Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2001-10-24-Speech-3-205"

PredicateValue (sorted: default)
rdf:type
dcterms:Date
dcterms:Is Part Of
dcterms:Language
lpv:document identification number
"en.20011024.9.3-205"2
lpv:hasSubsequent
lpv:speaker
lpv:spokenAs
lpv:translated text
"Mr President, Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen, I should like to congratulate Mr Lamassoure on his report. It is a very good report. Some people think that it is too soft. I do not believe that it is too soft; it simply uses a language which leaves the way open for a dialogue with Turkey and we want to enter into this dialogue. There are a number of hard points, however, which we need to discuss with Turkey, and certainly there is still a need to discuss the issue of human rights, in particular. It has been mentioned that people are in prison who should not be, first and foremost Leyla Zana. Turkey could and should, particularly in the light of rulings made by the European courts, ensure that they are released without delay. On the issue of Kurdish rights too, much remains to be done. It is obvious that the language, which, thanks to constitutional amendments, can now be used, should also be employed in the official media as soon as possible. The state of emergency could then be lifted relatively quickly in the provinces in which it is still in force. The constitutional amendments which Turkey has made are positive steps. We definitely wish to take note of them. However, now it is a question, firstly, of removing the constraints still connected to them, for example the death penalty, and, of course, of ensuring that the constitutional amendments are also implemented. A major task for Turkey is to do this in the very near future. On the subject of time, I should like to come back to an idea which I put forward when I had the honour of drawing up a report for this Parliament comprising a road map or timetable, and that is why tomorrow we will also be proposing that Turkey, itself, should table a timetable next year showing how it intends to meet the political Copenhagen criterion. Satisfaction of this political criterion is the precondition for our also being able to negotiate with Turkey. After all, this is the aim of the whole exercise, of which this report is also a part. I should also, however, like to address two points, which continue to be crucial for relations between the European Union and Turkey. The first point is Turkey's assistance in shaping an active and efficient external security policy. We know that at the end of the day this also presupposes that we are able to use NATO resources and this is still a stumbling block for Turkey. Turkey needs to know that this is damaging its prospects. The final problem is Cyprus. Here, too, I should like to say quite clearly that it is important to resolve the Cyprus problem, firstly, for the Turkish population of Cyprus and secondly, and undoubtedly, for the Greek population of Cyprus, the whole of Europe and Turkey itself. Turkey simply has not realised this. I would stress something which I have said repeatedly in the past: Turkey's path to the European Union is via Cyprus. Its assistance with resolving the Cyprus issue is not a precondition for our accepting Cyprus into the European Union, but it would be a basis on which we could enter into serious discussions about Turkey's membership of the European Union."@en1

Named graphs describing this resource:

1http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/rdf/English.ttl.gz
2http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/rdf/Events_and_structure.ttl.gz
3http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/rdf/spokenAs.ttl.gz

The resource appears as object in 2 triples

Context graph