non appena in Cina la situazione politica andrà di pari passo con quella economica. Oggigiorno un paese non può rimanere completamente a sé stante. E’ impossibile che un paese apra la propria economia mantenendo al contempo la politica sotto il più rigido controllo.
Mi auguro che nei prossimi anni s’instauri una relazione più stretta con la Cina e che questo paese continui a svolgere un ruolo concreto nella comunità internazionale. Spero vivamente che si possa tenere con la Cina un serio dibattito sui diritti umani, dal quale scaturiscano miglioramenti che, ne sono certo, Sun Yat-Sen avrebbe approvato.
Come i deputati sanno, dato il modo in cui funziona la politica estera e di sicurezza comune, su tale questione la Commissione può prendere l’iniziativa. Ciononostante, siamo indubbiamente interessati al generale evolversi delle nostre relazioni con la Cina, che nel complesso sono soddisfacenti, e ovviamente l’
sugli armamenti rientra in tale contesto. Come il Parlamento sa, l’
è stato imposto dal Consiglio europeo nel 1989, a seguito degli avvenimenti di Piazza Tienanmen, alle cui prime fasi ho potuto assistere di persona quando rivestivo la carica di vicepresidente della Banca asiatica di sviluppo.
Quest’anno, la Cina ha intensificato la propria campagna sulla revoca dell’
. Questa campagna continuerà anche nel periodo precedente al vertice tra Unione europea e Cina che si terrà il mese prossimo. Le autorità cinesi ritengono che l’
sia la riprova della discriminazione attuata nei loro confronti e sostengono che il divieto è obsoleto. A loro parere, esso ostacola seriamente l’ulteriore sviluppo delle relazioni bilaterali.
Se, da un lato, abbiamo riconosciuto che sono avvenuti cambiamenti positivi e che dopo Tienanmen la situazione politica in Cina è progredita, dall’altro il rispetto di alcuni diritti umani fondamentali da parte di questo paese è tutt’altro che conforme alle norme internazionali. Senza stabilire alcun collegamento diretto, quindi, abbiamo costantemente detto alle massime autorità cinesi che la revoca dell’
riscuoterebbe grandi consensi se, nell’ambito dei diritti umani, la Cina adottasse misure concrete atte a convincere i cittadini europei dell’opportunità di tale scelta.
So che diversi Stati membri sono favorevoli alla revoca dell’
e hanno reso pubblica la loro opinione. Altri ritengono che si tratti di un’azione prematura, in quanto esprimono preoccupazione per i diritti umani. La questione dei diritti umani occupava una posizione di rilievo nella risoluzione adottata lo scorso anno dal Parlamento contro la revoca dell’
.
Gli Stati membri che sostengono la revoca dell’
partono dal presupposto che i controlli introdotti nel codice di condotta sulla vendita di armi nel 1998 ne inficino la validità. Devo ammettere che questa argomentazione non è priva di fondamento.
Sono molto ansioso di portare avanti il nostro importante partenariato strategico con la Cina, un paese che sta rapidamente emergendo come attore globale a tutti i livelli e ora è, tra l’altro, il nostro secondo maggiore
commerciale. Negli anni a venire questa sarà una delle nostre massime priorità in politica estera.
Detto questo, considerata la logica sottesa all’
e le importanti questioni politiche e simboliche in gioco per entrambe le parti, è comprensibile che alcuni Stati membri sostengano la necessità di revocare l’
alla luce dei positivi e concreti passi avanti compiuti dalla Cina al fine di migliorare la propria situazione dei diritti umani.
Vorrei inoltre spendere alcune parole sulla relazione del Parlamento riguardo alla validità del codice di condotta dell’Unione europea per le esportazioni di armi. La forza del codice di condotta è strettamente correlata alla discussione sull’
alla Cina, poiché orienterà le prassi degli Stati membri in materia di esportazione nel caso in cui il divieto venga revocato. Attualmente la responsabilità del commercio di armi spetta agli Stati membri, ma la Commissione s’interessa pienamente alla questione conformemente a quanto previsto dalla politica estera e di sicurezza comune."@it12
"First of all, I apologise for appearing in front of the House for yet another farewell appearance. I am starting to know what Frank Sinatra must have felt like, as he staggered on making farewell appearances until he was into his seventies. I hope this really is the last afternoon that the House will have to endure me, but that is in Parliament's hands.
I commend the rapporteur for putting together a substantial document which merits very careful attention. It challenges Member States to attain more stringent standards on the control of arms exports. Amongst other things, it asks for more transparency, not something that is normally immediately associated with the arms trade. It also seeks further controls and limitations on such trade, inherently difficult areas for those Member States with significant arms industries.
Whilst the report focuses primarily on improvement in European practice, its scope is global. Recognising the European Union’s potential to promote best practice around the world, it advocates, among other things, an international arms trade treaty.
We should not forget - and I am sure Parliament has not - the sobering fact that around half a million people die each year as a result of violence linked to small arms and light weapons. As you are well aware, the Commission is regularly involved, with other international organisations and NGOs, in dealing with the consequences of inappropriate or illegal arms sales. We are also implementing some specific projects to reduce destabilising accumulations of weapons around the world. A pilot project initiated by the European Parliament is under way to see what else can be done. More certainly needs to be done. I particularly support the idea of an international agreement to strengthen the control of conventional arms sales. That is why the Commission has, as part of wider EU efforts, strongly supported the adoption of an international Code of Conduct on arms exports based on the European Union’s initiative.
Member States are currently considering how to improve the Code of Conduct and we are encouraging these efforts to strengthen EU controls on conventional arms sales. The success of this endeavour will be a factor in the ongoing China arms embargo debate.
We all know the importance of China as an economic partner and a political player in the world in the coming decades. China is, to a considerable extent, regaining the position that it had in the world until the middle of the 19th century, when it was still responsible for probably 30% of global GDP. The historic recovery we are witnessing is, on the whole, extraordinarily beneficial to the rest of the world. China's integration as an open economy into the world economy is good for all of us.
It is not in any way demeaning to us or the Chinese if we regularly make it clear that there are other issues that concern us, such as issues of human rights. I am sure we shall in due course see an improvement as the political situation in China matches the economic one. It is impossible these days for any country to remain completely self-contained. It is impossible for a country to open up its economy whilst keeping politics under absolutely rigid control.
I look forward to a more intimate relationship with China in the years ahead. I hope China will continue to play a positive role in the international community. I look forward to a serious dialogue with China about human rights, leading to improvements of which I am sure Mr Sun Yat-Sen would have approved.
As Members know, given the way in which the common foreign and security policy operates, this is not an issue on which the Commission takes a lead. Nevertheless, we have an obvious interest in the overall development of our relations with China, which by and large are excellent, and the arms embargo naturally operates in that context. As Parliament knows, the embargo was imposed by the European Council in 1989, following the events in Tiananmen Square, the early stages of which I was able to witness at first hand as the then vice-chairman of the Asia Development Bank.
This year, China has intensified its campaign to have the ban lifted. That campaign continues in the run-up to the summit between the European Union and China next month. The Chinese authorities consider the embargo to be evidence of discrimination against them; they argue that the ban is obsolete. They claim that it severely hinders the further development of bilateral relations.
Whilst we have acknowledged that positive change has occurred and that the political situation in China has moved on since Tiananmen, China's observance of some basic human rights, notably in the area of political and civil rights, continues to fall well short of international norms. Without making any direct link we have, therefore, consistently told the Chinese authorities at the highest level that the lifting of the embargo would be greatly assisted if they could take the sort of concrete steps in the field of human rights that would convince the European public that that was an appropriate course of action.
I know that a number of Member States are favourably disposed towards lifting the embargo and have made that view public. Others believe that it is premature, citing concerns about human rights. Human rights were an issue that figured prominently in the resolution passed by this House last year against lifting the ban.
Those Member States arguing for lifting the ban use the rationale that the controls introduced in the 1998 EU Code of Conduct on arms sales render it nugatory. I acknowledge that this argument is not without substance.
I am very keen to move forward with our important strategic partnership with China, a country that is rapidly emerging as a global player across the board, and is now, amongst other things, our second largest trading partner. That is one of our top foreign policy goals in the years to come.
That said, given the underlying logic of the embargo and the significant political and symbolic issues involved for both sides, it is understandable that some Member States argue that the lifting of the ban should take place against a background of positive and tangible steps by China to improve its human rights situation.
I should also like to say a few words on the European Parliament’s report on the operation of the EU’s Code of Conduct on arms exports. The strength of the Code of Conduct is closely related to the China embargo debate, since it will guide Member States' export practice if the ban is lifted. Responsibility for the arms trade currently rests with Member States, but the Commission is fully associated with its consideration under the common foreign and security policy."@lt14
"First of all, I apologise for appearing in front of the House for yet another farewell appearance. I am starting to know what Frank Sinatra must have felt like, as he staggered on making farewell appearances until he was into his seventies. I hope this really is the last afternoon that the House will have to endure me, but that is in Parliament's hands.
I commend the rapporteur for putting together a substantial document which merits very careful attention. It challenges Member States to attain more stringent standards on the control of arms exports. Amongst other things, it asks for more transparency, not something that is normally immediately associated with the arms trade. It also seeks further controls and limitations on such trade, inherently difficult areas for those Member States with significant arms industries.
Whilst the report focuses primarily on improvement in European practice, its scope is global. Recognising the European Union’s potential to promote best practice around the world, it advocates, among other things, an international arms trade treaty.
We should not forget - and I am sure Parliament has not - the sobering fact that around half a million people die each year as a result of violence linked to small arms and light weapons. As you are well aware, the Commission is regularly involved, with other international organisations and NGOs, in dealing with the consequences of inappropriate or illegal arms sales. We are also implementing some specific projects to reduce destabilising accumulations of weapons around the world. A pilot project initiated by the European Parliament is under way to see what else can be done. More certainly needs to be done. I particularly support the idea of an international agreement to strengthen the control of conventional arms sales. That is why the Commission has, as part of wider EU efforts, strongly supported the adoption of an international Code of Conduct on arms exports based on the European Union’s initiative.
Member States are currently considering how to improve the Code of Conduct and we are encouraging these efforts to strengthen EU controls on conventional arms sales. The success of this endeavour will be a factor in the ongoing China arms embargo debate.
We all know the importance of China as an economic partner and a political player in the world in the coming decades. China is, to a considerable extent, regaining the position that it had in the world until the middle of the 19th century, when it was still responsible for probably 30% of global GDP. The historic recovery we are witnessing is, on the whole, extraordinarily beneficial to the rest of the world. China's integration as an open economy into the world economy is good for all of us.
It is not in any way demeaning to us or the Chinese if we regularly make it clear that there are other issues that concern us, such as issues of human rights. I am sure we shall in due course see an improvement as the political situation in China matches the economic one. It is impossible these days for any country to remain completely self-contained. It is impossible for a country to open up its economy whilst keeping politics under absolutely rigid control.
I look forward to a more intimate relationship with China in the years ahead. I hope China will continue to play a positive role in the international community. I look forward to a serious dialogue with China about human rights, leading to improvements of which I am sure Mr Sun Yat-Sen would have approved.
As Members know, given the way in which the common foreign and security policy operates, this is not an issue on which the Commission takes a lead. Nevertheless, we have an obvious interest in the overall development of our relations with China, which by and large are excellent, and the arms embargo naturally operates in that context. As Parliament knows, the embargo was imposed by the European Council in 1989, following the events in Tiananmen Square, the early stages of which I was able to witness at first hand as the then vice-chairman of the Asia Development Bank.
This year, China has intensified its campaign to have the ban lifted. That campaign continues in the run-up to the summit between the European Union and China next month. The Chinese authorities consider the embargo to be evidence of discrimination against them; they argue that the ban is obsolete. They claim that it severely hinders the further development of bilateral relations.
Whilst we have acknowledged that positive change has occurred and that the political situation in China has moved on since Tiananmen, China's observance of some basic human rights, notably in the area of political and civil rights, continues to fall well short of international norms. Without making any direct link we have, therefore, consistently told the Chinese authorities at the highest level that the lifting of the embargo would be greatly assisted if they could take the sort of concrete steps in the field of human rights that would convince the European public that that was an appropriate course of action.
I know that a number of Member States are favourably disposed towards lifting the embargo and have made that view public. Others believe that it is premature, citing concerns about human rights. Human rights were an issue that figured prominently in the resolution passed by this House last year against lifting the ban.
Those Member States arguing for lifting the ban use the rationale that the controls introduced in the 1998 EU Code of Conduct on arms sales render it nugatory. I acknowledge that this argument is not without substance.
I am very keen to move forward with our important strategic partnership with China, a country that is rapidly emerging as a global player across the board, and is now, amongst other things, our second largest trading partner. That is one of our top foreign policy goals in the years to come.
That said, given the underlying logic of the embargo and the significant political and symbolic issues involved for both sides, it is understandable that some Member States argue that the lifting of the ban should take place against a background of positive and tangible steps by China to improve its human rights situation.
I should also like to say a few words on the European Parliament’s report on the operation of the EU’s Code of Conduct on arms exports. The strength of the Code of Conduct is closely related to the China embargo debate, since it will guide Member States' export practice if the ban is lifted. Responsibility for the arms trade currently rests with Member States, but the Commission is fully associated with its consideration under the common foreign and security policy."@lv13
"First of all, I apologise for appearing in front of the House for yet another farewell appearance. I am starting to know what Frank Sinatra must have felt like, as he staggered on making farewell appearances until he was into his seventies. I hope this really is the last afternoon that the House will have to endure me, but that is in Parliament's hands.
I commend the rapporteur for putting together a substantial document which merits very careful attention. It challenges Member States to attain more stringent standards on the control of arms exports. Amongst other things, it asks for more transparency, not something that is normally immediately associated with the arms trade. It also seeks further controls and limitations on such trade, inherently difficult areas for those Member States with significant arms industries.
Whilst the report focuses primarily on improvement in European practice, its scope is global. Recognising the European Union’s potential to promote best practice around the world, it advocates, among other things, an international arms trade treaty.
We should not forget - and I am sure Parliament has not - the sobering fact that around half a million people die each year as a result of violence linked to small arms and light weapons. As you are well aware, the Commission is regularly involved, with other international organisations and NGOs, in dealing with the consequences of inappropriate or illegal arms sales. We are also implementing some specific projects to reduce destabilising accumulations of weapons around the world. A pilot project initiated by the European Parliament is under way to see what else can be done. More certainly needs to be done. I particularly support the idea of an international agreement to strengthen the control of conventional arms sales. That is why the Commission has, as part of wider EU efforts, strongly supported the adoption of an international Code of Conduct on arms exports based on the European Union’s initiative.
Member States are currently considering how to improve the Code of Conduct and we are encouraging these efforts to strengthen EU controls on conventional arms sales. The success of this endeavour will be a factor in the ongoing China arms embargo debate.
We all know the importance of China as an economic partner and a political player in the world in the coming decades. China is, to a considerable extent, regaining the position that it had in the world until the middle of the 19th century, when it was still responsible for probably 30% of global GDP. The historic recovery we are witnessing is, on the whole, extraordinarily beneficial to the rest of the world. China's integration as an open economy into the world economy is good for all of us.
It is not in any way demeaning to us or the Chinese if we regularly make it clear that there are other issues that concern us, such as issues of human rights. I am sure we shall in due course see an improvement as the political situation in China matches the economic one. It is impossible these days for any country to remain completely self-contained. It is impossible for a country to open up its economy whilst keeping politics under absolutely rigid control.
I look forward to a more intimate relationship with China in the years ahead. I hope China will continue to play a positive role in the international community. I look forward to a serious dialogue with China about human rights, leading to improvements of which I am sure Mr Sun Yat-Sen would have approved.
As Members know, given the way in which the common foreign and security policy operates, this is not an issue on which the Commission takes a lead. Nevertheless, we have an obvious interest in the overall development of our relations with China, which by and large are excellent, and the arms embargo naturally operates in that context. As Parliament knows, the embargo was imposed by the European Council in 1989, following the events in Tiananmen Square, the early stages of which I was able to witness at first hand as the then vice-chairman of the Asia Development Bank.
This year, China has intensified its campaign to have the ban lifted. That campaign continues in the run-up to the summit between the European Union and China next month. The Chinese authorities consider the embargo to be evidence of discrimination against them; they argue that the ban is obsolete. They claim that it severely hinders the further development of bilateral relations.
Whilst we have acknowledged that positive change has occurred and that the political situation in China has moved on since Tiananmen, China's observance of some basic human rights, notably in the area of political and civil rights, continues to fall well short of international norms. Without making any direct link we have, therefore, consistently told the Chinese authorities at the highest level that the lifting of the embargo would be greatly assisted if they could take the sort of concrete steps in the field of human rights that would convince the European public that that was an appropriate course of action.
I know that a number of Member States are favourably disposed towards lifting the embargo and have made that view public. Others believe that it is premature, citing concerns about human rights. Human rights were an issue that figured prominently in the resolution passed by this House last year against lifting the ban.
Those Member States arguing for lifting the ban use the rationale that the controls introduced in the 1998 EU Code of Conduct on arms sales render it nugatory. I acknowledge that this argument is not without substance.
I am very keen to move forward with our important strategic partnership with China, a country that is rapidly emerging as a global player across the board, and is now, amongst other things, our second largest trading partner. That is one of our top foreign policy goals in the years to come.
That said, given the underlying logic of the embargo and the significant political and symbolic issues involved for both sides, it is understandable that some Member States argue that the lifting of the ban should take place against a background of positive and tangible steps by China to improve its human rights situation.
I should also like to say a few words on the European Parliament’s report on the operation of the EU’s Code of Conduct on arms exports. The strength of the Code of Conduct is closely related to the China embargo debate, since it will guide Member States' export practice if the ban is lifted. Responsibility for the arms trade currently rests with Member States, but the Commission is fully associated with its consideration under the common foreign and security policy."@mt15
"Allereerst wil ik mij verontschuldigen voor het feit dat ik in het Parlement verschijn om wederom een afscheidsoptreden te geven. Ik begin te begrijpen hoe Frank Sinatra zich gevoeld moet hebben, die van afscheidsoptreden naar afscheidsoptreden wankelde tot hij ver in de zeventig was. Ik hoop dat dit werkelijk de laatste middag is dat u mij zult moeten verdragen, maar dat heeft het Parlement zelf in de hand.
Mijn complimenten aan de rapporteur voor het belangrijke document dat hij heeft opgesteld en dat het verdient uiterst zorgvuldig bestudeerd te worden. Het houdt een uitdaging aan de lidstaten in om strengere controles op wapenexport in te stellen. In het verslag wordt onder meer opgeroepen tot een grotere transparantie, iets dat gewoonlijk niet direct in verband wordt gebracht met de wapenhandel. Ook wordt gestreefd naar meer controle op en beperking van deze handel, en voor de lidstaten met een aanzienlijke wapenindustrie zijn dat per definitie lastige onderwerpen.
De focus van het verslag ligt weliswaar hoofdzakelijk op verbetering van de Europese praktijk, maar de draagwijdte ervan is mondiaal. De rapporteur heeft oog voor het potentieel van de Europese Unie om overal ter wereld beste praktijken te bevorderen en breekt onder meer een lans voor een internationaal verdrag inzake wapenhandel.
We mogen niet de ontnuchterende realiteit vergeten – en ik ben ervan overtuigd dat het Parlement dat ook niet doet – dat ieder jaar ongeveer een half miljoen mensen omkomen als gevolg van geweld dat verband houdt met handvuurwapens en lichte wapens. Zoals u weet, houdt de Commissie zich, samen met andere internationale organisaties en NGO’s, regelmatig bezig met het aanpakken van de gevolgen van ongepaste of illegale wapenhandel. We voeren ook een aantal specifieke projecten uit om destabiliserende opeenhopingen van wapens overal ter wereld terug te dringen. Er staat een proefproject op stapel dat is geïnitieerd door het Parlement en dat ten doel heeft te onderzoeken wat er nog meer gedaan kan worden. Er moet in elk geval meer gedaan worden. Ik ben nadrukkelijk voorstander van een internationale overeenkomst ter versterking van de controle op de handel in conventionele wapens. Daarom heeft de Commissie, in het bredere kader van EU-inspanningen, zich sterk gemaakt voor de aanneming van een internationale gedragscode voor wapenexporten, die gebaseerd is op het initiatief van de EU.
De lidstaten buigen zich momenteel over de vraag hoe de gedragscode verbeterd kan worden, en deze pogingen om de controlemaatregelen van de EU op de verkoop van conventionele wapens te versterken, hebben onze steun. Het succes van deze inspanningen zal van invloed zijn op het huidige debat over het wapenembargo tegen China.
Wij weten allemaal dat China in de komende decennia een belangrijke economische en politieke wereldspeler zal zijn. China is in hoge mate bezig de positie te heroveren die het in de wereld had tot halverwege de negentiende eeuw, toen het nog waarschijnlijk 30 procent van het mondiaal bbp voor zijn rekening nam. Het historisch herstel waarvan wij getuige zijn, is al met al buitengewoon gunstig voor de rest van de wereld. Wanneer China als een open economie integreert in de wereldeconomie, is dat goed voor ons allemaal.
Het is noch voor ons, noch voor de Chinezen vernederend als wij er regelmatig op wijzen dat er andere zaken zijn die ons zorgen baren, zoals mensenrechtenkwesties. Ik twijfel er niet aan dat zich in de loop der tijd een verbetering zal aftekenen naarmate de politieke situatie in China steeds meer op één lijn komt met de economische. Het is in deze tijd onmogelijk voor welk land dan ook om volledig op zichzelf te staan. Een land kan onmogelijk zijn economie openstellen en tegelijkertijd volstrekt rigide controle blijven uitoefenen op het politieke vlak.
Ik zie ernaar uit dat wij in de jaren die voor ons liggen nauwere betrekkingen met China kunnen aanknopen. Ik hoop dat China een positieve rol zal blijven spelen in de internationale gemeenschap. Ik zie uit naar een serieuze dialoog met China over mensenrechten, die zal leiden tot verbeteringen die ongetwijfeld de goedkeuring van de heer Sun Yat-Sen hadden kunnen wegdragen.
Zoals de geachte afgevaardigden weten, is dit niet een gebied waarop de Commissie het voortouw neemt, gezien de wijze waarop het gemeenschappelijk buitenlands en veiligheidsbeleid georganiseerd is. Niettemin hebben wij vanzelfsprekend belang bij de algehele ontwikkeling van onze betrekkingen met China, die door de bank genomen uitstekend zijn, en het is natuurlijk in die context dat het wapenembargo van kracht is. Zoals u weet heeft de Europese Raad het embargo in 1989 ingesteld, naar aanleiding van de gebeurtenissen op het Plein van de Hemelse Vrede; als toenmalig vice-president van de Aziatische Ontwikkelingsbank ben ik overigens getuige geweest van het begin van die gebeurtenissen.
Dit jaar heeft China zijn campagne tegen het embargo opgevoerd. Die campagne is in de aanloop naar de topconferentie tussen de Europese Unie en China, die volgende maand gehouden wordt, nog steeds aan de gang. De Chinese autoriteiten vinden het embargo een bewijs dat zij gediscrimineerd worden; zij stellen dat het achterhaald is. Zij beweren dat het verbod op wapenhandel de verdere ontwikkeling van de bilaterale betrekkingen nadrukkelijk in de weg staat.
Hoewel wij erkennen dat er positieve veranderingen hebben plaatsgevonden en dat de politieke situatie in China verbeterd is sinds de gebeurtenissen op het Plein van de Hemelse Vrede, voldoet China nog bij lange na niet aan de internationale normen wat betreft de eerbiediging van een aantal fundamentele mensenrechten, met name op het gebied van politieke en burgerrechten. Zonder rechtstreekse verbanden te leggen, hebben wij de Chinese autoriteiten op het hoogste niveau derhalve consequent voorgehouden dat de opheffing van het embargo een heel eind dichterbij zou komen als zij op het gebied van de mensenrechten een aantal concrete stappen zouden zetten. Het Europese publiek moet er in ieder geval van worden overtuigd dat het juist zou zijn het embargo op te heffen.
Ik weet dat sommige lidstaten welwillend tegenover opheffing van het embargo staan en dit ook niet onder stoelen of banken hebben gestoken. Andere zijn van mening dat opheffing voorbarig zou zijn en wijzen op de mensenrechtensituatie, die aanleiding geeft tot zorg. Het mensenrechtenvraagstuk nam een prominente plaats in in de resolutie van vorig jaar waarin dit Parlement zich uitsprak tegen opheffing van het verbod.
De lidstaten die er voorstander van zijn het embargo op te heffen voeren daarvoor als reden aan dat de controlemaatregelen die zijn geïntroduceerd in de EU-gedragscode uit 1998 betreffende wapenuitvoer het embargo zinloos hebben gemaakt. Ik geef toe dat hier wel iets in zit.
Ik ben er zeer op gebrand ons belangrijke strategische partnerschap met China – een land dat zich over de hele linie in hoog tempo ontpopt als wereldspeler en dat nu, onder andere, onze op één na grootste handelspartner is – verder uit te bouwen. Dat zal de komende jaren een van de hoogste prioriteiten van ons buitenlands beleid zijn.
Dit gezegd hebbende, vind ik het, gezien de onderliggende logica van het embargo en de belangrijke politieke en symbolische kwesties die aan beide zijden meespelen, begrijpelijk dat sommige lidstaten stellen dat tegenover de opheffing van het embargo positieve en concrete maatregelen van China ter verbetering van de mensenrechtensituatie moeten staan.
Ik wil voorts enkele opmerkingen maken over het verslag van het Europees Parlement over de uitvoering van de gedragscode van de Europese Unie betreffende wapenuitvoer. De kracht van de gedragscode hangt nauw samen met het debat over het embargo tegen China. Als het embargo wordt opgeheven, zal de gedragscode immers als leidraad dienen voor de exportpraktijk van de lidstaten. De verantwoordelijkheid voor de wapenhandel berust momenteel bij de lidstaten, maar de Commissie is volledig betrokken bij de gedachtewisselingen erover in het kader van het gemeenschappelijk buitenlands en veiligheidsbeleid."@nl3
"First of all, I apologise for appearing in front of the House for yet another farewell appearance. I am starting to know what Frank Sinatra must have felt like, as he staggered on making farewell appearances until he was into his seventies. I hope this really is the last afternoon that the House will have to endure me, but that is in Parliament's hands.
I commend the rapporteur for putting together a substantial document which merits very careful attention. It challenges Member States to attain more stringent standards on the control of arms exports. Amongst other things, it asks for more transparency, not something that is normally immediately associated with the arms trade. It also seeks further controls and limitations on such trade, inherently difficult areas for those Member States with significant arms industries.
Whilst the report focuses primarily on improvement in European practice, its scope is global. Recognising the European Union’s potential to promote best practice around the world, it advocates, among other things, an international arms trade treaty.
We should not forget - and I am sure Parliament has not - the sobering fact that around half a million people die each year as a result of violence linked to small arms and light weapons. As you are well aware, the Commission is regularly involved, with other international organisations and NGOs, in dealing with the consequences of inappropriate or illegal arms sales. We are also implementing some specific projects to reduce destabilising accumulations of weapons around the world. A pilot project initiated by the European Parliament is under way to see what else can be done. More certainly needs to be done. I particularly support the idea of an international agreement to strengthen the control of conventional arms sales. That is why the Commission has, as part of wider EU efforts, strongly supported the adoption of an international Code of Conduct on arms exports based on the European Union’s initiative.
Member States are currently considering how to improve the Code of Conduct and we are encouraging these efforts to strengthen EU controls on conventional arms sales. The success of this endeavour will be a factor in the ongoing China arms embargo debate.
We all know the importance of China as an economic partner and a political player in the world in the coming decades. China is, to a considerable extent, regaining the position that it had in the world until the middle of the 19th century, when it was still responsible for probably 30% of global GDP. The historic recovery we are witnessing is, on the whole, extraordinarily beneficial to the rest of the world. China's integration as an open economy into the world economy is good for all of us.
It is not in any way demeaning to us or the Chinese if we regularly make it clear that there are other issues that concern us, such as issues of human rights. I am sure we shall in due course see an improvement as the political situation in China matches the economic one. It is impossible these days for any country to remain completely self-contained. It is impossible for a country to open up its economy whilst keeping politics under absolutely rigid control.
I look forward to a more intimate relationship with China in the years ahead. I hope China will continue to play a positive role in the international community. I look forward to a serious dialogue with China about human rights, leading to improvements of which I am sure Mr Sun Yat-Sen would have approved.
As Members know, given the way in which the common foreign and security policy operates, this is not an issue on which the Commission takes a lead. Nevertheless, we have an obvious interest in the overall development of our relations with China, which by and large are excellent, and the arms embargo naturally operates in that context. As Parliament knows, the embargo was imposed by the European Council in 1989, following the events in Tiananmen Square, the early stages of which I was able to witness at first hand as the then vice-chairman of the Asia Development Bank.
This year, China has intensified its campaign to have the ban lifted. That campaign continues in the run-up to the summit between the European Union and China next month. The Chinese authorities consider the embargo to be evidence of discrimination against them; they argue that the ban is obsolete. They claim that it severely hinders the further development of bilateral relations.
Whilst we have acknowledged that positive change has occurred and that the political situation in China has moved on since Tiananmen, China's observance of some basic human rights, notably in the area of political and civil rights, continues to fall well short of international norms. Without making any direct link we have, therefore, consistently told the Chinese authorities at the highest level that the lifting of the embargo would be greatly assisted if they could take the sort of concrete steps in the field of human rights that would convince the European public that that was an appropriate course of action.
I know that a number of Member States are favourably disposed towards lifting the embargo and have made that view public. Others believe that it is premature, citing concerns about human rights. Human rights were an issue that figured prominently in the resolution passed by this House last year against lifting the ban.
Those Member States arguing for lifting the ban use the rationale that the controls introduced in the 1998 EU Code of Conduct on arms sales render it nugatory. I acknowledge that this argument is not without substance.
I am very keen to move forward with our important strategic partnership with China, a country that is rapidly emerging as a global player across the board, and is now, amongst other things, our second largest trading partner. That is one of our top foreign policy goals in the years to come.
That said, given the underlying logic of the embargo and the significant political and symbolic issues involved for both sides, it is understandable that some Member States argue that the lifting of the ban should take place against a background of positive and tangible steps by China to improve its human rights situation.
I should also like to say a few words on the European Parliament’s report on the operation of the EU’s Code of Conduct on arms exports. The strength of the Code of Conduct is closely related to the China embargo debate, since it will guide Member States' export practice if the ban is lifted. Responsibility for the arms trade currently rests with Member States, but the Commission is fully associated with its consideration under the common foreign and security policy."@pl16
".
Antes de mais, peço desculpa por comparecer diante desta Assembleia para mais um discurso de despedida. Começo a perceber o que provavelmente terá sentido Frank Sinatra, quando, já nos seus 70 e tantos anos, se arrastava em concertos de despedida. Espero que esta seja, efectivamente, a última tarde em que esta Assembleia terá de me suportar, mas isso está nas mãos do Parlamento.
Felicito o relator pela elaboração de um documento substancial, que merece uma atenção aturada. Desafia os Estados-Membros a atingir padrões mais rigorosos, no que respeita ao controlo das exportações de armas. Entre outras questões, exorta a uma maior transparência, aspecto que, normalmente, não é de imediato associado ao comércio de armas. Visa igualmente a imposição de novos controlos e limitações ao referido comércio, áreas, por inerência, difíceis para os Estados-Membros que possuem importantes indústrias de armamento.
Embora o relatório se centre sobretudo nas práticas europeias, o seu âmbito é mundial. Reconhecendo o potencial da União Europeia em matéria de promoção das melhores práticas em todo o mundo, advoga, entre outras coisas, a conclusão de um tratado internacional sobre o comércio de armas.
Não deveremos esquecer – e estou certo de que o Parlamento não o esquece – o preocupante facto de meio milhão de pessoas morrer, anualmente, em consequência de actos violentos relacionados com armas ligeiras. Como bem sabem, a Comissão participa, com regularidade, juntamente com outras organizações internacionais e ONG, na resposta às consequências da venda irregular ou ilegal de armas. Estamos também a levar à prática alguns projectos específicos, destinados a reduzir a desestabilizadora acumulação de armas em todo o mundo. Está em curso um projecto-piloto, iniciado pelo Parlamento Europeu, com vista a determinar que outras acções podem ser tomadas. Seguramente, será preciso fazer muito mais. Sou, em especial, favorável à ideia de um acordo internacional para o reforço do controlo do comércio de armas convencionais. Razão pela qual a Comissão tem apoiado decididamente, no âmbito dos esforços mais alargados da UE, a adopção de um Código de Conduta internacional relativo às exportações de armas, com base na iniciativa da União Europeia.
Os Estados-Membros estão, presentemente, a estudar formas de melhorar o Código de Conduta, e estamos a encorajá-los nestes esforços com vista ao reforço dos controlos da UE em matéria de vendas de armas convencionais. O êxito destes esforços será um factor importante no debate em curso sobre o embargo de armas à China.
Todos nós estamos cientes da importância da China como parceiro económico e actor político no mundo, nas próximas décadas. A China está, em grande medida, a reconquistar a posição que deteve no mundo até meados do Século XIX, altura em que, provavelmente, ainda era responsável por 30% do PIB mundial. A recuperação histórica que temos vindo a testemunhar é, em geral, extremamente benéfica para o resto do mundo. A integração da China, como economia aberta, na economia mundial é benéfica para todos nós.
Não é, de forma alguma, embaraçoso, para nós ou para os chineses, se afirmarmos, claramente, com regularidade, que há questões que nos preocupam, tais como as relativas aos direitos humanos. Estou certo de que chegará o momento em que verificaremos que as melhorias em matéria de situação política na China corresponderão às melhorias económicas já alcançadas. Hoje em dia, é impossível, para qualquer país, permanecer em total auto-confinamento. É impossível para um país abrir a sua economia e manter, simultaneamente, a política sob um controlo absolutamente rígido.
Aguardo com expectativa uma relação mais estreita com a China nos próximos anos. Espero que a China continue a desempenhar um papel positivo na comunidade internacional. Aguardo com ansiedade um diálogo sério com a China a respeito dos direitos humanos, que conduza às melhorias que, estou certo, Sun Yat-Sen teria aprovado.
Como sabem, por via do modo de funcionamento da política externa e de segurança comum, este não é um domínio em que a liderança pertença à Comissão. No entanto, temos um interesse óbvio no desenvolvimento geral das nossas relações com a China, as quais, de um modo geral, são excelentes, e o embargo à venda de armas insere-se, naturalmente, nesse contexto. Como é do conhecimento do Parlamento, o embargo foi imposto pelo Conselho Europeu, em 1989, na sequência dos acontecimentos na Praça Tiananmen, cujos primeiros momentos tive a oportunidade de testemunhar, em primeira mão, na qualidade de Vice-presidente do Banco Asiático de Desenvolvimento.
Este ano, a China intensificou a sua campanha, com vista ao levantamento do embargo. Essa campanha prossegue agora que nos aproximamos da Cimeira entre a União Europeia e a China, que tem lugar no próximo mês. As autoridades Chinesas consideram o embargo uma prova de discriminação contra o país, argumentando que esta proibição é obsoleta. Afirmam que prejudica seriamente o futuro desenvolvimento de relações bilaterais.
Embora tenhamos reconhecido que se verificaram alterações positivas e que a situação política na China se modificou desde Tiananmen, a observância, por parte da China, de alguns direitos humanos fundamentais, nomeadamente na área dos direitos políticos e civis, continua muito aquém do exigido pelas normas internacionais. Por conseguinte, sem estabelecer qualquer ligação directa, afirmámos insistentemente às autoridades chinesas, ao mais alto nível, que o levantamento do embargo seria extremamente facilitado se estas estivessem dispostas a tomar medidas concretas no campo dos direitos humanos que pudessem convencer a opinião pública europeia de que esse tipo de actuação seria o correcto.
Estou ciente de que uma série de Estados-Membros se mostram favoráveis ao levantamento do embargo, tendo tornado pública essa opinião. Outros há que o consideram prematuro, manifestando preocupações relativamente à situação dos direitos humanos. A questão dos direitos humanos figurava, de forma proeminente, na resolução aprovada por esta Assembleia, no ano passado, contra o levantamento do embargo.
Os Estados-Membros que defendem o levantamento do embargo argumentam com o facto de os controlos introduzidos no Código de Conduta da UE, de 1998, relativo à Exportação de Armas, o tornarem inútil. Reconheço que este argumento não deixa de ser válido.
Anseio por que possamos prosseguir a nossa importante parceria estratégica com a China, um país que está a emergir rapidamente como um actor mundial em todos os sectores, sendo actualmente, entre outros aspectos, o nosso segundo maior parceiro comercial. Esse é um dos nossos principais objectivos políticos nos próximos anos.
Posto isto, e com base na lógica subjacente ao embargo, bem como nas questões políticas, importantes e simbólicas, que estão em causa para ambas as partes, é compreensível que alguns Estados-Membros defendam o levantamento do embargo, à luz dos passos positivos e concretos que a China tem vindo a dar com vista a melhorar a sua situação em matéria de direitos humanos.
Gostaria também de dizer algumas palavras sobre o relatório do Parlamento Europeu referente à aplicação do Código de Conduta da União Europeia relativo à exportação de armas. A força do Código de Conduta está intimamente relacionada com o debate do embargo à China, uma vez que orientará as práticas de exportação dos Estados-Membros, caso o embargo seja levantado. A responsabilidade pelo comércio de armas cabe, actualmente, aos Estados-Membros; porém, a Comissão está plenamente associada a esta questão ao abrigo da política externa e de segurança comum."@pt17
"First of all, I apologise for appearing in front of the House for yet another farewell appearance. I am starting to know what Frank Sinatra must have felt like, as he staggered on making farewell appearances until he was into his seventies. I hope this really is the last afternoon that the House will have to endure me, but that is in Parliament's hands.
I commend the rapporteur for putting together a substantial document which merits very careful attention. It challenges Member States to attain more stringent standards on the control of arms exports. Amongst other things, it asks for more transparency, not something that is normally immediately associated with the arms trade. It also seeks further controls and limitations on such trade, inherently difficult areas for those Member States with significant arms industries.
Whilst the report focuses primarily on improvement in European practice, its scope is global. Recognising the European Union’s potential to promote best practice around the world, it advocates, among other things, an international arms trade treaty.
We should not forget - and I am sure Parliament has not - the sobering fact that around half a million people die each year as a result of violence linked to small arms and light weapons. As you are well aware, the Commission is regularly involved, with other international organisations and NGOs, in dealing with the consequences of inappropriate or illegal arms sales. We are also implementing some specific projects to reduce destabilising accumulations of weapons around the world. A pilot project initiated by the European Parliament is under way to see what else can be done. More certainly needs to be done. I particularly support the idea of an international agreement to strengthen the control of conventional arms sales. That is why the Commission has, as part of wider EU efforts, strongly supported the adoption of an international Code of Conduct on arms exports based on the European Union’s initiative.
Member States are currently considering how to improve the Code of Conduct and we are encouraging these efforts to strengthen EU controls on conventional arms sales. The success of this endeavour will be a factor in the ongoing China arms embargo debate.
We all know the importance of China as an economic partner and a political player in the world in the coming decades. China is, to a considerable extent, regaining the position that it had in the world until the middle of the 19th century, when it was still responsible for probably 30% of global GDP. The historic recovery we are witnessing is, on the whole, extraordinarily beneficial to the rest of the world. China's integration as an open economy into the world economy is good for all of us.
It is not in any way demeaning to us or the Chinese if we regularly make it clear that there are other issues that concern us, such as issues of human rights. I am sure we shall in due course see an improvement as the political situation in China matches the economic one. It is impossible these days for any country to remain completely self-contained. It is impossible for a country to open up its economy whilst keeping politics under absolutely rigid control.
I look forward to a more intimate relationship with China in the years ahead. I hope China will continue to play a positive role in the international community. I look forward to a serious dialogue with China about human rights, leading to improvements of which I am sure Mr Sun Yat-Sen would have approved.
As Members know, given the way in which the common foreign and security policy operates, this is not an issue on which the Commission takes a lead. Nevertheless, we have an obvious interest in the overall development of our relations with China, which by and large are excellent, and the arms embargo naturally operates in that context. As Parliament knows, the embargo was imposed by the European Council in 1989, following the events in Tiananmen Square, the early stages of which I was able to witness at first hand as the then vice-chairman of the Asia Development Bank.
This year, China has intensified its campaign to have the ban lifted. That campaign continues in the run-up to the summit between the European Union and China next month. The Chinese authorities consider the embargo to be evidence of discrimination against them; they argue that the ban is obsolete. They claim that it severely hinders the further development of bilateral relations.
Whilst we have acknowledged that positive change has occurred and that the political situation in China has moved on since Tiananmen, China's observance of some basic human rights, notably in the area of political and civil rights, continues to fall well short of international norms. Without making any direct link we have, therefore, consistently told the Chinese authorities at the highest level that the lifting of the embargo would be greatly assisted if they could take the sort of concrete steps in the field of human rights that would convince the European public that that was an appropriate course of action.
I know that a number of Member States are favourably disposed towards lifting the embargo and have made that view public. Others believe that it is premature, citing concerns about human rights. Human rights were an issue that figured prominently in the resolution passed by this House last year against lifting the ban.
Those Member States arguing for lifting the ban use the rationale that the controls introduced in the 1998 EU Code of Conduct on arms sales render it nugatory. I acknowledge that this argument is not without substance.
I am very keen to move forward with our important strategic partnership with China, a country that is rapidly emerging as a global player across the board, and is now, amongst other things, our second largest trading partner. That is one of our top foreign policy goals in the years to come.
That said, given the underlying logic of the embargo and the significant political and symbolic issues involved for both sides, it is understandable that some Member States argue that the lifting of the ban should take place against a background of positive and tangible steps by China to improve its human rights situation.
I should also like to say a few words on the European Parliament’s report on the operation of the EU’s Code of Conduct on arms exports. The strength of the Code of Conduct is closely related to the China embargo debate, since it will guide Member States' export practice if the ban is lifted. Responsibility for the arms trade currently rests with Member States, but the Commission is fully associated with its consideration under the common foreign and security policy."@sk18
"First of all, I apologise for appearing in front of the House for yet another farewell appearance. I am starting to know what Frank Sinatra must have felt like, as he staggered on making farewell appearances until he was into his seventies. I hope this really is the last afternoon that the House will have to endure me, but that is in Parliament's hands.
I commend the rapporteur for putting together a substantial document which merits very careful attention. It challenges Member States to attain more stringent standards on the control of arms exports. Amongst other things, it asks for more transparency, not something that is normally immediately associated with the arms trade. It also seeks further controls and limitations on such trade, inherently difficult areas for those Member States with significant arms industries.
Whilst the report focuses primarily on improvement in European practice, its scope is global. Recognising the European Union’s potential to promote best practice around the world, it advocates, among other things, an international arms trade treaty.
We should not forget - and I am sure Parliament has not - the sobering fact that around half a million people die each year as a result of violence linked to small arms and light weapons. As you are well aware, the Commission is regularly involved, with other international organisations and NGOs, in dealing with the consequences of inappropriate or illegal arms sales. We are also implementing some specific projects to reduce destabilising accumulations of weapons around the world. A pilot project initiated by the European Parliament is under way to see what else can be done. More certainly needs to be done. I particularly support the idea of an international agreement to strengthen the control of conventional arms sales. That is why the Commission has, as part of wider EU efforts, strongly supported the adoption of an international Code of Conduct on arms exports based on the European Union’s initiative.
Member States are currently considering how to improve the Code of Conduct and we are encouraging these efforts to strengthen EU controls on conventional arms sales. The success of this endeavour will be a factor in the ongoing China arms embargo debate.
We all know the importance of China as an economic partner and a political player in the world in the coming decades. China is, to a considerable extent, regaining the position that it had in the world until the middle of the 19th century, when it was still responsible for probably 30% of global GDP. The historic recovery we are witnessing is, on the whole, extraordinarily beneficial to the rest of the world. China's integration as an open economy into the world economy is good for all of us.
It is not in any way demeaning to us or the Chinese if we regularly make it clear that there are other issues that concern us, such as issues of human rights. I am sure we shall in due course see an improvement as the political situation in China matches the economic one. It is impossible these days for any country to remain completely self-contained. It is impossible for a country to open up its economy whilst keeping politics under absolutely rigid control.
I look forward to a more intimate relationship with China in the years ahead. I hope China will continue to play a positive role in the international community. I look forward to a serious dialogue with China about human rights, leading to improvements of which I am sure Mr Sun Yat-Sen would have approved.
As Members know, given the way in which the common foreign and security policy operates, this is not an issue on which the Commission takes a lead. Nevertheless, we have an obvious interest in the overall development of our relations with China, which by and large are excellent, and the arms embargo naturally operates in that context. As Parliament knows, the embargo was imposed by the European Council in 1989, following the events in Tiananmen Square, the early stages of which I was able to witness at first hand as the then vice-chairman of the Asia Development Bank.
This year, China has intensified its campaign to have the ban lifted. That campaign continues in the run-up to the summit between the European Union and China next month. The Chinese authorities consider the embargo to be evidence of discrimination against them; they argue that the ban is obsolete. They claim that it severely hinders the further development of bilateral relations.
Whilst we have acknowledged that positive change has occurred and that the political situation in China has moved on since Tiananmen, China's observance of some basic human rights, notably in the area of political and civil rights, continues to fall well short of international norms. Without making any direct link we have, therefore, consistently told the Chinese authorities at the highest level that the lifting of the embargo would be greatly assisted if they could take the sort of concrete steps in the field of human rights that would convince the European public that that was an appropriate course of action.
I know that a number of Member States are favourably disposed towards lifting the embargo and have made that view public. Others believe that it is premature, citing concerns about human rights. Human rights were an issue that figured prominently in the resolution passed by this House last year against lifting the ban.
Those Member States arguing for lifting the ban use the rationale that the controls introduced in the 1998 EU Code of Conduct on arms sales render it nugatory. I acknowledge that this argument is not without substance.
I am very keen to move forward with our important strategic partnership with China, a country that is rapidly emerging as a global player across the board, and is now, amongst other things, our second largest trading partner. That is one of our top foreign policy goals in the years to come.
That said, given the underlying logic of the embargo and the significant political and symbolic issues involved for both sides, it is understandable that some Member States argue that the lifting of the ban should take place against a background of positive and tangible steps by China to improve its human rights situation.
I should also like to say a few words on the European Parliament’s report on the operation of the EU’s Code of Conduct on arms exports. The strength of the Code of Conduct is closely related to the China embargo debate, since it will guide Member States' export practice if the ban is lifted. Responsibility for the arms trade currently rests with Member States, but the Commission is fully associated with its consideration under the common foreign and security policy."@sl19
".
Först av allt ber jag om ursäkt för att jag infinner mig i kammaren för att göra ännu ett avskedsframträdande. Jag börjar inse hur Frank Sinatra måste ha känt sig, när han vacklade runt och gjorde avskedsframträdanden ända tills han blev över sjuttio år. Jag hoppas att detta verkligen är den sista eftermiddag då kammaren får stå ut med mig, men det ligger i parlamentets händer.
Jag lovordar föredraganden för att han har utarbetat ett gediget dokument som förtjänar noggrann uppmärksamhet. I betänkandet uppmanas medlemsstaterna att utarbeta strängare normer för kontrollen av vapenexport. Bland annat framförs ett krav på större öppenhet, någonting som man normalt inte omedelbart förknippar med vapenhandeln. I betänkandet eftersträvas också ytterligare kontroller och begränsningar av sådan handel, det vill säga områden som i sig är svåra för de medlemsstater som har betydande vapenindustrier.
Samtidigt som man i betänkandet i första hand inriktar sig på förbättringar av EU:s praxis är betänkandets räckvidd global. Man erkänner Europeiska unionens möjligheter att främja bästa möjliga praxis runt om i världen och förespråkar bland annat ett internationellt fördrag om vapenhandel.
Vi får inte glömma – och jag är säker på att parlamentet inte har glömt – det dämpande faktum att ungefär en halv miljon människor dör varje år till följd av våld genom användning av handeldvapen och lätta vapen. Som ni väl känner till får kommissionen, tillsammans med andra internationella organisationer och icke-statliga organisationer, regelbundet ta itu med följderna av olämplig eller illegal vapenförsäljning. Vi genomför också ett antal specifika projekt för att minska den destabiliserande anhopningen av vapen runt om i världen. Ett pilotprojekt som Europaparlamentet har tagit initiativet till är under utarbetande för att se vad som kan göras ytterligare. Det är verkligen mer som behöver göras. Jag stöder särskilt tanken på en internationell överenskommelse för att stärka kontrollen av försäljningen av konventionella vapen. Därför har kommissionen, som ett led i mer omfattande EU-insatser, gett ett kraftigt stöd till antagandet av en internationell uppförandekod för vapenexport, som bygger på Europeiska unionens initiativ.
Medlemsstaterna överväger för närvarande hur man skall kunna förbättra uppförandekoden, och vi uppmuntrar dessa strävanden att stärka EU:s kontroller av försäljningen av konventionella vapen. En framgång för dessa strävanden kommer att vara en viktig faktor i den pågående debatten om vapenembargot mot Kina.
Vi känner alla till Kinas betydelse som ekonomisk partner och politisk aktör i världen under de kommande decennierna. Kina håller i stor utsträckning på att återvinna den ställning landet hade i världen fram till mitten av 1800-talet, när det fortfarande svarade för troligtvis 30 procent av hela världens BNP. Den historiska återhämtning som vi bevittnar är på det stora hela gynnsam för resten av världen. Kinas integrering som en öppen ekonomi i världsekonomin är bra för oss alla.
Det är inte på något sätt förnedrande för oss eller för kineserna om vi regelbundet klargör att det finns andra frågor som oroar oss som till exempel frågor om mänskliga rättigheter. Jag är säker på att vi i sinom tid kommer att få se en förbättring i takt med att den politiska situationen i Kina svarar mot den ekonomiska. Nu för tiden är det inte möjligt för något land att förbli fullständigt slutet. Det är omöjligt för ett land att öppna sin ekonomi samtidigt som det håller politiken under fullständigt rigorös kontroll.
Jag ser fram emot förtroligare förbindelser med Kina under de kommande åren. Jag hoppas att Kina skall fortsätta att spela en positiv roll i världssamfundet. Jag ser fram emot en seriös dialog med Kina om mänskliga rättigheter, som leder till förbättringar som jag är säker på att Sun Yat-sen skulle ha gillat.
Som ledamöterna vet är detta, med tanke på hur den gemensamma utrikes- och säkerhetspolitiken fungerar, inte en fråga där kommissionen tar några initiativ. Trots det har vi ett uppenbart intresse av en allsidig utveckling av våra förbindelser med Kina, som på det stora hela är omfattande och utmärkta, och vapenembargot hör naturligtvis hemma i detta sammanhang. Som parlamentet känner till infördes embargot av Europeiska rådet 1989 efter händelserna på Himmelska fridens torg, vilkas inledningsskede jag själv kunde bevittna på nära håll, då jag vid den tidpunkten var vice ordförande för Asiatiska utvecklingsbanken.
I år har Kina intensifierat sin kampanj för att få embargot upphävt. Denna kampanj fortsätter under förberedelserna för toppmötet mellan Europeiska unionen och Kina i nästa månad. De kinesiska myndigheterna anser att embargot är ett bevis på diskriminering av dem; de hävdar att embargot är förlegat. De påstår att det utgör ett allvarligt hinder för den fortsatta utvecklingen av de bilaterala förbindelserna.
Samtidigt som vi har erkänt att positiva förändringar har ägt rum och att den politiska situationen i Kina har förbättrats sedan händelserna på Himmelska fridens torg, är det fortfarande så att Kinas respekt för vissa grundläggande mänskliga rättigheter, särskilt när det gäller politiska och medborgerliga rättigheter, långt ifrån motsvarar internationella normer. Utan att antyda något direkt samband har vi därför konsekvent talat om för de kinesiska myndigheterna på högsta nivå att ett hävande av embargot i hög grad skulle underlättas om de kunde vidta sådana konkreta åtgärder i fråga om mänskliga rättigheter som skulle övertyga allmänheten i EU om att detta var ett lämpligt sätt att agera.
Jag vet att ett antal medlemsstater är positiva till ett hävande av embargot och att de har gett uttryck för denna åsikt offentligt. Andra anser att det är för tidigt, under åberopande av oro för de mänskliga rättigheterna. Mänskliga rättigheter var en fråga som hade en framskjuten plats i den resolution mot ett hävande av embargot som Europaparlamentet antog förra året.
De medlemsstater som argumenterar för ett hävande av embargot använder argumentet att de kontroller som infördes i EU:s uppförandekod för vapenförsäljning 1998 gör embargot verkningslöst. Jag medger att det ligger mycket i detta argument.
Jag är mycket angelägen om att gå vidare med vårt viktiga strategiska partnerskap med Kina, ett land som snabbt håller på att framträda som en global aktör över hela linjen och som nu, bland mycket annat, är vår näst största handelspartner. Detta är ett av våra främsta utrikespolitiska mål under de år som kommer.
Samtidigt är det förståeligt, med tanke på den bakomliggande orsaken till embargot och de viktiga politiska och symboliska frågor som berör båda parter, att några medlemsstater hävdar att hävandet av embargot bör ske först sedan Kina vidtagit positiva och påtagliga åtgärder för att förbättra situationen för de mänskliga rättigheterna.
Jag skulle också vilja säga några ord om Europaparlamentets betänkande om tillämpningen av EU:s uppförandekod för vapenexport. Styrkan i uppförandekoden har ett nära samband med debatten om Kinaembargot, eftersom koden kommer att vara vägledande för medlemsstaternas exportpraxis om embargot hävs. Ansvaret för vapenhandeln ligger för närvarande hos medlemsstaterna, men kommissionen fäster stort avseende vid denna handel med utgångspunkt från den gemensamma utrikes- och säkerhetspolitiken."@sv21
|
| lpv:unclassifiedMetadata |
"(ΕΝ)"10
"Commission"5,19,15,1,18,14,16,11,13,4
"Patten,"5,19,15,1,18,14,16,11,10,13,4,20
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples