Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2008-01-16-Speech-3-454"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20080116.19.3-454"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spoken text |
"Madam President, after more than a century and a half of neglect, the Black Sea area is again at the pinnacle of international economics and politics.
This area is currently striving to reach a new balance following the entrance of new actors, the EU included, after being considered a closed lake for so many years during the Cold War.
After the Commission’s communication entitled ‘Black Sea synergy: a new regional cooperation initiative’, the current first report in Parliament is another step in the right direction.
But unfortunately, both are still not enough. The lack of identity of the area itself and the traditional sensitivities of certain EU countries towards Russia, both political (for example Ukraine, Moldova, the Southern Caucasus and the frozen conflicts) and economic (the increased European dependence on Russian gas and the delicate status of the EU-Turkey negotiations), are probably among the reasons why the EU has limited itself to synergy instead of strategy.
While strategy means clear objectives, concrete means to attain them and, eventually, a detailed calendar, all tailored to the merit of the area itself, synergy suggests simply connecting to neighbouring areas of interest to the EU.
A strategy could be arrived at through concrete measures on how the EU deals with a multitude of local organisations; on physically linking the area to the rest of the continent in which the River Danube is crucial; and on strengthening the instrument of neighbourhood policy towards the Black Sea area, as suggested through my group’s amendments.
In conclusion, one word on Moldova, the last piece of continental Latinity outside EU borders. Although part of the same regrettable experience at the beginning of the Second World War, Moldova could not share the positive destiny of the three Baltic countries after the Cold War.
I believe Europe has a duty to correct that situation and thus continue to encourage and respond to Moldova’s efforts to join the Union. My hope is that her case will be finally judged on its own merit and not remain a de facto prisoner of other EU relations, no matter how strategic that relation might be."@en1
|
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:unclassifiedMetadata |
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples