Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2000-06-14-Speech-3-062"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20000614.4.3-062"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
"Mr President, there are matters which give rise to fundamental differences of opinion and this is obviously one of them. You, Mrs Lalumière, have obtained the backing of a large majority in committee and you will no doubt maintain this majority in plenary. This majority confirms the quality of your work and the care which has gone into it. But it also confirms how weak the critical voices have become. I do not see this is a cause for celebration. Even official threat analyses confirm that there is no military threat to the countries of western Europe. Instead, scenarios such as the war in Kosovo or imaginary crises in the future, Islamic fundamentalism or, as in the German defence guidelines, even possible ecological threats are wheeled out in order to justify huge military spending. It marks the capitulation of politics and of the intellect, when such problems are met with a military response.
Let me pick up on just one issue, an issue which figured at the centre of all the positions taken here today: the war in Kosovo. I think that the Council, the Commission and we ourselves are drawing the wrong conclusions in principle from a war which was wrong in principle. First, the violation of international law, as practised by NATO, and which, for the rest, still forms part of the official NATO military strategy, should not shape future security policy. Secondly, I am convinced that the war against Yugoslavia could and should have been avoided with a consistent, preventive, long-term policy, especially as events over the last few days have again shown dramatically that its alleged or actual aim of safeguarding human and minority rights failed disastrously. War, if anything, is the most unsuitable and most counter-productive method in this respect.
Finally, when it is again argued that the war in Kosovo demonstrated that the EU needs major military independence from the USA then, to my mind, this begs the conclusion that militarising international relations and security policy will increase, not reduce dependency on the USA. Military is what the USA does best. My group takes an opposing view in principle to the present prevalent European security policy on at least three counts.
First: the security policy template is a military, not a political, civil or cooperative one and the section on preventive and civil security policy cannot hide that fact. It is interesting that military resolutions have been coming thick and fast since the Helsinki Summit while, to all intents and purposes, nothing has been done about a civil, cause-orientated security policy.
Secondly: we reject a European military block formation. The only viable approach, in our view, is to restore the central role of the UNO for international security, reinforce the OSCE, design cooperative security concepts and radically disarm.
Thirdly: we are deeply concerned at how automatically demands are rejected which, until just recently, formed part of a broad political consensus, at least between Mrs Lalumière and, for example, the positions represented in my group. In all events, demands for an unequivocal declaration on the UN charter, defence of the ABM treaty, respect for the policy of neutrality of certain EU Member States or an increase in funds for peace education and peace studies failed to muster a majority in committee.
Germany has earmarked DM 17.5 million for civil conflict management projects this year. I think it is a fairly typical figure. It represents – and let me say this very slowly – 0.00029% of military spending. I fear that this policy first creates crises which it then endeavours to control. Which is why there is nothing left for us but to say a firm No."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples