Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2001-11-28-Speech-3-179"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20011128.10.3-179"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
".
Mr President, the answer to the question of whether we can support the Commission proposal to extend the activities of the European Agency for Reconstruction to include Macedonia is, in fact, quite simple.
When one or two months ago the Commission presented its proposal for the first time, there was some doubt. This doubt had nothing to do with the appreciation of the Committee on Foreign Affairs, Human Rights, Common Security and Defence Policy for the European Agency for Reconstruction. Indeed, this Agency has had very positive feedback right from the outset. This positive assessment was confirmed recently by a very complimentary remark by the Court of Auditors about the prompt and effective way in which the Agency has carried out its work to date.
Our initial doubts were, therefore, quite unrelated to the Agency, but stemmed from the fact that the Commission itself appeared unsure as to which direction to take with regard to assistance in the Balkans. Should it run its entire operation via the Agency for Reconstruction, first in Yugoslavia, subsequently in Macedonia and soon, perhaps, in Albania and Croatia, or should the Commission adhere to its original policy to devolve its powers to the delegations in the various countries?
We have, meanwhile, had the opportunity of talking to the Commissioner about this. He promised that the Commission will soon, early next year, come up with an opinion about the strategy to be pursued with regard to assistance in the Balkans and that it will specify more clearly the role of the Agency for Reconstruction and the role which the devolved delegations must play. We await this report with interest. At the moment, and this removes the last lingering doubt, there is no alternative but to accord the Agency an important role if we want to grant assistance in Macedonia promptly and efficiently. I believe that, as far as this aspect is concerned, we are in complete agreement with the Commission.
Why is it so important to grant aid in Macedonia so quickly now and to do this, therefore, via the Agency? I have pointed out the great significance of the developments in Macedonia for the European Union many times, both earlier in this debate and at other occasions, notably after 11 September. Macedonia’s importance is many times greater than that of a relatively small country in the Balkans. Indeed, it is the first time that the European Union has managed, in talking with one voice, to do a reasonable job in the Balkans, in Macedonia, something which we would have liked to have seen a long time ago. It is the greatest success story of European foreign policy so far. Talk with one voice and do what you do best: that is, after all, what the Commission and the European Union have been doing to date in Macedonia. There have been talks and consultations, compromises have been reached, financial aid pledged and limited military aid promised. In my view, that is the best that the European Union has to offer at the moment, and it is important for this effort, namely having prevented a civil war from breaking out a few months ago, to be followed up by sufficient financial aid and sufficient reconstruction equipment. Hence, a positive opinion, from Parliament too, about involving the Agency.
If the situation changes for the worse in Macedonia, then I fear that that will rub off in the Balkans as a whole. Hence, once again, my urgent plea for involving the Agency, but also for mapping out a sound strategy.
It is a well-known fact – fellow MEPs, Swoboda and Pack, and the Commissioner, himself, have visited the region many times – that tension in Macedonia is currently very high. Under pressure from the European Parliament, the European Union and many international bodies, the Macedonian Parliament has, at long last, ratified the constitution. That has led, and is still leading, to major tension. Europe can do a great deal to clear that tension, and one of the ways is to translate words into deeds swiftly. That is where the Agency comes in.
In short, prompt aid in Macedonia is needed, both materially and politically. At the moment, we need the Agency there for reconstruction. I would urge the Commission to clarify its strategy in the Balkans soon, and also to specify the role which the Agency has to play and the role which other sections of the Commission will need to play in future."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples