Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2000-11-14-Speech-2-269"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20001114.9.2-269"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
"Mr President, Mr Kostunica, the new President of the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia, will be addressing the House tomorrow. His symbolic presence here could open up prospects for the overall policy which we are pursuing. My second comment is that the previous speakers complained that the European Union pays, but the US is listened to. That is only logical because the US has engaged in political acts in Bosnia with the Dayton agreement and the US has again engaged in political acts in Kosovo with the initiative which it took on the bombings and much else besides.
What does that mean for us? That policy must come first or must at least move in parallel if it is to have political objectives. What should these political objectives be? Obviously, institutional aspects and the proper working of democracy take priority in the region as a whole. If democracy is working properly it will create the preconditions to respect for minorities in the various regions. If democracy is working properly, it will help the region to run smoothly. However, it must also be based on individuals. We must admit that, on numerous occasions, the individuals serving a number of purposes during the transitional phase were not a healthy expression of political life in the region. In this sense, we need to review our perception of individuals, facts and situations.
The second issue which I would like to touch on concerns the strategy in the region. Quite clearly, uniting political prospects with economic and institutional prospects is a positive development. However, if positive developments are to have good results, they need a strategic framework and a strategic aspect. From this point of view, I think that resurrecting an issue which was resolved about a year ago with the Pack report as far as the headquarters of the Reconstruction Agency is concerned is a disservice. It would be a good idea for Commissioner Patten, who has a great deal of experience – not to say wisdom – in managing international crises, to add to the visits which he has made to various regions of the Balkans by going to the headquarters of the Reconstruction Agency in Thessaloniki in order to see how this department works. In this sense, I endorse and repeat everything which Mr Folias just said.
Anyway, enough of the bad news, now to the good news. The Lagendijk report, apart from the criticism which I may have levied at one point, is an excellent text, as is the Commission proposal. They create a framework for political initiatives which must be built up into new perceptions. We must look on this region as a region of Europe and not as a region of antagonism between the countries and the national policies of Europe or America. If we treat the area as a region of political antagonism we shall be making a big mistake. In all events, I think that we are on the right track."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples