Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2007-03-29-Speech-4-027"

Predicate	Value (sorted: default)
rdf:type	lpv_eu:Speech2
dcterms:Date	"2007-03-29"^^xsd:date2
dcterms:Is Part Of	lp_eu:Prospects for the EU's Common Foreign Policy in 2007, including the deployment of anti-missile defence systems in Europe by the United States (debate)2
dcterms:Language	"de"^^xsd:language2
lpv:document identification number	"en.20070329.5.4-027"2
lpv:hasSubsequent	lp_eu:2007-03-29-Speech-4-0282
lpv:speaker	lp:Angelika Beer2
lpv:spokenAs	member; AFET (2007-01-31--2009-07-13)3 chair; Delegation for relations with Iran (2007-03-14--2009-07-13)3 member; SEDE (2007-01-31--2009-07-13)3 member; G/EFA (2004-07-20--2009-07-13)3 member; Delegation for relations with Afghanistan (2007-03-15--2009-07-13)3 substitute; Delegation to the EU-Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia Joint Parliamentary Committee (2004-09-15--2009-07-13)3 member; Conference of Delegation Chairs (2004-09-22--2009-07-13)3 member; Delegation for relations with the NATO Parliamentary Assembly (2007-03-14--2009-07-13)3 unknown; Bündnis 90/Die Grünen (2004-07-20--2009-07-13)3
lpv:translated text	"Mr President, Mr Solana’s interesting speech made it clear to me just what the European dilemma actually is, for we have a lot to say about the Common Foreign and Security Policy, but on nothing – anywhere – do we actually end up managing to adopt a common position. Mr Solana, I welcome what you had to say about the Middle East. If we try to negotiate with states such as Iran or the Arab League, we should do likewise with Hamas, which has at least been elected. While nuclear disarmament, to which you refer, is a cause close to the heart of this House, where is there a united voice criticising the United Kingdom for its renewal of the Trident programme? Even though the governments of two countries – the USA and the United Kingdom – are set to be voted out of office in the near future, they still want to rearm and present new threats to the world. Speaking about Kosovo, you mentioned that you support Ahtisaari, but what form does that support take? Why is it that Europe is not bold enough to say what is now to be done? Why does it not break cover? Supervised independence is what is needed, and yet we avoid using the term as if it carried the plague. It is high time that Europe and its Parliament – which will be voting on the subject today – should at last say that there is no going back, that Kosovo will not be handed back to Serbia, that the no longer works, and that we have to go down this difficult road instead of organising police missions and waiting for others to clarify where they stand. What is needed is a new resolution by the UN Security Council, and the old Resolution 1244, which is still in force, must be thrown out. The ESDP Mission also needs its mandate. It is not enough to wait for others to clarify matters on this front, and so, while I welcome your speech, I would ask you to go on to say whether you endorse Mr Ahtisaari’s letter to the UN Security Council, in which he speaks of ‘supervised independence’ and the statement made by Mr Ban I Moon. Why is it that Europe is trying to evade its responsibilities in this regard?"@en1
lpv:unclassifiedMetadata	"status quo"1

Named graphs describing this resource:

The resource appears as object in 2 triples

Context graph