Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2005-04-13-Speech-3-260"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20050413.20.3-260"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:translated text |
".
Mr President, honourable Members and rapporteurs, let me start by thanking you most warmly for your weighty and even-handed reports, most of which leave little to be desired where clarity is concerned.
I mentioned earlier another key instrument for implementing the European Security Strategy, by which I mean, of course, our development policy. Here we are again trying to move forward, not least with the UN’s Millennium Goals in mind, for it is here too – as I said earlier – that we Europeans must set the pace.
Let me now also draw your attention to the Commission’s forthcoming proposals for reform of European crisis management and civilian protection, which we will be presenting next week in a communication to the Council and to your House, the details of which you will of course have an opportunity to debate. I will also take this opportunity to thank Parliament for its support for the European Security Research Programme, on which the Commission is working very closely with the European Defence Agency.
I also want to stress that I attach importance to Parliament’s proposal for a regular debate on the Security Strategy, which would also involve the parliaments of the Member States. We are right to cite democracy and the rule of law as essential values underpinning Europe, and hence also as integral parts of our foreign policy.
The European Union can, however, be strong on the international stage only if its actions really are coherent, and so, if it is to face up to the new challenges, it needs more than just the common foreign and security policy in the strict sense of the term. The common foreign and security policy is one among several instruments that the EU possesses in the foreign policy sphere and complements our other policies. The success of this broad-based approach is, I believe, demonstrated by the concept of the European Neighbourhood Policy, which illustrates one of my own particular priorities; the export of security, stability and prosperity to our neighbours and facilitation of structural reforms, all of which clearly has a security policy dimension to it. The European Neighbourhood Policy parallels exactly our European development policy in being a long-term and intelligent security policy in the regional context.
We have already made a start on implementing this. It is being used to gradually deepen our relationships with our partner states, above all through the detailed joint action plans, which give them clear prospects for drawing closer to Europe. Parliament’s forthright support for the neighbourhood policy was very important to me, and it still is. I therefore look forward with interest to Mr Laschet’s report.
One can – and I will – describe the European Neighbourhood Policy as our security policy on a regional scale. It helps to promote stability and reform in regions with a crucial geopolitical impact through their long-term association with Europe and through specific joint activities, such as anti-terrorist cooperation. This makes it an essential instrument in implementing the European Security Strategy. We have already concluded detailed and ambitious plans of action with seven partner countries, of which Ukraine is one, and five more are in the pipeline.
One of the last things I would like to say is that the reports also put a great deal of emphasis on the need for institutional reforms. This is something that our new Constitutional Treaty will renew in fundamental and positive ways, and these the Commission very much endorses. I am therefore very interested in your detailed proposals and will take note of them. We have for some time been making preparations for the Treaty’s implementation, in order that it may become operational at once following what we hope will be its successful ratification. This will be accomplished not least through the establishment of a Joint Foreign Service, concerning which very profound discussions are going on between the Council and the Commission. These reforms really are important. Even more effective collaboration between the EU institutions is indispensable.
Mr Kuhne’s report rightly highlights the obvious need for the EU, as an actor on the global stage, to be endowed with the financial resources it needs. For that reason, I, too, am confident that we will soon be able to come to an agreement on the reform of our foreign aid instruments that the Commission has proposed. At the same time, though, it is also clear that institutional reform and improved finances can be no substitute for the political will that we need. It follows that Europe needs even more to think of itself as a global player. As the forum for a broad, transparent and democratic debate, your House plays a crucial role in articulating that political will.
I would like to pick up three specific things that enhance Europe’s global role. One of them is effective multilateralism. I see this as being beyond doubt the right response to our being ever more closely connected internationally. This year, 2005, will be decisive in terms of reform and the reinforcement of multilateralism, of international law, and, in particular, of the United Nations. The UN Summit in September will take the latest report by its Secretary-General, Kofi Annan, as a basis for essential decision-making in this area.
I believe it to be essential that Europe should make a contribution to this debate on reform. This is an area in which it has a leadership role, one that it must actually play. It is for that reason that the Commission is currently engaged in producing detailed proposals on the issues to which I have referred. As you will be aware, I am currently pressing for the EU to have a seat on the UN Security Council. The details of how this will work out are a matter for discussion, but what matters is that the EU should, in important international bodies, carry the weight that is rightly its due.
As Mr Schmit has just said, multilateralism can be effective only if it is founded upon a strong transatlantic partnership. Effective solutions to the world’s problems can be found only if the United States of America and Europe are really singing from the same hymn sheet. President Bush’s visit to Brussels clearly showed that the United States of America is very much aware of the ever-expanding and ever more important role of the EU.
It is with this ever-broader agenda that our common structures must be able to cope, while at the same time remaining flexible. The Commission is currently examining whether, and if so to what extent, our institutions need to amend the New Transatlantic Agenda. What emerges from our deliberations will then form a contribution to the EU-US Summit in June. I believe – as do others, both individuals and groups, in this House – that closer relations between it and the US Congress are essential in this regard.
The reports rightly reflect the fact that Europe’s foreign policy is already underpinned by a comprehensive concept of security. I believe that guaranteeing Europe’s security is not just about defence policy or military operations; today, above all, it has to do with conflict prevention, with civilian crisis management and common policies on trade, the economy, energy, justice, health and the environment.
The European Security Strategy already takes account of these complex potential threats. The Commission is making an important contribution, not least to its implementation, in our day-to-day close relations with third countries and, most recently, also through various communications, not only on such issues as anti-terrorism and improved civil protection, but also in terms of the reform of development policy, concerning which we, in the Commission, put out important communications yesterday.
I believe that the broader concept of security must, ultimately, focus on the safety of people, which has been a constant theme in my own work. Behind structural security risks, there are often offences against the freedom and dignity of individuals. To sum up, the actions referred to in the Security Strategy in respect of such things as the non-proliferation of weapons of mass destruction or defences against terrorism, the ways in which we deal with failed states and regional conflicts can be successful only if they form part of a wider policy of conflict prevention and conflict resolution. One example of this is Afghanistan, and we hope that Iraq will one day be an example of how such an approach can bear fruit.
This is where the EU’s unique collection of instruments puts it at a comparative advantage, but, if we are to work efficiently, we need to deploy them all – civil, military and sectoral – in a coherent way. We have to make long-term plans for crisis regions, targeting and deploying as an integral whole our Community instruments – not only overseas aid, but also the prospect of closer relations with the EU. In addition to that, there is the help we give with nuclear non-proliferation, in the shape, for example, of the enormous amount of aid the EU has given for nuclear safety and non-proliferation since the beginning of the 1990s, not to mention our commitment to fighting terrorism, the spread of small arms and landmines, and drugs."@en1
|
| lpv:unclassifiedMetadata |
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples