Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2008-03-10-Speech-1-040"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20080310.15.1-040"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
"Mr President, ladies and gentlemen, as far as the analysis of the situation is concerned, I really have nothing to add to your remarks and those of Joseph Daul.
Perhaps, then, the crucial task for us Europeans is to take to heart some words spoken by an Israeli, namely Yitzhak Rabin. In 1995, he made one of the wisest statements I have encountered: ‘We shall fight terrorism as if there is no peace process and pursue the peace process as if there is no terrorism’. That is the message to both sides. Without such a message there will be no peace.
We all agree on what is needed, and we are all familiar with the present situation. There is therefore no need for me to recapitulate the list of requirements from the perspective of the European Union or to repeat anything about the role of the EU itself. I must stress, however, that we cannot stay silent when things we construct with resources provided by the European Union are then senselessly destroyed within a short time.
That has all been said. For this reason I will look at what we in the Socialist Group have to say in this debate at the current time and pick out the following thought for us to ponder: if the principle of renouncing violence cannot be established as a priority, there will be no solution for Gaza and no end to the spiral of violence that has plagued the Middle East for decades.
This is why it has to be said quite categorically that the renunciation of violence – the announcement by both sides of their intention to refrain from any further use of force and to focus all their efforts on the achievement of a negotiated settlement – is not an invention of this House but underlies repeated attempts over the last few decades – and Annapolis was essentially nothing more than a fresh attempt – to bring about dialogue without violence.
Why do these attempts keep failing? The reasons are obvious, and they must be spelled out. They fail because there are people on both sides with an interest in continuing the struggle or preaching violence. On the one side, particularly in terrorist circles, there are those who propagate denial of Israel’s right to exist and therefore advocate the use of violence as a matter of principle, while on the other side, in the democratic structures of the State of Israel, whenever an Israeli Government is prepared to negotiate in search of peaceful solutions, the whole process is held hostage by parliamentary tacticians.
This, of course, is precisely what we are experiencing once again. In Annapolis, the Prime Minister says he wants to negotiate, and Members of the Knesset and ministers from his own government restrict his negotiating mandate for reasons of party-political tactics that all of us will recognise.
The fate of the people in Gaza and the pointless blockade that has brought chaos and misery to that territory are the result of the view espoused by Hamas, which seized power illegally, that violence is the only answer. This point has to be clearly highlighted, as has the observation that the powers they have usurped are not being used to dissuade radicals in their own ranks from resorting to violence. That, in fact, is at the root of the suffering endured by the civilian population of the Gaza Strip.
Just as firmly rooted is the fact that those on the Israeli side who seek to sabotage every small step forward because they are pursuing their own agenda succeed repeatedly in undermining even the most minimal progress by means of provocation. I cannot arrive at any other explanation for occurrences such as the announcement of the continuing construction of settlements.
Who are the ultimate losers? Women, children, defenceless people, especially in the Gaza Strip, but also, of course, Israelis living close to the border. To sum up what we have been experiencing, let me say that the radicals need this conflict to justify their existence. That has been a fact of life for decades, and this chronic condition is prevalent on both sides. We must say to these radicals on either side that they can never achieve their goal. They may perpetuate violence, but they will never achieve their political objectives, because political objectives are never achieved by violence."@en1
|
| lpv:unclassifiedMetadata |
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples