Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2008-10-22-Speech-3-264"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20081022.17.3-264"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
".
With regard to the second round of talks on a new partnership and cooperation agreement between the European Union and Vietnam, which were held yesterday and the day before that in Hanoi, a majority of this Parliament has adopted a resolution which seems more like an exercise in hypocrisy and instrumentalisation of human rights.
On reading its content, we could question why this majority in Parliament has not also proposed making the future agreement dependent on a clause ensuring respect for democracy and human rights on the part of the EU.
How useful and educational it would be for the EP, for example, to ‘ask’ the Member States and the EU to refrain from collaborating with and/or whitewashing the criminal CIA flights, to respect the human rights of immigrants, flagrantly violated in the ‘return directive’, to respect the democratically and sovereignly expressed will of the French, Dutch and Irish people who rejected the proposed ‘Constitutional’/‘Lisbon’ Treaty, to respect international law, particularly with regard to Kosovo, and to stop pretending that they can give lessons to the world …
What would happen if Vietnam were doing all this? Would the EP agree to negotiate under those conditions? Would it agree to reciprocally apply this clause? Obviously not, because ‘dialogue’ and the ‘clause’ are only for others …"@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples