Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2008-05-21-Speech-3-305"

Predicate	Value (sorted: default)
rdf:type	lpv_eu:Speech2
dcterms:Date	"2008-05-21"^^xsd:date2
dcterms:Is Part Of	lp_eu:Tragic situation in Burma (debate)2
dcterms:Language	"fr"^^xsd:language2
lpv:document identification number	"en.20080521.23.3-305"2
lpv:hasSubsequent	lp_eu:2008-05-21-Speech-3-3062
lpv:speaker	lp:Daniel Cohn-bendit2
lpv:spokenAs	substitute; BUDG (2007-01-31--2009-07-13)3 co-chair; G/EFA (2007-07-20--2009-07-13)3 substitute; Delegation for relations with South Africa (2007-03-14--2009-07-13)3 unknown; Bündnis 90/Die Grünen (Germany) (2004-07-20--2009-07-13)3 substitute; SEDE (2007-01-31--2009-07-13)3 substitute; Delegation for relations with the NATO Parliamentary Assembly (2007-03-14--2009-07-13)3 substitute; Delegation to the EU-Turkey Joint Parliamentary Committee (2004-09-15--2009-07-13)3 substitute; Delegation to the Euro-Mediterranean Parliamentary Assembly (2007-03-15--2009-07-13)3 member; Conference of Presidents (2006-12-13--2009-07-13)3 member; AFCO (2007-01-31--2009-07-13)3
lpv:translated text	". Madam President, I feel we ought to be slightly more precise in the way we talk about this issue; for example, the concept of neutrality. We are not neutral. If we are for the people of Burma, this means we are against the military junta. Since the military junta has no intention of helping the people of Burma, we are against the military junta. We must not support it, and this is exactly how we are perceived. Louis Michel held discussions for two and a half hours. The entire story has a surrealist ring to it: he says he went there, he talked to them for two and a half hours, he was told that such-and-such an airport could not be mobilised in 24 hours, whereas technical facilities were provided to open an airport in Sarajevo. This is not really the problem. It is therefore obvious we are at an extremely specific juncture, and I agree: the responsibility to protect means the military junta is committing a crime against humanity, against its own population. This is a fact. We will see what becomes of this state of affairs in the public debates to follow. It is, however, true that this obvious case must be submitted to the International Court of Justice. What is most interesting is that in doing this we are addressing the Security Council, and Burma’s protectors, the Chinese, are in fact talking a rather unintelligible language. We could say, in fact, that China may have done the right thing by opening up its borders, but at the same time it continues to protect Burma, and continues to protect a government that is massacring its own people. Thus I feel that in this situation it is obvious nobody can impose food. We must nevertheless exert pressure, all the pressure we can. Even a possible solution involving assistance would give us and countries in Asia some chance of putting pressure on Burma. I think Louis Michel’s speech to us today was quite explicit: talk to me honey, talk to me, I’m listening, but I couldn’t care less. That is what he told us in his diplomatic way, for which I have the utmost respect. Today, however, the authorities in Burma are deaf. They will not listen, they are not interested in a constitutional referendum, as has been mentioned. They are laughing at us all. Henceforth, therefore, pressure must be stepped up to the maximum, and we must ask for the consequences to be submitted to the Security Council and the International Criminal Court in The Hague."@en1
lpv:unclassifiedMetadata	"manu militari"1

Named graphs describing this resource:

The resource appears as object in 2 triples

Context graph