Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2002-04-10-Speech-3-013"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20020410.1.3-013"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
"Mr President, I am the reprehensible author, or co-author of the resolution. Needless to say, I am also impressed with the enthusiasm and commitment with which Mr Dupuis is talking about this issue. Nevertheless, I take the view that it is very important, particularly in a situation as complicated as this one, where it is important to help find a solution, to keep a cool head, even though we have a warm heart.
It is true that, after the first war, the politicians in Chechnya actually received all our sympathy. The outlook was, in fact, very rosy and, indeed, as the Chairman of my group, Mr Poettering, said, Tatarstan was a shining example. Chechnya could have developed into a Tatarstan, and perhaps even a Tatarstan with more independence than Tatarstan itself. This was also provided for in Russian policy. What did we ultimately see? That, in the time between the two wars over Chechnya, nothing was achieved in the way of forming a state. A failed state emerged, which is a disaster. We have seen this everywhere where the situation is similar. We have seen this in former Afghanistan and in Somalia, where this is still a live issue. We have also identified this in other parts of the world. A failed state is a disaster for all citizens and for the international community, for what can happen in such a failed state always has international repercussions.
We therefore watched – and this was also observed by our Western journalists – Chechnya degenerate into a kidnapping state, a robber state, a smuggler state revolving around the oil which runs through it. This is a disaster which we are facing. Then a war breaks out. One of a kind which we would never ever want to see, neither from the Chechen point of view nor from the Russian point of view. So a war ensues in which it is even difficult to distinguish citizens from the military and which therefore claims many civilian victims. The battle surrounding Chechnya has elements of a freedom struggle, but these are terribly overshadowed by radicalisation and imbued with criminal activity. We are now also informed of Russian troops and Chechen rebels together earning a handsome figure from oil which is transported through the region illegally. These are very ironic facts which we are facing and it is not easy to say: this is black and this is white. It is not like that in this case.
I have to admit that I am pleased that, at the time, I was able to hold extensive talks with colleagues of the Duma, namely the chairman of the committee responsible for Chechnya, the chairman of the Human Rights Committee and the spokesperson of the army, General Manilov. They were all very honest with me about the concern which all of this has caused them. And they never disguised anything, which shows me that Moscow, too, takes this matter very seriously but fails to find the answer. All the more reason why we should intervene on the strength of our partnership with Russia. Human rights are in our line of business. They will never be able to disappear from our agenda, and certainly not if they involve a close partner, as Russia currently is. We should make it our concern. This is why our resolution is full of questions. It is indeed easy and exciting only to address Russia with accusations, but we also have a great many questions. We also have a number of proposals, and these are all aimed at reconstruction, humanitarian aid, better reception of refugees from those regions, options to return home and the development of the social conditions under which it is possible to return home. This is also self-evident, even to the politicians in Moscow with responsibility for the situation.
During talks with them, it is impossible to ignore the feeling that they too are very much struggling with this issue. And if the situation could be different, they would be in favour of it. They are also very much convinced that war criminals from their own ranks should be brought to justice. The difficulty and the uncomfortable fact that we are left with is that this is not done frequently enough, because commanders on the ground tend to protect their own soldiers from jurisdiction. This is a reprehensible attitude, but we recognise it in different wars, including colonial wars, such as the one which the Netherlands fought in Indonesia after the Second World War. It was very often the case that, only 20 or 30 years after the event, was it possible in the Netherlands to mention war crimes which our own boys had committed in Indonesia. I am pleased that, at least in Russia, openness is being achieved more promptly in this matter, which also creates the opportunity for action. Once again, we read recently that President Putin collects people around him and asks them to moot ideas for a viable policy to inject, where possible, peace and security into Chechnya once again. Maybe in conjunction with Ingushetia, there are all kinds of plans afoot in Russia to examine to what extent it would be possible to create a reasonably functioning state, for that is something which concerns us all.
There are indeed 200 000 refugees, and it would be of crucial importance – and we have insisted on this in the past – for Commissioner Nielsen, who is, after all, responsible for refugee issues and humanitarian issues, to have a personal input in this. It is, of course, the case that it would be quite difficult to ask for entry into Chechnya right now. We, and I personally, have on a couple of occasions asked the ambassador and other Russian representatives here to allow us entry to Chechnya. Every time, this question is avoided, and this is why I will give my full backing to the proposals, including those made in the Council of Europe, to set up delegations, possibly in combination with members of the Duma who have a sense of responsibility, to go there and to establish for ourselves what is going on. For only if we really know what the situation is like over there and if the international press, as stated in the resolution, and the Russian press, are allowed entry, will it be possible to make well-informed proposals which make any sense."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples