Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2002-03-11-Speech-1-053"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20020311.4.1-053"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
"Mr President, I welcome this debate because I believe that Porto Alegre requires a firm response from the European Union.
We must deal with this in a mature fashion; in other words, act independently and responsibly. This is what some of those who are legitimately challenging a predatory and inhuman system still expect of Europe.
This year, at last, Porto Alegre firmly expressed a third demand which, despite the fact that its primary target is a military superpower, also concerns the European Union and its Member States. We cannot allow war to once again become a way to solve the world’s problems. We do not always know how war begins to become a part of everyday life, but we all know what it can lead to.
From this point of view, I refer to what I said at the opening of today’s sitting on the incredible revelation in the
regarding the existence of a secret plan at the Pentagon to authorise the use of atomic weapons. This extremely serious strategic about-turn goes hand-in-hand with the already exaggerated increase of the US military budget, an increase equivalent to the total amount of official development assistance of all the OECD countries.
Mr President, Europe must respond, not by attempting to imitate the model, but by working openly with its fellow citizens on bringing to life the now emblematic slogan of Porto Alegre: ‘another world is possible’.
First of all, many people attending the world forum expect the European Union to cut its ties with the ultra-liberal model that provides a structure for the current form of globalisation. At the same time, however, Mr Aznar, in his capacity as President-in-Office of the Council, summed up his profession of faith for Europe in three meaningful words, which are – and I quote – ‘liberalisation, privatisation and competition’.
We are still a long way from the requirement of sustainable development, from the requirement of promoting human abilities, in both the north and the south. Clearly, a consensus reached by the Fifteen to this effect at the forthcoming Barcelona Summit would constitute the most negative signal that the European Union could give to those I call ‘the people of Porto Alegre’.
We can obviously disregard them and prefer to believe, like the President of
at the World Economic Forum in New York, that globalisation is a good thing and that nothing needs to be changed. I doubt, however, that he will be proved correct over time.
Every era has provided such examples of short-sighted policies pursued by the ruling classes, who are too convinced of their beliefs and interests to allow a rebellious division to emerge that challenges its dogmas and status.
We are all familiar with the episode in history where Louis XVI, King of France, wrote ‘nothing to report’ in his personal diary on the page dated 14 July 1789. I hope that the European Union will demonstrate rather more insight.
Porto Alegre is also focusing the European Union’s attention on its responsibilities, in the face of the heightened and dangerous unilateralism of America under President George W. Bush. We cannot, firstly, expect the whole world to express its solidarity when one falls victim to a savage act of violence, and then, secondly, act according to one’s own agenda, and disregard every rule, principle and scruple.
In a globalised world, the more powerful one is, the more responsibilities one has towards others and towards the planet. Ignore these responsibilities and globalisation becomes a minefield. I believe that the European Union’s primary duty is, in fact, to combat this very real danger.
Yet, when it comes to its relations with the United States, one often has the impression that Europe is scared of its own shadow. For instance, on 8 February 2002 in Casares, the Fifteen had only just declared their clear position on the situation in the Middle East, when its major allies in Washington pathetically changed their stance a mere two weeks later."@en1
|
| lpv:unclassifiedMetadata |
"Sun Micro Systems"1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples