Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2003-06-04-Speech-3-177"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20030604.5.3-177"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spoken text |
". – Madam President, I am speaking on behalf of our chairman, Mr Brok, of the Committee on Foreign Affairs, Human Rights, Common Security and Defence Policy. It is imperative that we think seriously about how to foster and strengthen the transatlantic relationship today. That is the thrust of our questions to the Council and the Commission: the development of the transatlantic partnership.
It is our view that our shortcomings in common security and defence policy have been ruthlessly exposed by the Iraq conflict and that, in consequence, has badly damaged the transatlantic partnership.
We believe that intergovernmental action still has the upper hand, and that is at the expense of the
in the transatlantic relationship. Joint structures which we could develop with institutions in Brussels, perhaps under the European Convention, will assist in greater coordination. But unless the Member States demonstrate a political will to pursue joint action, the development of the common defence and security policy in the context of the transatlantic alliance will not have the force that it both demands and deserves.
As President Bush said earlier this week in Poland, the common values that underpin that transatlantic relationship are the common foreign policy element that can bring the European Union together with the USA. However, we cannot afford to behave in an erratic, inconsequential and fragmented manner. The USA is such a strong partner that if the European Union cannot speak with one voice – if not a common voice, perhaps a single voice, but at least a coordinated voice – then we will continue to fall behind in the transatlantic partnership. The European Union in this context is facing its most serious crisis of the last decade.
The question today, which we look to the Commissioner and to the Council of Ministers to answer, is whether or not we can return to a real partnership with the USA. Can we give that partnership the new dynamism that the Committee on Foreign Affairs believes it demands and deserves, and can we be a full partner of the USA, or must we always feel that we are falling behind? We see that there is potential for a dramatic renewal of the transatlantic alliance, and here the partnership between the EU and the USA plays the most fundamental role.
Of course, we see a stronger Europe as a condition for the very survival of Nato. It is not just the European Union that has been damaged by the conflict in Iraq and by the outfall of that conflict; Nato and the United Nations have also been seriously damaged. Most Member States of the European Union are an integral part of Nato, and even those who are not still believe that Nato is the fundamental guarantee for European Atlantic stability. We, therefore, seek reassurance this afternoon that the Council of Ministers and the Commission share our view on this and that they too feel that a stronger Europe will mean a stronger Nato. Can we from the European Union – those of us who are members and non-members – strengthen the Nato-Euro-Atlantic Alliance, since it is still a fundamental guarantee for European stability? We therefore seek to discuss what purpose the Atlantic Alliance now serves, how the Atlantic Alliance should be structured and what means should be placed at its disposal. Indeed, Nato itself needs reform, in particular with regard to military restructuring.
We have had many discussions lately in the context of the common security and defence policy, including with the Commissioner himself last night in the Western European Union-European Parliament joint dialogue on military restructuring, focusing in particular on full cooperation between EU Member States and our heavy investments in the modern technologies. But how can we achieve that most effectively within the Nato context, and perhaps in a less costly way? Institutional reform of Nato is also something we see as imperative.
Thus, we seek a coherent performance for the European Union both at home and abroad, based on consistent strategic thought and action. We look forward to a full debate this afternoon to enable us to kick-start, with the real dimension it deserves, a proper transatlantic relationship in the post-Iraq context."@en1
|
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:unclassifiedMetadata |
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples