Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2007-12-13-Speech-4-171"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20071213.27.4-171"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spoken text |
"Madam President, I want to make a couple of important and essential points. There is absolutely no doubt that intervention is required in Chad. There is no doubt that the teeming human misery of refugees in that part of our world is unbearable to see, but I want to state very clearly that there are a number of core difficulties with this proposed mission.
The first of these is the lack of clarity in terms of the operation’s mandate. We are saying that this is a peace-keeping and humanitarian effort. If that is indeed so, then this must be made doubly clear in the terms of reference for the troops we send. I believe that clarity is lacking.
I do not believe – and I have to disagree with my colleague – that an intervention shaped in this way will actually increase security. We have recently witnessed a growing intensity and barbarity of the conflict. We have also heard from leaders of many of the rebel groups that any intervention, and this intervention in particular, will be considered hostile. That poses a huge difficulty.
I must also say – and, again, I disagree with my colleague – that the troops as currently configured will not act as the neutral force that is required. I have to say, with the greatest of respect for France and her people, that to load the mission so much towards France verges on the provocative, and I think it deeply unwise.
I do not believe that it is possible for us to formulate a common European defence or security policy. The difficulties that have arisen – in this instance in relation to Chad – reflect very clearly why. I think it is undoable, because we have very different traditions and histories and very different foreign policy goals and outlooks. For this reason in particular it is a great shame – if I may say so, coming from a country that is still at least nominally militarily neutral – that the obligations, responsibilities and capacities of militarily neutral states are not recognised sufficiently in the European Union, and particularly not in the Lisbon Treaty. I believe that countries with that tradition could make the kind of valued intervention based on neutrality that my colleague has mentioned.
To conclude, intervention in Chad is necessary. However, the essential thing is how we go about this. Any operation has to be focused. It certainly has to be neutral and, above all, it must have prospects of success."@en1
|
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:unclassifiedMetadata |
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples