Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2001-06-12-Speech-2-166"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20010612.9.2-166"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
"Mr President, Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen, I fully agree with what the committee chairman has just said: the ASEM process is an important framework for dialogue between EU states and Asian states.
But, quite honestly, we should also admit that the results of the ASEM III Summit in Seoul last year were not so terribly significant. Many assertions remained very vague and if you look at how many of them have been put into practice you will see that we actually still have work to do on many of them. In this respect I fully share the views of our committee chairman. Commissioner, I think that we are acting as allies when we ask you to table a report on the preparations for ASEM IV, so that both of us – the Commission and Parliament – as we say in Hamburg, have a bit of butter with our fish, that is, actually introduce some substance into the preparations for ASEM IV in Copenhagen next year. We would ask you to provide us with a very substantial report as soon as possible so that we can debate with you, but also with the Council, which areas further negotiations should really focus on.
Allow me to make one additional comment. I should like to take up once more what Mr Brok said about conflict prevention, but also about conflict resolution. We are in the business of helping each other. I need only recall that the Japanese donate a considerable amount of development aid to south-eastern Europe – our area – so as to express their solidarity with us on matters of security policy, and we should not therefore shy away from taking part in discussions about conflict resolution or providing assistance in this respect either, whether it be in China, Taiwan, North Korea or South Korea.
There is one further comment which is on the tip of my tongue, Commissioner. Consider the following: this initiative involves ten Asian countries and fifteen European countries. There will soon be eighteen or twenty countries on the European side. We should maintain a balance. That is why I think it is important for us to consider to what extent it might be possible for the Asian side also to admit more members. I believe, for example, that a country like India, which is significant on the one hand because of its abundant population but on the other because of its democratic structure and experience, could be a good partner. Perhaps you could discuss this briefly with your Asian colleagues even in the run-up to ASEM IV, so that we have balanced coverage of both geographical areas.
I think that we agree here: we need to make it clear in the political discussion that Asia's relations with Europe are of decisive importance, and we should help each other in this respect. In conclusion, I should once again like to refer to Mr Brok's opening comments. Relations between states are of course negotiated formally by their governments. But I would say to the Heads of State and Government: civil servants and ministers need the support of members of parliament. That is why the committee's idea…"@en1
|
| lpv:unclassifiedMetadata |
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples