Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2010-09-22-Speech-3-342"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20100922.23.3-342"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:translated text |
"Mr President, Minister, I would like to make three additional points in reply.
First, as regards MONUSCO, many of you have referred to its role, or rather its passiveness. We have warned against the premature withdrawal of MONUSCO on several occasions in order to avoid a vacuum and the possibility of even greater deterioration of security in the areas affected by the conflicts. Generally speaking, beyond the atrocities committed, we can only welcome the way in which the United Nations has handled the issue of extending the mandate of the UN mission in the DRC. As you know, while the new mandate was being discussed in the United Nations, for its part, the Congolese Government was insisting on a partial withdrawal. The Security Council therefore agreed to reduce the mission by 2 000 UN peacekeepers on 30 June 2010, bringing the number of soldiers on the ground down from 21 500 to 19 500, but resisted pressure from Kinshasa to commit to a further decrease.
In the specific case of today’s debate, we think that responsibilities need to be established and we welcome the fact that the United Nations is taking a long, hard look at its own failings. However, we need to understand the difficult context in which MONUSCO works and, in all likelihood, call for better coordination between the DRC authorities and the UN. We believe that abolishing MONUSCO at this time would significantly aggravate the situation of the people and compromise the stabilisation process in the region.
The second point concerns what the European Union is ultimately doing to support reform of the judiciary and the fight against impunity and, especially, against sex crimes. Commissioner Šefčovič spoke about this a few moments ago. It is true that the European Union is taking action at several levels, including through EUPOL and EUSEC. I have something more to add, because I think that the means developed by our institutions are neither meagre nor minimal, but there is probably scope to assess how they are used. Moreover, on this point, the Political and Security Committee, the PSC, which is chaired by the Belgian Ambassador, Walter Stevens, will travel to the DRC in the coming weeks to evaluate these two missions.
The third, and final, point is that Mr Tarabella and other Members have quite rightly stressed the importance of tackling the illegal exploitation of natural resources in the DRC because of its link with the violence there, since this traffic helps to finance certain rebel movements. It is an issue that the EU is monitoring closely. Moreover, as a number of you have suggested, we are going to analyse the US legislation recently adopted on this subject, which has been mentioned a great deal in this debate.
It is still a little too early to analyse the decision taken by President Kabila to stop the exploitation of the mineral resources in Kivu, in particular. The only thing that can be said at this stage is that the closing of these sites is to be welcomed, as it shows that the DRC’s highest authorities are, in fact, committed to combating the illegal exploitation of the country’s natural resources. It is, however, clear that this measure can only be analysed in the light of the effect it will have not only on the financing of the rebel troops but also on whether the authorities can regain effective control, and on the socio-economic well-being of the people."@en1
|
| lpv:videoURI |
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples