Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2000-12-12-Speech-2-150"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20001212.8.2-150"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
".
Mr President, our relations with Russia underwent a fundamental change when the cold war ended. Fear of military violence or of a dictatorship that might advance further, is a thing of the past.
The attitude of the European Union and its Member States is now more one of a feeling of joint responsibility for the restoration of Russian society. It can be regarded as a kind of moral duty but also as being in the interests of the European Union, which, of course, has nothing to gain from lawlessness and poverty in a very large neighbouring country.
Yet for many of us, the development of the Russian Federation is still a dubious matter and that is why I can imagine that people sometimes have their doubts about it, even in this Parliament. In any case, the best thing we can do in our strategy towards the Russian Federation is to follow a twin-track strategy. On the one hand, we must indict those who violate human rights and wield a disproportionate amount of power, clearly and forcefully, and on the other, we must enter into cooperation in a variety of sectors. Both approaches are necessary if we are to help Russia become a flourishing, democratic constitutional state. This is in our mutual interest. That means condemning the gross violence in Chechnya and looking for ways of helping to end the war and assuage the suffering. So it is necessary for the European Union and the OECD to be present there. We know, I am happy to say, that people in Russia are not indifferent to our criticism of what is happening there. That comes up in quite a few conversations one has in Russia. After all, Russia too wants to be assessed by the same standards that we apply to ourselves.
We would also do well to be severely critical of the visa measures vis-à-vis Georgia that have recently been undertaken, and provided for in amendments. I am expecting a more extensive discussion to take place next month via the topical and urgent debate, and would suggest that we only give a limited preview of this debate in these resolutions. In particular, I hope to be able to adopt half of the amendment tabled by the Greens on this issue. It also behoves us to criticise the relations between Russia and the Baltic States, which are still to be regularised. It will not be the fault of the latter. They need Russia to regularise and establish its affairs with them effectively.
As far as cooperation with Russia is concerned, the Russian response to the strategy document of the European Union offers some good starting points. The entry into force of scientific and technological cooperation with the Russian Federation is a good example. In retrospect, the interruption of this cooperation was not a success, particularly as there appears to be little coordination in actions of this kind, between the European Union on the one hand and other major players, such as Japan and the United States, on the other. We must take this lesson to heart for future reference.
The Northern Dimension is a clear example of cooperation that is to be put into concrete form. In point of fact, this concept is underused, politically speaking. It is an important concept, particularly in the fields of energy provision, care for the environment, the clearing up of nuclear waste, and the decommissioning of nuclear submarines. In addition, it is possible to achieve various forms of cross-border cooperation that will prevent sharp disparities in wealth from arising. Initiatives concerning cooperation with the region of Kaliningrad fit into the same framework.
We would argue in favour of having a separate budgetary line for developing this Northern Dimension in a coherent manner, along the lines of the one that we already have for cooperation with the three Baltic States. However, I am of the opinion that the importance of Russia is not really reflected in the budget, but we disagree with the Social Democrats on that score. If you take a close look, then roughly speaking, Russia is slightly ahead of Morocco in terms of budgetary importance, which cannot be right to my mind. I could live with it though, if recital G on this aspect were to lapse, and in so doing if it were to be possible, with the support of the Social Democrats, to achieve a broader majority for this resolution, because this would send out a clearer signal to Russia.
We are hoping that the cooperation will extend to external policy. The resolution refers to the Commission as the initiator of policy and to the High Representative as the coordinator of policy. There are various regions where we could start the ball rolling, such as the Balkans, the Caucasus region and Central Asia. A more relaxed discussion of mutual security interests would also have its uses, bearing in mind that, naturally, from my point of view and that of others and the majority of my group, NATO, and within this framework, our bond with North America, are absolutely paramount in matters of security.
We will follow the developments in Russian society and internal politics with great interest. We hope that a truly civil society will soon flourish there and form the permanent basis for a real political democracy. I hope that links will be established at all levels between organisations, individuals and associations in the EU and their counterparts in the Russian Federation. This will help to spread awareness of the values we all share."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples