Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2005-10-13-Speech-4-120"
Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
---|---|
rdf:type | |
dcterms:Date | |
dcterms:Is Part Of | |
dcterms:Language | |
lpv:document identification number |
"en.20051013.27.4-120"2
|
lpv:hasSubsequent | |
lpv:speaker | |
lpv:spokenAs | |
lpv:translated text |
".
No more escalation in the nuclear dispute with Iran!
I oppose nuclear power as a matter of principle, but the agreement between Iran and the EU, as put before us, was a sham and could only been seen as escalating the dispute. The agreement expected Iran to renounce, once and for all, everything other than the operation of nuclear reactors for the generation of electricity, which would make impossible the conversion or enrichment of uranium, the production of fuel rods, and the planned heavy water reactor at Arak. Iran was to be required, as a matter of treaty obligation, to abandon the right to withdraw from the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty. Never before has any state on this earth signed up to such a commitment to the unilateral renunciation of its own sovereignty. In return for this, the EU was willing to guarantee, among other things, that no EU Member State would attack Iran using nuclear weapons, but no mention was made of the USA. This appears to be a joint effort on the part of the USA and the EU3.
One reason why the EU is a thoroughly poor choice as a broker is that it itself promotes the use of nuclear power, with France and the United Kingdom refusing to abandon their nuclear weapons and no attempt being made to abandon the enrichment of uranium in Germany.
The peaceful resolution of the conflict surrounding the Iranian nuclear programme is the only possible option. The pressure being exerted upon Iran is a cause of profound concern to me. It reminds me of the preparation of the war against Iraq."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples