Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2002-03-13-Speech-3-052"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20020313.3.3-052"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spoken text |
"Mr President, I would like to thank the President-in-Office of the Council and the Commissioner for their comments this morning. I believe that we have reached one of those critical stages in the development of the transatlantic relationship in its global context.
Firstly, looking at the overall relationship, it is quite clear – as our two speakers have said – that since 11 September 2001 we have seen a significant change in the way in which the Americans view their place in the world. We see an America under attack – one which we recognised on 12 September in this House, but which perhaps we now fail to recognise six months on.
Secondly, we are in danger of seeing an unravelling of the security side of our relationship, where a political consensus underlying NATO cannot now be taken for granted for out-of-area responsibilities. We see the military gap widening and perhaps difficulties also in expanding NATO operations.
Thirdly, the strong impetus that came with the 1995 New Transatlantic Agenda now appears to be under threat because of a lack of political vision and, perhaps, frustration at the lack of results among many of the parties involved in the dialogues.
On the specific case of steel, I can only welcome the comments made by the Commissioner in deploring the US decision. The Commission should take action to seek compensation, and look for legal means of taking retaliatory action. I would also add that it would be very unhelpful, as Mr Aldonas at the Department of Commerce in the United States has suggested, for the US to link this steel dispute to the wider issue of problems in the global economy. That surely is not the way to go.
Fourthly, I come to what we might be able to do in the present context. It is indeed tempting to think of taking retaliatory action through tariffs. However, as
stated on 7 March, in Bush's folly, tariff walls would amount to an own goal. It would simply be a futile effort by the Americans to preserve unviable jobs in steel. Surely, therefore, we should be looking for a broader transatlantic partnership in which to define Europe's role and America's role and build on our common interests together. As regards NATO, that means ensuring that we can move NATO on to more global responsibilities. Furthermore, your meeting on 2 May at the EU/US Summit to update the New Transatlantic Agenda to meet new challenges must ensure that the political communities are properly involved.
In conclusion, it is up to you to provide leadership. We must be tough and take the necessary action to protect our interests in this steel dispute, but also think of the broader context and form a vision of how the transatlantic partnership should look in the 21st century."@en1
|
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:unclassifiedMetadata |
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples