Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2003-03-12-Speech-3-155"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20030312.4.3-155"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
"Mr President, ladies and gentlemen, on behalf of my own group, too, I would like to express our profound sense of bewilderment at the death of Mr Djindjić and to take this opportunity to say that events such as these always forcefully bring us back to the question of whether the establishment of peace in this region really has advanced as far as we hoped it had.
Apart from that, Mr Gollnisch, I take the view that our taking over from NATO responsibility for the mission in Macedonia is an historic event. Even though the unit involved is a very small one, this still creates a precedent, in that structures and possibilities are being created on which we will later be able to build. It is for that reason that I believe this to be an important step on the road that leads to a European defence policy.
For the first time, the EU is taking on responsibility for the military side of peacekeeping in the Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia. What functions do parliaments have to perform in operations of this kind? It is one of the principles of democratic politics that military operations may be mounted only with the mandate of a directly elected parliament. For Macedonia, these mandates were provided by the national parliaments. If European defence policy is to develop further, mandates will in future have to be given by the European Parliament, and so, our primary expectation of the Council is that it should do what has already been demanded of it and, this very day, meet this need by providing truly comprehensive information and, secondly, we expect the Convention to give parliamentary control a clear, unambiguous and permanent place in the future constitutional treaty.
Those in positions of political leadership must ensure that the troops on the ground are not exposed to unnecessary dangers – and what gives rise to these? They come about as a result of the wrong orders being given or of inadequate leadership and equipment. This consideration leads me to put a number of questions to the Council, and also to the Commission. For a start, what difference will it make that American troops are no longer to be deployed in Macedonia? Might not the loss of certain capacities expose our soldiers to danger?
My second question concerns the way in which decisions are implemented. Are you confident that the decisions taken by the Council will then be implemented by way of NATO, and that, when decisions have to be implemented without delay on the ground, these lines of command really do function as quickly as will be required of them?
Thirdly, I turn to costs, on which I have questions about both the civilian and military sides of this mission. It is my view that both the Convention and the new constitutional treaty will, in future, have to make it possible for the military costs of the mission, as well as the civilian ones, to be borne by the Budget of the European Union.
I would like to conclude by saying that we have seen in this morning's debate on Iraq just how inadequate the European Union's foreign and security policy can still be at the present time, but, at the same time, I would like to give voice to the hope that, at any rate in the European Union's immediate vicinity, where the essence and heart of Europe – of which the Balkans are part – are at stake, we may continue to demonstrate the European Union's capacity to contribute to the maintenance of peace."@en1
|
| lpv:unclassifiedMetadata |
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples