Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2001-10-24-Speech-3-204"

Predicate	Value (sorted: default)
rdf:type	lpv_eu:Speech2
dcterms:Date	"2001-10-24"^^xsd:date2
dcterms:Is Part Of	lp_eu:Turkey2
dcterms:Language	"de"^^xsd:language2
lpv:document identification number	"en.20011024.9.3-204"2
lpv:hasSubsequent	lp_eu:2001-10-24-Speech-3-2052
lpv:speaker	lp:Elmar Brok2
lpv:spokenAs	member; Conference of Committee Chairs (1999-07-21--2002-01-14)3 member; Delegation for relations with the United States (1999-10-06--2002-01-14)3 member_of_the_bureau; EPP-ED (1999-10-12--2002-03-07)3 unknown; Christlich Demokratische Union Deutschlands (1999-07-20--2004-07-19)3 substitute; AFCO (1999-07-21--2002-01-14)3 chair; Committee on Foreign Affairs, Human Rights, Common Security and Defence Policy (1999-07-21--2002-01-14)3
lpv:translated text	". Mr President, Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen, I should like to thank Mr Lamassoure for his report, in which he also points out that, as a Member of NATO, Turkey is a very significant partner particularly at this time. Despite all of the criticism which we have rightly voiced in the past and still do today, in respect of the constitution and human rights, we have to say that, compared with most of its neighbours, Turkey is a country which is exceptionally pro-western, democratic and respectful of human rights. Everything is relative and must be seen in its context. We also have to recognise that progress has been made in a number of areas and that, despite the severe economic problems which Turkey is currently experiencing, it is still attempting, by amending its constitution and changing the composition of its security committee, to ensure that the civilian political forces are given more powers to act in more areas. We will have to check to see whether all of this is sufficient. Commissioner, you will have to help us to respect the Copenhagen Criteria. The Copenhagen Criteria explicitly state that we need to see developments on the political aspects for accession negotiations even to be justified. We will have to assess this on a case-by-case basis. If further negotiations get underway we will also have to answer the question of whether Turkey is in a position to meet the conditions of the European internal market. At this stage, I should like to mention just two points, which will provide a tangible touchstone as the European Union embarks on this very complex development against the background of a very dangerous situation for security policy. Personally, I cannot understand why Turkey refuses to seek a compromise under the European security and defence policy over the issue of the conditions under which it will be involved and what kind of cooperation there will be with NATO. For me this is a test case. We should not allow there to be any blackmail on this issue. I believe that there has to be a willingness to accept a compromise which was negotiated in Budapest and blocked by the military. Surely we should now be in a position to find our way back to these criteria and agree on them. The second point concerns what should be done about Cyprus. Is Turkey prepared to seek a constructive solution in Cyprus? If a solution is not possible, how will it react when the European Union enlarges? I believe that these are two very tangible issues on the basis of which Turkey's credibility can be judged."@en1

Named graphs describing this resource:

The resource appears as object in 2 triples

Context graph