Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2001-09-06-Speech-4-209"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20010906.10.4-209"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:translated text |
".
Mr President, what are we doing? I think that is the question that is being asked and the question to which you are asking us to reply.
Well, first of all we have equipped ourselves with a framework of rules for the Union, and just before the summer recess we adopted two regulations against mines, so that we now have legal instruments on the basis of which we shall be able to take effective and coordinated action.
Then at the end of this month we shall be actively participating, together with the presidency, at the meeting in Nicaragua of signatory states to the Ottawa Convention, a meeting which we believe is extremely important, because we shall of course be discussing the challenges posed by the abolition of anti-personnel mines, sharing the practical experiences of those who have been involved in this action and, as most of you have asked us to do, putting pressure on those states which have not yet signed the Convention.
In our view, the objective remains the same and we are determined to achieve it, by obtaining a universal prohibition on the production, stockpiling, movement and use of anti-personnel landmines.
The achieving of this objective and the removal of the risk to which the millions of mines which still have to be removed from areas of conflict throughout the world expose not only human lives, but also economic activities, is chiefly the task of states and governments. There is no doubt about that. Unfortunately, it sometimes happens that non-government actors also use anti-personnel landmines in internal conflicts or conflicts between states, and they too bear a responsibility for the suffering and devastation caused to populations and societies by mines
Experience has shown, as you have pointed out, that we need to explore new ways of involving non-governmental agencies in these campaigns against landmines, and of making them subscribe to the objective of a complete ban on such devices. From this point of view, the Geneva appeal is an initiative with laudable intentions, but we must make sure that any future initiatives of this kind take place in the context of the considerable efforts which have already been undertaken by the international community.
As Parliament knows, the international campaign to prohibit landmines has assumed the form of a worldwide movement which the European Union has supported since the beginning. This international campaign, in conjunction with a certain number of governmental and non-governmental agreements, has drawn up standards and action programmes which will supplement the international regulations of which the Ottawa Convention is an example.
We would therefore like to see, alongside this international regulatory framework, initiatives being set up to strengthen the action that is being taken within states and civilian society, and we are ready to support them.
We must analyse this Geneva appeal in detail, and encourage those who have instigated it to coordinate their activities closely with the ICBL and with other major agreements, so as to ensure that all the forces that are mobilised towards this objective never run the risk, given the magnitude of what is at stake here, of becoming dispersed. There is still a lot to be done to consolidate the ambitious demands and objectives that were defined by the Ottawa Convention."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples