Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2008-06-04-Speech-3-033"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20080604.15.3-033"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
"Mr President, ladies and gentlemen, I will not repeat all the congratulations or re-emphasise the points on which we actually agree: that is, the call for a coherent foreign and security policy, such as Mr Saryusz-Wolski has formulated for us, and of course the question of parliamentary scrutiny and transparency. When we return to our national Member States we notice in all our discussions that, the more the European Union becomes involved in foreign and security policy, the more we wish to and must promote these instruments for transparency and legitimacy amongst the population of our own country.
I would like to address the contentious points that no one else has mentioned yet. Mr Verheugen, in the first debate we discussed the draft of Mr Kuhne’s report with Commissioner Ferrero-Waldner. She, like my group, emphasised that it is beneficial that we keep on thinking about this, that we not only discuss reworking the European Security Strategy but also try to formulate a joint mission statement, namely the question of human security and the responsibility to protect. Anyone who has been following what has happened since then will have been aware of the strange coalition of the conservatives under Mr von Wogau and the communists under Mr Pflüger. The relevant passage has been deleted, with the support of both groups, and we will make a fresh request for it to be included, since if we do not meet this political challenge, we will lose our credibility with regard to the way we deal with this topic, that is, with conflict prevention, but also with the question of what we do about Darfur, Chad and other conflicts that we should be wary of.
The second thing, which I find absurd, even though we have not yet reached consensus on it, is that the conservatives under Mr von Wogau are requesting that we take the US national security strategy into account in the future within the framework of the European Security Strategy and our reworking of it. That is completely absurd, because this policy has run aground and we know that the US Administration has failed with this escalation, this unilateralism, and that it has cost many lives. To then say that we should absorb this into our future European foreign policy – I find that more than absurd!
Thirdly, I would like to raise an extremely important matter: proliferation. Mr Solana, I also wish you every success. We need dialogue, including with Iran, but I would ask my fellow Members this: when we are talking about energy security which, after all, is part of wider security – is it the correct response when Mr Sarkozy, as the future President-in-Office of the Council of the European Union, announces that he wants to place nuclear technology on the world market without restriction and with no means of monitoring it? What happens to our credibility then? Firstly, we are not effecting nuclear disarmament, which we are supposed to be doing. Secondly, we are circulating this technology even though we know that it can always be abused from a military aspect. I believe we are making a mistake in this and therefore we will also be submitting an amendment."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples