Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2002-05-16-Speech-4-184"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20020516.10.4-184"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
"Mr President, ladies and gentlemen, unfortunately, the negative developments in Zimbabwe are in inverse proportion to the degree of international attention focussed on this country since the rigged presidential elections in March. One of the most dramatic outcomes, for example, are the growing food shortages which, as Commissioner Nielson has already mentioned in another context, are largely man-made, namely by the Mugabe regime itself. We have received reports that around 50 000 people in Zimbabwe have fled their homes as a result of repression and violence at the hands of Mugabe's troops, and we receive daily reports of farm lootings, while Zimbabwe's leadership is blatantly enriching itself by confiscating private property while it can still get away with it.
However, I would also like to draw your attention to another quite scandalous aspect, namely the Council's response to the situation. Yesterday I received a reply to an application for information from the Council. I asked for an update on the targeted sanctions applied against certain persons. I wanted to find out about the situation regarding the refusal to grant them visas. In reply, I was told this was a matter for the Member States. In other words, I could have just asked the others this time.
Apart from that, the question which really arises is this: what are the Council's motives concerning these measures in a country which – as Commissioner Patten said at a Committee meeting – is in freefall? How has the Council managed to achieve a situation in which a country which is in freefall has vanished completely from its operational agenda?
It was postponed in April, and a more comprehensive decision in May was also postponed because the high level troika had not yet departed. It is now due to leave on Sunday. The really lamentable aspect of this state of affairs are the attempts by France, Belgium and the Presidency itself to water down the troika's terms of reference in advance of the visit. In light of the situation in the country, this is really quite incredible. There is already talk of resuming cooperation, even though no evaluation of the measures we have taken has yet been carried out.
I really do ask myself what else has to befall the country to raise the Council's awareness of its responsibilities in this context once more. I hope, at least, that the European Union troika, which will visit the region from Sunday to confer with SADAC countries on possible courses of action in response to the Zimbabwean crisis, will hear first-hand, at least in one of Zimbabwe's neighbours, about the dramatic worsening of the situation in Zimbabwe from diplomats posted in Harare.
As the European Parliament, we cannot accept the Council's attempts to play down such an urgent issue in southern Africa in this way, and, above all, that it is not prepared to make these developments in Zimbabwe a test case for the new African development programme, for example. These are the things we should definitely be demanding."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples