Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2008-10-21-Speech-2-317"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20081021.39.2-317"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
"Mr President, Mr President-in-Office of the Council, Commissioner, there are many differences between the United States and Russia. Above all, I would like to see as free a presidential election in Russia as I would at least expect in the US today.
However, great powers also have certain similarities, and I hope that many of you may soon get to see the programme broadcast by the channel ARTE on the portrait of Henry Kissinger. With regard to the intervention in Chile and the continued interventions in Latin America, Kissinger and General Alexander Haig said the following: if the United States is disturbed by something, it will intervene and bring about a regime change. They declared themselves to be fully justified in taking this action. We can perhaps say something similar about Russia, although probably in fewer cases than the United States.
Both great powers are also somewhat at odds with international law. The interventions in Latin America, in particular, were very definitely contrary to international law. The war in Iraq was clearly against international law, and Russia’s actions in Abkhasia and South Ossetia were also contrary to international law. In the case of the Kosovo problem, we will have to wait and see whether the International Court of Justice determines the action to have been contrary to international law.
In both cases, Mr Zaleski – and I am saying this because I hold you in high regard – you were absolutely right when you said that this is a fascinating and strong country, but unpredictable. This applies as much to the US as to Russia, and we must respond to this.
In both cases, however, I think it would be wrong to break off the talks. After the clear violation of international law in the war with Iraq – and it was indeed a huge violation where thousands of people were killed – we did not say ‘now we will break off talks with the US’. We did, of course, continue discussions with this country.
I am not comparing the internal structure of the US and Russia, only their behaviour at international level. President Sarkozy is absolutely right – and I would like to thank him for his pragmatic, clear policy: we must, emphatically, engage in this dialogue.
The second point I would like to make is that we must strengthen the neighbouring countries, particularly as they are our neighbours too. We must give the Ukraine and Georgia strength so that they can also deal with their difficult neighbour, Russia. However, we must make sure that our action is rational, and the action taken by Mr Saakaschwili was not rational. The behaviour of Mr Juschtschenko towards Mrs Timoschenko, for example, is not rational either. We must ensure that our neighbours take rational action. If they do that and have our strength behind them, then they will also resist Russia, which is once again trying to play the great power."@en1
|
| lpv:videoURI |
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples