Indiċi 
 Preċedenti 
 Li jmiss 
 Test sħiħ 
Proċedura : 2010/2502(RSP)
Ċiklu ta' ħajja waqt sessjoni
Ċikli relatati mad-dokumenti :

Testi mressqa :

B7-0137/2010

Dibattiti :

PV 10/03/2010 - 6
CRE 10/03/2010 - 6

Votazzjonijiet :

PV 10/03/2010 - 7.11

Testi adottati :

P7_TA(2010)0062

Dibattiti
L-Erbgħa, 10 ta' Marzu 2010 - Strasburgu Edizzjoni riveduta

6. Rapport annwali 2008 dwar is-CFSP - L-implimentazzjoni tal-Istrateġija ta' Sigurtà Ewropea u tal-Politika ta' Sigurtà u ta' Difiża Komuni - It-Trattat tan-Nonproliferazzjoni (dibattitu)
Vidjow tat-taħditiet
PV
MPphoto
 
 

  Presidente. − Nel porgere il benvenuto alla sig.ra Ashton, dichiaro aperta la seduta.

L'ordine del giorno reca in discussione congiunta:

– la relazione di Gabriele Albertini, a nome della commissione per gli affari esteri, sulla relazione annuale del Consiglio al Parlamento europeo sugli aspetti principali e le scelte di base della politica estera e di sicurezza comune (PESC) nel 2008, presentata al Parlamento europeo in applicazione della parte II, sezione G, punto 43, dell'accordo interistituzionale del 17 maggio 2006 (2009/2057(INI) (A7-0023/2010),

– la relazione di Arnaud Danjean, a nome della commissione per gli affari esteri sull'attuazione della Strategia europea di sicurezza e politica di sicurezza e difesa comune (2009/2198(INI)) (A7-0026/2010),

– l'interrogazione orale al Consiglio sul Trattato di non proliferazione, di Gabriele Albertini e Arnaud Danjean, a nome della commissione per gli affari esteri (O-0169/2009 - B7-0009/2010), e

– l'interrogazione orale alla Commissione sul Trattato di non proliferazione, di Gabriele Albertini e Arnaud Danjean, a nome della commissione per gli affari esteri (O-0170/2009 - B7-0010/2010).

 
  
MPphoto
 

  Gabriele Albertini, relatore. − Signor Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, con l'entrata in vigore del trattato di Lisbona vi è la necessità di un nuovo approccio da parte dell'Unione, uno sforzo comune nell'affrontare sfide di carattere globale. I poteri appena ottenuti grazie all'entrata in vigore del trattato inducono il Parlamento a tessere un dialogo frequente, collaborativo ed efficiente con il nostro primo interlocutore, la nuova figura di Vicepresidente/Alto rappresentante che la Baronessa Ashton per la prima volta ha l'onore di rappresentare.

Il suo mandato è stato soggetto al nostro voto di consenso in gennaio e, in più occasioni, in quanto Assemblea parlamentare, abbiamo avuto la promessa di un continuo coinvolgimento da parte di Consiglio e Commissione in tutte le tematiche più rilevanti sul piano di sicurezza e difesa europea. L'Alto rappresentante, come la relazione stessa tiene a ribadire, è pertanto invitato a comparire davanti al Parlamento europeo e a consultarlo con frequenza e regolarità.

Con Lisbona, l'azione esterna dell'Unione europea acquista una dimensione nuova e di rilievo, ma per ottenere questo traguardo in concreto è altresì importante che questa disponga delle necessarie risorse di bilancio. Il Parlamento europeo ha un ruolo fondamentale quale garante della legittimità democratica dell'azione esterna. La creazione di un Servizio europeo di azione esterna darà un corpo e un apparato diplomatico all'Unione europea, che poteva sinora contare sulla sola rappresentanza nazionale.

Un aspetto di enorme rilevanza e attualità è dato dalla figura dei rappresentanti ufficiali: la nomina spetta all'Alto rappresentante. Ciononostante, si puntualizza nella relazione, il Parlamento chiede un maggiore potere di scrutinio, nonché di controllo, sul ruolo e il mandato dei singoli rappresentanti, fermi restando i principi di trasparenza e di merito che devono guidare l'Alto rappresentante nella loro nomina. L'auspicio è che gradualmente si raggiunga la forma del double hatting – se non del caso del rappresentante speciale, che abbia raggio d'azione regionale – e che dunque si raggiungano delle economie di scala, che rendono l'azione esterna dell'Unione europea più efficiente e al contempo meno onerosa.

Da una prima sezione di carattere introduttivo e strategico, la relazione affronta il tema della politica estera europea per tematiche e aree geografiche. L'Unione europea deve esporsi con le organizzazioni internazionali sue alleate, prima fra tutte le Nazioni Unite, il più alto garante della sicurezza mondiale. Deve poter contare non solo dal punto di vista del seggio al Consiglio di sicurezza, ma anche nello staff e nelle delegazioni di collegamento tra le due realtà. L'Europa, come si richiede al Vicepresidente/Alto rappresentante, vuole diventare un partner attivo, strategico e indipendente, di un grande alleato come gli Stati Uniti, per rispondere alle sfide mondiali del terrorismo, della finanza, ai rapporti spesso difficili con i giganti industriali quali Russia, Cina e Giappone.

La relazione prosegue con un'analisi geografica sulle linee auspicabili. Nei Balcani introducono soprattutto il tema dell'allargamento: si plaude alla progressiva realizzazione del processo di stabilizzazione in Kosovo, dove l'Unione europea è presente con la missione EULEX, ma sforzi devono essere ancora fatti perché siano rispettati gli standard di accesso di molti paesi vicini alla candidatura d'ingresso – Turchia e Bosnia-Erzegovina.

Nel capitolo riguardante la cooperazione con l'Est e le regioni del Mar Nero è affrontato il tema della sicurezza dell'approvvigionamento e della dipendenza energetica dell'Unione europea. Nella sezione dedicata alla Russia si chiede la sottoscrizione di un nuovo accordo di partnership e cooperazione. Per quanto riguarda il Caucaso meridionale si chiede il rispetto dell'integrità territoriale della Georgia e delle minoranze e la risoluzione dei conflitti in Nagorno-Karabakh e Transnistria.

Medio Oriente: conflitto israelo-palestinese, dove a seguito della decisione del Consiglio del 12 dicembre 2009 l'Unione europea dovrà avere un ruolo politico più forte per rilanciare il processo di pace. Unione per il Mediterraneo: risoluzione del conflitto Turchia-Cipro. Asia: Afghanistan, periodo critico per la creazione del nuovo governo dopo le elezioni; ruolo chiave del Pakistan nella lotta al terrorismo; preoccupazione per la violazione dei diritti fondamentali in Iran. Africa: contributo positivo della missione di difesa delle coste somale. America latina: necessità di creare una partnership stabile e duratura per le relazioni tra Unione europea e America latina.

Ascolterò con molto interesse i commenti dei colleghi e mi riservo di replicarvi alla fine.

 
  
MPphoto
 

  Arnaud Danjean, rapporteur. − Monsieur le Président, Madame la Haute représentante, le rapport sur la mise en œuvre de la stratégie européenne de sécurité que nous présentons aujourd'hui est un document annuel du Parlement qui établit une sorte de bilan d'étape de la politique européenne en matière de sécurité et de défense et soumet des propositions pour améliorer l'efficacité et la visibilité de cette politique.

Cette année, ce rapport s'inscrit dans un contexte très particulier qui doit l'amener à être une force de proposition. Ce contexte particulier est marqué par la conjonction de trois cycles majeurs.

Le premier concerne les dix ans de la politique européenne de sécurité et de défense, que nous avons célébrés à la fin de l'année 2009. Les dix années écoulées ont montré que l'Europe pouvait conduire des opérations civiles et militaires sur plus de 23 théâtres de crise. Cet acquis fondamental peut être encore valorisé. Il montre qu'il existe une demande d'Europe et une capacité politique institutionnelle et opérationnelle de l'Union à faire face à ces défis.

Le deuxième cycle important c'est évidemment, et le président Albertini l'a rappelé à l'instant, la mise en œuvre du traité de Lisbonne. Le changement en matière de sécurité et de défense va bien au–delà d'un strict ajustement sémantique. La PESD devient en effet la politique de sécurité et de défense commune, la PSDC, et elle doit acquérir une nouvelle dimension. Le traité a enrichi la gamme des outils et des champs d'action de la politique de sécurité et de défense, particulièrement avec l'inscription des clauses d'assistance, de solidarité, avec la coopération structurée permanente mais, surtout, avec la création du service européen d'action extérieure et la création de votre fonction de haute représentante, vice–présidente de la Commission.

Enfin, le troisième événement majeur qui marque le contexte d'élaboration de ce rapport, c'est que l'OTAN, qui reste, pour 21 des 27 membres de l'Union, la référence essentielle pour la sécurité collective du continent européen, conduit actuellement la révision de son concept stratégique et que cette réflexion de l'OTAN doit également nous amener nous, l'Union, à mieux définir les conditions de ce partenariat qui reste fondamental.

Dans ce contexte, le but du rapport est moins de figer une doctrine que de vous délivrer une feuille de route forcément évolutive, pour toutes les nouvelles institutions qui se mettent en place et qui doivent apprendre à travailler ensemble. Il s'agit de rendre l'Union plus crédible, plus efficace, plus visible en matière de sécurité et de défense. À cet égard, une plus grande responsabilité du Parlement européen dans ces domaines sensibles est indispensable pour donner toute sa légitimité à une politique dont l'objectif premier est d'assurer la sécurité des citoyens européens.

À travers ce rapport, nous avons souhaité insister sur les points suivants: d'abord, rappeler qu'avant tout, la stratégie européenne de sécurité et la politique de sécurité et de défense commune sont au service des citoyens européens, pour garantir et améliorer leur sécurité. Cette ambition politique n'est pas superflue, ce n'est pas une coquetterie. Elle correspond à un besoin, pour notre continent, d'œuvrer à sa propre sécurité mais aussi de contribuer à la stabilité du monde qui nous entoure, de faire face aux crises et aux menaces qui se développent dans notre environnement. Au–delà des conflits armés classiques qui perdurent dans notre environnement proche, l'Europe doit être capable d'énoncer ses intérêts et de les défendre face aux nouvelles menaces, je pense particulièrement à la piraterie ou à la cybercriminalité.

Il nous a paru également important de souligner combien l'Union dispose d'une valeur ajoutée inégalée dans la gestion des crises, grâce à la variété des réponses qu'elle apporte et à l'équilibre qu'elle aménage dans chacune de ses opérations entre les dimensions civile et militaire. Je réfute d'ailleurs, à cet égard, les critiques de militarisation que certains peuvent adresser à la politique de sécurité et de défense de l'Union. Je crois profondément en la complémentarité des instruments civils et militaires dont l'Union dispose et la récente crise en Haïti, où vous vous êtes rendue – et je crois que vous avez pu observer cette bonne coopération – atteste de la nécessaire imbrication des moyens civils et militaires pour faire face à des catastrophes naturelles et à des crises majeures.

Concernant justement ces opérations, nous avons tenu à les passer toutes en revue, à mettre en avant ce qui nous semble être leurs forces, mais aussi, parfois, leurs lacunes – il faut les admettre pour pouvoir améliorer les choses. Nous avons aussi tenu à mettre en avant plusieurs régions stratégiques pour la sécurité de l'Union et inciter le Conseil et la Commission à accélérer la mise en œuvre de stratégies globales, en particulier pour la Corne de l'Afrique et pour la zone Afghanistan–Pakistan.

Dans le domaine des capacités – aussi bien civiles que militaires – qui est un enjeu crucial pour la crédibilité de notre politique, l'enjeu est d'améliorer la réactivité de l'Union. Nous devons être capables de mobiliser plus rapidement et plus efficacement les moyens matériels et les personnels compétents dont les États disposent. Mais nous devons aussi être capables, à travers une industrie de sécurité et de défense qui est performante, qui réunit des savoir–faire technologiques inestimables et qui représente aussi des centaines de milliers d'emplois en Europe, de nous doter de programmes d'équipement correspondant à ces besoins de projection.

L'Europe de l'industrie et de la défense a commencé à s'organiser sur notre continent à travers le paquet défense. Il conviendra d'aborder rapidement les questions de coopération industrielle et commerciale avec les pays tiers, particulièrement à l'aune des récentes difficultés rencontrées par des industries européennes dans l'accès au marché américain par exemple.

Voici un résumé bref, forcément trop bref, des priorités qui figurent dans ce rapport et qui sont autant de défis que vous aurez à relever. Le Parlement est prêt à jouer tout son rôle, tout son rôle positif et constructif, pour vous aider à réussir dans cette ambition qui est une ambition commune. J'en profite d'ailleurs pour remercier tous les groupes politiques qui ont œuvré à enrichir ce rapport. Nous avons tous eu une très bonne coopération pour maintenir un niveau d'ambition élevé, tout en tenant compte, évidemment, des caractéristiques de chacun de nos groupes.

J'en profite également, Madame la Haute représentante, pour aborder avec vous aujourd'hui la question de la non–prolifération. À la veille de la conférence d'examen du traité sur la non–prolifération en mai prochain, le Parlement européen souhaitait faire le point avec vous sur l'engagement de l'Union en matière de lutte contre la prolifération, de maîtrise des armements et de désarmement; c'est le sens des questions orales qui vous ont été transmises et auxquelles vous répondrez tout à l'heure.

Le contexte international semble offrir de nouvelles opportunités à la veille de cette conférence d'examen. D'abord le président Obama a affirmé fortement son ambition d'un monde sans armes nucléaires ainsi que son engagement à rechercher activement une ratification du traité d'interdiction complète des essais nucléaires par les États–Unis. Deuxièmement, la conclusion avec la Russie d'un nouvel accord appelé à succéder à l'accord START semble en bonne voie et, enfin, nous avons le lancement de la négociation d'un nouveau traité de désarmement qui interdirait la production de matières fissiles pour les armes nucléaires.

Concernant la réduction des arsenaux nucléaires, la priorité consiste de toute évidence à poursuivre la réduction des deux principaux arsenaux, c'est–à–dire ceux de la Russie et des États–Unis, dont on s'accorde à considérer qu'ils détiennent encore à eux seuls près de 95% de l'ensemble des armes nucléaires présentes sur la planète. Nous nous félicitons donc de l'engagement pris par les présidents Medvedev et Obama de conclure très prochainement un nouvel accord de réduction. Comment l'Union, dans ce contexte, envisage–t–elle de soutenir ces efforts et de coopérer avec les États–Unis et la Russie?

L'Union doit également être à la hauteur des défis lancés au régime de non–prolifération, et plus particulièrement, ceux que nous rencontrons face aux deux crises majeures de prolifération que sont l'Iran et la Corée du Nord, qui restent les menaces principales à la sécurité internationale. L'Union continue–t–elle à s'engager efficacement, totalement, pour régler ces crises, particulièrement dans le cas de l'Iran? Nous attendons sur cette question majeure, Madame la Haute représentante, vos indications. L'Union a, par ailleurs, un rôle à jouer pour favoriser la coopération relative à l'utilisation pacifique de l'énergie nucléaire. Vous savez que c'est un défi important. Quelles sont les actions menées dans ce contexte et quelle est votre stratégie en la matière?

Enfin, le Parlement européen souhaite que l'Union puisse être une force de proposition au cours de la prochaine conférence d'examen du TNP. L'adoption d'une nouvelle position commune ambitieuse et équilibrée de l'Union est essentielle pour que celle–ci puisse défendre sa position. Où en sont, à cet égard, les États membres?

 
  
MPphoto
 

  Catherine Ashton, Vice-President of the Commission/High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy. − Mr President, thank you very much. I am delighted to be with you to discuss the big questions on Europe’s international agenda.

I want to begin by thanking Mr Albertini and Mr Danjean for their excellent reports. You have underlined, if I may say, the number, range and urgency of the challenges we face.

From strengthening the rule of law in Kosovo to working with the emerging powers to share responsibility for global governance, from promoting peace in the Middle East – and may I join Vice-President Biden in condemning the decision to build 1 600 new houses in East Jerusalem – to providing shelter to the surviving victims of Haiti’s earthquake, which I visited last week, from dealing with proliferation problems such as Iran, to devising effective answers to ‘new’ challenges such as energy, climate change and cyber security.

Europe is going through a phase of building something new, where people have to adjust their mental maps and institutions have to find their new place. Doing so is messy and complicated – but also exciting, for it is impossible to overstate how important this moment is. Right now we have a chance to build what many across Europe – and many in this House – have long wanted: a stronger, more credible European foreign policy.

Of course the European External Action Service will be key to delivering this. We have to build a system that is robust, that will enable us to deal with the problems of today and the new problems that will arise tomorrow.

For years, we have been trying to frame and implement comprehensive strategies but the structures and the systems we had made this difficult. With the Lisbon Treaty and the External Action Service we should now be able to achieve this.

At the heart of everything we do lies a simple truth: to protect our interests and promote our values we must be engaged abroad. No one can hope to be an island of stability and prosperity in a sea of insecurity and injustice.

Ours is, if I may say, a world in flux. To engage with it effectively, we need to frame it first. To me the most striking features of today’s world are twofold. One, a deep interdependence in political, economic and security terms: technologies, ideas, diseases, money – everything moves. We are connected in ways we have never been before. Two, the fact that power is shifting, both within political systems – roughly from governments to markets, media and NGOs – and between political systems – roughly from the old ‘West’ to both the east and the south. Both are the outcome of globalisation which is not just an economic but also a political phenomenon, both in its manifestations and, of course, its consequences.

Think of the rise of China and others as major political players, or consider the political impact of the financial crisis. The debts are in the West; the surpluses are in the East. This redistribution of financial power is also shaping our political discussions. Or consider climate change, which is not just an environmental problem but also one with security and geopolitical ramifications.

So we have to deal with complex problems and we do so in a new geopolitical landscape. We need to adapt. This is not a time to fly on auto-pilot or to stick to the narrow defence of national ways of doing things. It is a time to be smart and ambitious.

Let me give you some figures to illustrate the point. Europe’s share of the world’s population is 7%, down from 25% a century ago. In the last 60 years, our share of global GDP has shrunk from 28% to 21%. The economies of China, India and others are racing ahead at 10% per year.

Economic weight is translating into political clout and self-confidence. You feel it everywhere: from negotiations on climate change to Iran, to big energy deals in Africa or central Asia. If we pull together, we can safeguard our interests. If not, others will make the decisions for us. It is that simple, really that simple.

My preference is clear. We should respond as Europeans. Firstly, by pulling together, because unity is a pre-condition for influence, and, secondly, by taking action, because the answer to a problem cannot be a paper or a meeting. If you want results, you have to act and sometimes take risks. And yes, there is a tendency in Europe to put process ahead of outcomes. Thirdly, by being both principled and creative because we must be both: principled in the defence of our values and creative in how we forge bespoke solutions to complex problems.

As Mr Albertini’s report rightly points out, ‘a new approach is needed if the EU is to act collectively and meet the global challenges in a coherent, consistent and efficient manner’. Out of that general picture come several core objectives: firstly, to ensure greater stability and security in our neighbourhood, by promoting political and economic reform. This is important in itself for reasons which are very self-evident, but our wider international credibility also depends on getting our neighbourhood right.

Secondly, to address global security challenges, the challenges of our time. For this, we need comprehensive strategies, strong international organisations and the rule of law both within countries and between them.

Thirdly, to build a network of strategic relationships with key countries and organisations because the problems we face cannot be solved by any single actor.

On top of all this comes the creation of the European External Action Service – a means to achieve the other three objectives and a way to deliver the promise of the Lisbon Treaty.

Those are the core tasks to which I have devoted my time since I took on this role. I first went to Washington and New York, which was the right way to start our important relationships with the United States and the UN. I have since been to Moscow, Kiev, the Balkans and Haiti. I will go to the Middle East next week and again to New York at the end of the month. In between, I have chaired the Foreign Affairs Council three times, attended the informal European Council and met with the College of Commissioners. I have worked hard to build the necessary internal consensus, visiting various EU capitals: Berlin, Paris, London, Vienna and Ljubljana. Naturally, I have spent a significant amount of time on the creation of the External Action Service and that will continue in the weeks ahead, including working with you.

That is also why, because of the interests of this House, I have ensured involvement from the European Parliament in the steering group that I set up. I will also discuss it this afternoon at the Conference of Presidents. When I come to the Foreign Affairs Committee on 23 March we will have an opportunity for in-depth exchanges in the presence of all the relevant committees.

Any time you create something new, there will be resistance. Some prefer to minimise perceived losses rather than maximise collective gains. I see it differently, and I hope the Parliament does too.

This is a once-in-a-generation opportunity to build something new, something that finally brings together the instruments of our engagement in support of a single political strategy. A huge chance for Europe. We should not lower our ambitions but, rather, give ourselves the means to realise them. A moment to see the big picture, to be creative and take collective responsibility. If we get it right – and we must – then we will be able to shape a European foreign policy for the 21st century with an external service designed to achieve it: one where we mobilise all our levers of influence – political, economic, development and crisis management tools – in a coordinated way. A service that represents the European Union in geographic and gender terms too. I believe that is the only acceptable way to go.

Let me illustrate what I have in mind when I say ‘comprehensive approach’ with a couple of examples.

The Western Balkans – I was pleased to travel to the region recently. In a way, the Balkans is the birthplace of EU foreign policy. More than anywhere else, it is where we cannot afford to fail. My purpose was to establish good working relations with political leaders, engage with civil society about what belonging to Europe could mean, and ensure coordination among the different EU actors on the ground. One conclusion I drew was that the region is making progress, even if it is uneven and incomplete. The European perspective remains the overarching framework – both as our objective and as the main incentive for reform. As I stressed everywhere, progress on the path to the EU depends on the commitment to reform at home. On human rights, the rule of law and regional cooperation.

We are backing up our strategy with available foreign-policy tools. In Kosovo we have our biggest civilian mission and it is a success. In Bosnia we have adjusted ALTHEA as the situation has stabilised and developed a training programme. We are pushing the European message hard in the run-up to the October elections. Throughout the region we are making progress on visa liberalisation and people-to-people contact.

So our Balkan strategy is what it should be: strategic in its objectives, multi-faceted in terms of instruments and tailor-made in terms of implementation.

The second example is the Horn of Africa. It highlights the interplay of state fragility, poverty, resource competition including water, with piracy, terrorism and organised crime. The only possible answer is a comprehensive one, which is exactly what we are doing. Our naval operation Atalanta has been widely hailed as a success. Our next step is to further develop our options for the transfer of suspected pirates for prosecution in the region. We are adding a training mission for the TFG in Somalia, with deployment expected in the spring. Through our Stability Instrument we are funding flanking measures to build capacity, to train the maritime authorities and moving ahead with long-term development work in Yemen and Somalia on poverty, literacy and health.

The way we are engaged in Georgia follows the same script. When a frozen conflict erupted into open conflict in August 2008, we responded immediately. We took the international lead, we brokered a truce and deployed a 300-strong monitoring mission in record time. Since then, we are engaged across the spectrum of Community and CSDP means of preventing a return to violence and building stability in Georgia and in the region.

With the UN and OSCE, we lead the Geneva talks, the only forum where all concerned meet. We hosted a donors’ conference for reconstruction and economic support in Georgia and we included Georgia – together with Armenia and Azerbaijan – in the European Neighbourhood Policy. We continue to promote those reforms and closer ties. We work on trade and visa liberalisation and we support confidence-building measures to rebuild ties with the breakaway republics.

There is more work to do in Georgia, and we have a full agenda when we discuss it with Russia, as I did only 10 days ago with Sergey Lavrov. In this case we demonstrated what the EU can do when we fully mobilise the resources we have. Those who were involved in those incredibly hectic weeks have told me that what was done in this case was exceptional. So we need stronger structures, more flexibility and better preparedness if we want Georgia to be the benchmark for our action in the future.

Let me turn to our common security and defence policy and say that I agree with the broad thrust of the Danjean report about how important our missions are. They save lives, create the space for functioning politics to work and they mean that Europe can draw on all its instruments of power to meet its responsibilities.

It is striking to me how far we have come in the last ten years. More than 70 000 men and women have been deployed in that period in more than 20 missions. We do crisis management in a European way with a comprehensive approach in support of international law and agreements and in close cooperation with our key partners. We work well with NATO together in Bosnia and Herzegovina and along the coast of Somalia. In Kosovo and Afghanistan it is more difficult because of the political issues. We need to get this right so I am working with the NATO Secretary General to improve EU-NATO relations in practical areas and set a positive climate. Let us see how we can develop our relations pragmatically. The UN is another key partner. There are many good examples of EU and UN cooperation on the ground – the Democratic Republic of Congo, Chad and indeed Kosovo. In recent times we have got to know each other better, but we can and should strengthen this by focusing on areas such as planning and the sharing of best practice.

In the Danjean report, and more widely, people raise the question of whether it is time for the EU to have its own permanent operations headquarters. It is a serious issue that needs a serious debate. No one contests that we need a headquarters able to plan and conduct military operations. The question is whether the current system, relying on SHAPE or national headquarters, is the most efficient way or if something else is better.

We often find ourselves approaching this in terms of structures. I think we first need to do the analysis of what functions we need to perform. I see three main functions from which the decisions should flow: one, the ability to plan and conduct military operations, including advance planning, and to be able to react quickly when there is a need; two, the ability to develop civil-military coordination in a more structured way to maximise our capacity; and, three, the ability to establish links with others, to optimise the overall coordination and what we loosely call the ‘international community’. If we use that analysis as the starting point for our discussions, we should be able to establish the necessary common ground and move forward to determine what we should do.

The report also calls for the establishment of a Defence Council, an idea that I know has been around for some time. The next meeting in April will follow established practice but at the informal Defence Ministers’ meeting a consensus emerged based on my proposals to hold Foreign Affairs Councils in Ministry of Defence formation. That would enable Defence Ministers to come together and take decisions, for instance on capabilities development.

My last point on that relates to the suggestion of a civil protection force. Let us start with the Haiti lessons learned exercise which is now underway. Then let us apply the spirit of Lisbon and see what options we have to mobilise assets of Member States together with EU instruments to support either the UN, OCHA or to act as the EU itself. The watchwords ought to be maximising synergies and avoiding ‘hard’ or artificial splits between how we handle EU internal and external crises.

Let me, finally, turn to the question of non-proliferation, given the oral question that has been raised. I want to mention briefly the two most significant items: first, the Non-Proliferation Treaty Review Conference scheduled for May in New York. I will be participating with the aim of ensuring that we do get a successful outcome. We should make no mistake: the entire treaty-based non-proliferation system with the NPT as a cornerstone is under growing pressure. To respond we need to be ready to make our contribution: on access to the peaceful uses of nuclear energy, in particular for developing countries, while avoiding proliferation risks, and that includes work on the multilateral nuclear fuel cycle approaches – I think 84 countries have benefited from EU assistance programmes; with progress on nuclear disarmament – politically, this is fundamental to create a constructive atmosphere; and by addressing regional proliferation crises, in particular with Iran, which has the potential to derail the Conference.

As you know, the EU is leading the efforts to find diplomatic solutions. We fully support the Security Council process on further restrictive measures if – as is certainly the case today – Iran continues to ignore its obligations.

Secondly, there is President Obama’s Nuclear Security Summit. We share the goal of the summit, namely to strengthen the security of nuclear materials and prevent terrorists from getting access. I think that the EU has been providing support to the IAEA since 2004 to assist countries in this area and we will continue to do so.

Finally, let me come back to where I started. The demand for European global engagement is enormous. We have to ensure that supply matches demand. The Lisbon Treaty gives us that chance. We should act in line with the letter and the spirit of the Treaty, remembering why European leaders negotiated the Treaty in the first place. I think the reason was clear: to build a stronger, more assertive and self-confident European foreign policy at the service of the citizens of the European Union. I know many in this House share that goal, and I count on your support to make sure it happens.

 
  
MPphoto
 

  Nadezhda Neynsky, rapporteur for the opinion of the Committee on Budgets. − Mr President, I want to congratulate Mrs Ashton on her encouraging statement.

At the same time, as the rapporteur for the opinion of the Committee on Budgets on the CFSP, I want also to underline that it is of core importance that she initiate an audit of past and present CFSP operations and CSDP civil missions in order to identify their strengths and weaknesses. This way the European Union will be more effective in providing security, will increase its autonomy and will most notably make wiser use of the relevant budget, which regrettably continues to be underfunded.

 
  
MPphoto
 

  Ioannis Kasoulides, on behalf of the PPE Group. – Mr President, it is frightening to imagine a nuclear device, small in size but potentially lethal for millions of people, falling into the hands of terrorists. Some years back we could say that this was highly unlikely. We cannot say this any longer.

Countries like Iran and North Korea are in the process of acquiring, or have the capability to acquire, a nuclear weapon. A scientist from Pakistan has allegedly sold know-how to Iran, and North Korea has traded in nuclear material. Nobody is against Iran acquiring nuclear energy for peaceful purposes, but patience is running thin if Iran is buying time in the dialogue with the 5+1, which we support.

The dual-track approach and the preparation of smart targeted sanctions by the UN Security Council are warranted. Nuclear proliferation is at such a critical point that it has led personalities like Henry Kissinger to argue that only the move towards total elimination will ensure non-proliferation and global security.

So we support an international treaty for the progressive elimination of nuclear weapons, a halt to the production of fissile material, bringing forward the comprehensive nuclear test ban treaty, the reduction of nuclear warheads, START etc., bringing all treatment of nuclear fuel under the control of the IAEA and strengthening its mandate and its verification powers.

 
  
MPphoto
 

  Adrian Severin, on behalf of the S&D Group. – Mr President, I hope we are agreed that we need a proactive foreign policy guided by our European common goals and based on our common values. This policy should recognise the indivisibility of security in the globalised world as it is a source of solidarity of interest both within the European Union and outside.

Such a policy requires and presupposes an adequate institutional instrument. Thus the priorities are clear and I am happy to see that these priorities I am going to mention are the same as those of Mrs Ashton. An efficient External Action Service, a vibrant neighbourhood policy, a visionary enlargement policy, well-structured partnerships with the strategic players, both traditional and emerging, an effective strategy in coping with the global challenges, namely energy security, non-proliferation, migration, transnational organised crime, transnational expression of poverty, cultural conflicts and so on.

As far as the External Action Service is concerned, we need an institution which should be built not only on the principle of political and budgetary accountability but also on the principle of effectiveness. We should not build a service which preserves the old national competition or the present bureaucratic structure. The two-headed head of the European external actions must wear both hats at all times, thus assuring the unity of the service and the coherence of its action.

On external neighbourhood policy, we need an approach which does not exclude Russia and Turkey. On the Black Sea we have to move from synergy to strategy. On frozen conflicts we need regional initiatives and mechanisms of regional cooperation and security under international guarantees.

On global security we need a new arrangement reflecting the post-bipolar-order realities. We have to promote our values in the world but in a secular way and not as new crusaders.

I think that these and many others are our priorities which circumscribe a Herculean task. Let us work together – Parliament, the Commission and the Council – to accomplish this task.

 
  
MPphoto
 

  Annemie Neyts-Uyttebroeck, namens de ALDE-Fractie. – Voorzitter, hoge vertegenwoordiger/vice-voorzitter van de Commissie, collega's. Mevrouw, ik richt mij eerst tot u om u te verwelkomen en ook om de hoop uit te drukken dat uw uitstekende en forse uiteenzetting van vandaag inderdaad het einde inluidt van een bijzonder moeilijke periode voor ons allemaal, die begon in november, toen het mandaat van de vorige Commissie ten einde liep. Want als er één ding wel duidelijk is dan is het dat we ons dergelijke lange perioden van lopende zaken eigenlijk niet kunnen veroorloven. In de periode van eind november tot voor kort leek het - het spijt me dat ik het moet zeggen - alsof de EU van het wereldtoneel verdwenen was, of bijna verdwenen, en dat kunnen wij - ik herhaal het - ons onder geen enkel beding veroorloven. Want de wereld wacht natuurlijk niet op ons. U heeft een aantal cijfers aangehaald die dat duidelijk illustreren. Maar ook een aantal evenementen hebben dat duidelijk geïllustreerd: natuurrampen die blijven gebeuren, gruwelijke aanslagen blijven gebeuren, democratische regeringen in het Midden-Oosten blijven niettemin beslissingen nemen die hoogst negatief zijn voor het vredesproces, of wat daarvan overblijft, en dergelijke meer. Wij hebben dus behoefte aan een hoge vertegenwoordiger/vice-voorzitter van de Commissie, die de mogelijkheid heeft om op het terrein aanwezig te zijn en ook in de Europese en beslissingscentra elders in de wereld. U wist en wij wisten dat u aan een welhaast onmogelijke taak begon. Ik bewonder u omdat u ze op zich genomen heeft. Wij hebben u toegezegd dat we u daarin zouden steunen. Wij zijn blij u gehoord te hebben vandaag en u forse taal te hebben horen spreken over de Europese Dienst voor extern optreden, die we allemaal zo hard nodig hebben. Als nu ook nog iedereen wil ophouden met wat men in het Engels turf wars noemt, uit te vechten - de ene met handschoenen en de andere zonder - dan ben ik zeker dat we allemaal samen de toekomst goed zullen kunnen voorbereiden. Dank u voor uw aandacht.

 
  
MPphoto
 

  Franziska Katharina Brantner, im Namen der Verts/ALE-Fraktion. – Herr Präsident, sehr geehrte Baroness Ashton, sehr geehrte Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Frau Ashton, wir haben Ihnen aufmerksam zugehört. Leider müssen wir feststellen, dass wir wahrscheinlich noch etwas warten müssen, bis Sie aus Ihrem für uns eigentlich zustimmungsfähigen Besinnungsaufsatz heraus konkrete Zukunftsprojekte entwickeln.

Lassen Sie mich aber etwas zum Auswärtigen Dienst sagen, wo ich von Ihnen durchaus etwas Konkreteres erwartet hätte. Sie haben es mehrmals gesagt: Es geht um Kohärenz, das ist das Gebot der Stunde. In vielen Fällen brauchen wir dafür gemeinsames Planen und Programmieren von Auswärtigem Dienst und Kommission. Wer dafür ist, viele Politikbereiche bei der Kommission oder dem Ratssekretariat zu belassen, sollte ehrlich sein und zugeben, dass er für den Status quo, für das System des Nizza-Vertrags ist.

Für uns ist ein erster wichtiger Punkt, inwieweit wir in den ganzen Fragen von ziviler Krisenprävention, zivilem Krisenmanagement und Wiederaufbau einen Mehrwert schaffen. Aus unserer Sicht geht es hierbei um all das, was man unter dem Begriff peacebuilding zusammenfasst: Konfliktprävention, Frühwarnung, Konfliktmediation, Versöhnung und kurz- bis mittelfristige Stabilisierung. Dafür brauchen wir eine entsprechende organisatorische Einheit. Wir fordern ein crisis management and peacebuilding department. Ich möchte Sie deshalb dazu fragen, wie Sie zu der Schaffung eines solchen Departments stehen. An dieser Stelle möchte ich auch wirklich betonen, dass wir uns dafür aussprechen, dass sowohl das GASP-Budget als auch das Stabilitätsinstrument in den Auswärtigen Dienst gehen, aber eben nicht als Teil des CMPD und diesem untergeordnet, sondern in einer neuen Struktur, die Sie hoffentlich schaffen werden. Ich würde gerne von Ihnen hören, wie Sie dazu stehen.

Ein zweiter Punkt, der uns wichtig ist, ist die Verknüpfung zwischen den traditionellen außenpolitischen Themen und neuen Themen wie eben Energiepolitik, Klimapolitik, Justiz, Inneres. Welche Strukturen haben Sie in Planung, damit der Auswärtige Dienst zu diesen globalen Politikfeldern der EU und ihrer Mitgliedstaaten einen systematischen Zugang hat?

Ein letzter Punkt ist uns wichtig: Es soll um einen modernen Dienst gehen mit einer ausgewogenen Personalpolitik. Wir haben diese Woche den 8. März gefeiert. Da ist es natürlich klar, dass es uns um die Verankerung der Rechte von Frauen geht und auch um die Teilnahme von Frauen an diesem Dienst. Mehrere Kolleginnen aus diesem Parlament haben Ihnen einen Brief geschrieben, Frau Ashton, und Sie aufgefordert, in diesem Dienst von Anfang an die institutionellen Strukturen zu schaffen, die dafür sorgen, dass die UN-Resolutionen 1325 und 1820 umgesetzt werden. Auch hier meine Frage: Was planen Sie dazu?

Wie gesagt, wir unterstützen Sie auf dem Weg zu einem guten gemeinsamen Auswärtigen Dienst. Ich freue mich auf Ihre Antworten.

 
  
MPphoto
 

  Charles Tannock, on behalf of the ECR Group. – Mr President, the Lisbon Treaty is now a legal reality in the international order, even if it lacks popular democratic legitimacy because most EU citizens, including Britain’s, were denied a vote in a referendum. Nevertheless, the ECR Group and British Conservatives are committed to positive engagement and to moving on within the new institutional framework.

We would like to see a similar approach from the Member States and the Commission. It is deeply ironic, in my view, that the first major institutional development under Lisbon, namely the creation of the European External Action Service, threatens to push the EU back towards the very introspection and bickering that Lisbon was supposed to have eradicated. Undoubtedly the creation of the EAS must be subject to debate and consensus about who does what and does it best, but the CFSP foreign policy elements must remain firmly within the Council.

But we also need strong leadership, in theory enabled by the Lisbon Treaty, to forge a lasting vision for Europe’s diplomacy in the world. We look to you, High Representative Ashton, to seize the initiative and to assert the authority and leadership provided to you by the Treaty, to knock heads together if necessary and to chart the way forward. We will support you in your efforts if you can show that you are up to the daunting challenge.

The EU has had many years to think about this Service, so this muddling through and hesitation that we currently see does no credit to the EU’s ambitions to play a global role in foreign policy through the CFSP.

There are more general points. The Albertini report, which I support strongly, sets out the Union’s foreign policy priorities and rightly endorses the EU membership aspirations for the Western Balkan countries, particularly Croatia, Macedonia and Montenegro, for which I am rapporteur.

But it also mentions the transatlantic alliance and NATO, which we believe are the cornerstones of the EU’s foreign security policy. It rightly emphasises the EU’s responsibility for resolving the frozen conflicts, particularly in Transnistria and Nagorno-Karabakh in our immediate neighbourhood, and good relations with Ukraine.

But, finally, Taiwan is also mentioned as an important partner for the EU and it should also be enabled to participate actively and fully in international organisations, according to the EU’s policy and the ‘One China’ policy.

 
  
MPphoto
 

  Willy Meyer, en nombre del Grupo GUE/NGL. – Señor Presidente, señora Ashton, el señor Albertini ya tuvo conocimiento de las razones por las que mi grupo presenta una opinión minoritaria al informe sobre política exterior y de seguridad y defensa. Y lo hacemos, fundamentalmente, señora Ashton, porque hemos llegado a una conclusión. En los países de nuestro entorno, en la Unión Europea, hoy las políticas de defensa y seguridad no tienen nada que ver con la defensa del territorio: hoy la política de seguridad es una proyección de la política exterior.

Nosotros creemos que, en política exterior, el primer objetivo debería ser alcanzar el desarme a nivel internacional: punto cero de armamento, y ello con políticas pragmáticas que permitan dar respuesta a lo que hoy crea inseguridad en el mundo.

La principal arma de destrucción masiva hoy en el mundo es el hambre y la pobreza. Y a esa arma no se le puede anteponer una fuerza militar. Por lo tanto, nosotros creemos que, a partir de esa consideración, deberíamos apostar por un sistema de seguridad en transición que permita la desmilitarización progresiva de toda la seguridad en el mundo y, claro, no compartimos que se vincule a la Unión Europea con la OTAN, entre otras cosas porque la OTAN, en su concepto estratégico, ha optado por dar respuesta militar a inseguridades como el crimen organizado o el terrorismo, que nunca han sido materia de respuesta militar.

Creo que esa militarización creciente obliga a los Estados miembros a tener industrias cada vez más potentes en armamento, a tener más gasto militar en armamento. Estamos en el punto más alto de civilización y armamento, más que en la guerra fría, lo que no tiene nada que ver, por tanto, con políticas pragmáticas que avancen hacia la desmilitarización.

No, ni el terrorismo ni el crimen organizado deben ser un objetivo militar, sino un objetivo de policía, de los servicios internacionales de los tribunales, de los servicios de inteligencia, para poner a los delincuentes en manos de los tribunales, pero no deben ser objeto de una respuesta militar.

Y, por lo tanto, no compartimos ese enfoque militar. No compartimos que la Unión Europea tenga en su territorio bases militares estadounidenses. No se lo deseamos a ningún Estado, no deseamos que ningún Estado potente pueda desplegar fuerza militar en el mundo, y por eso creemos que es muy importante el respeto del Derecho internacional. No compartimos el reconocimiento de Kosovo —ningún reconocimiento de ningún Estado que salga del uso de la fuerza al margen del Derecho internacional—, porque creemos en el Derecho internacional, y por eso creemos que dentro de este informe debía estar el Sáhara Occidental —ese proceso de descolonización—. Y, por supuesto, pedimos la retirada de las tropas de Afganistán, que, como la propia OTAN reconoce semana tras semana, produce víctimas civiles inocentes. No es el nuestro el camino, por lo tanto, de la militarización.

 
  
MPphoto
 

  Fiorello Provera, a nome del gruppo EFD. – Signor Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, signora Ashton, nell'ambito della relazione del presidente Albertini, che è davvero eccellente, c'è un passaggio che mi sembra politicamente importante: quello che lega il fenomeno dell'immigrazione alla politica di cooperazione con i paesi in via di sviluppo.

Non è pensabile controllare flussi migratori che hanno dimensioni enormi unicamente con provvedimenti repressivi e misure di politica interna. Neppure la distribuzione dei migranti in tutti gli Stati d'Europa potrebbe risolvere il problema, anzi, favorirebbe nuovi arrivi. Una risposta fondamentale per il controllo dei fenomeni migratori è la politica di cooperazione allo sviluppo, meglio se coordinata a livello europeo e mirata non solo al progresso economico ma anche a quello sociale e democratico. L'emigrazione deve essere una scelta e non una necessità.

Perché questa politica di cooperazione sia efficace e arrivi a chi ha veramente bisogno è indispensabile promuovere la good governance locale, senza la quale ci sarebbero inefficienza, corruzione, sperpero di risorse e povertà di risultati. Garantire la governance locale e la collaborazione dei governi è oggetto di politica estera e la cooperazione deve diventare strumento importante della politica estera europea: questo è il messaggio che affido all'Alto rappresentante Ashton in un settore, quello della cooperazione, che mi sta molto a cuore.

 
  
MPphoto
 

  Andreas Mölzer (NI). - Herr Präsident! Nun rächt es sich, dass mit dem Vertrag von Lissabon nur sehr unscharfe außenpolitische Ziele definiert wurden. Und es rächt sich wahrscheinlich auch, dass mit Frau Ashton eine EU-Außenvertreterin ohne wirkliche außenpolitische Erfahrung als kleinster gemeinsamer Nenner der Mitgliedstaaten auf diesen Posten gehievt wurde.

Zu allen wichtigen außenpolitischen Fragen zu schweigen, können wir uns als Europäer nämlich genauso wenig leisten wie eine Truppe von Diplomaten, die in aller Welt Hände schüttelt und jeweils andere außenpolitische Richtungen vorgibt.

Auch die Auseinandersetzungen um einen Europäischen Auswärtigen Dienst können wir uns nicht wirklich leisten. Dieser zweifellos wichtige neue Dienst soll nicht oder darf nicht über die Köpfe der Mitgliedstaaten hinweg zu einem Betätigungsfeld von Eurokraten verkommen.

Es ist wahrscheinlich an der Zeit, dass sich das Dickicht bei der Errichtung dieses Europäischen Auswärtigen Dienstes lichtet und dass die EU nach außen hin wieder gehört wird. Und es ist auch an der Zeit, dass die neue Außenministerin in diesen Angelegenheiten sensibler vorgeht, u.a. indem beispielsweise alle drei Arbeitssprachen der Union, also auch das Deutsche, im Europäischen Auswärtigen Dienst Verwendung finden.

Es gilt, die Erfahrungen und guten Beziehungen der einzelnen Mitgliedstaaten zu bestimmten Regionen optimal zu nutzen. Denken Sie etwa daran, dass Österreich beispielsweise historische Erfahrungen mit dem Westbalkan hat. Wobei klar sein muss, dass die Sicherheit Europas auch an den EU-Außengrenzen auf dem Balkan und nicht am Hindukusch verteidigt wird. Die EU muss aufhören, den verlängerten Arm und Zahlmeister für die NATO und für die USA zu spielen. Europäisches Geld ist bei FRONTEX sicher besser angelegt als in den Wüsten Afghanistans.

 
  
MPphoto
 

  Catherine Ashton, Vice-President of the Commission and High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy. − Mr President, if I might just give some comments directly on the issues and questions that have been raised.

To Mr Kasoulides, on the Non-Proliferation Treaty review, it is vital that it succeeds above anything else. We believe we have to take practical steps: a comprehensive test ban treaty should come into force; the fissile material cut-off; support for peaceful uses of nuclear energy to find safe ways of making sure that we avoid proliferation – for example, the contributions we make to the nuclear fuel bank – and support for a very strong and effective IAEA. We must work of course especially, as we have said, in areas like the Middle East, which means that we have to continue to put pressure on Iran and address the issues that are raised there.

Mr Severin, on the External Action Service and the priorities that you gave, well, we are in the same place – exactly so. It is very important to me that the Service has political and budgetary accountability, exactly as you have said, and it must be effected in this double-hatted way. It is going to be essential too, as you have indicated, that we draw in and discuss these issues with other key partners. I think you mentioned, for example, Russia and Turkey. Well, Russia I have already visited. I was spending part of the weekend with the Turkish Foreign Minister: a real opportunity to talk in much greater depth about that relationship for the future. So I would agree wholeheartedly with the priorities that you set out and thank you for those.

Mrs Neyts-Uyttebroeck, thank you for your kind words. I think it was not so much that the EU disappeared from the world stage. It is that the inevitability of that hiatus, of having a Commission that was effective, has now been resolved. And, for my own part, it has been extremely important because, until the Commission came into force, I did not even have a cabinet, never mind an External Action Service. And we are now in a position where we can begin to put the resources together.

I think it is also absolutely right that you raise the importance of being visible on the ground. My difficulty, as you know, is that I have not yet learned how to time travel. But I think it is absolutely essential that, as we look ahead, we look at the priorities that have been set out with which I think this House will largely agree and make sure that my actions are addressed to those priorities, one of which is setting up the Service, which does not yet exist. It does not have a staffing structure. It is not there yet. But when it does have that, we will be able to demonstrate the force of Europe in the best sense of that word across the world.

Mrs Brantner, again your common theme to me of trying to get as much detail as possible: I think it is very important. Some of the issues that you have raised are very critical. We do not want duplication within the different institutions in terms of what we do. We want the geographical desk approach to what we do, and I agree with you about peace-building: that it is a very important part of where the EU should act.

And in a sense it comes into building the different elements of what we do well – the work we do on state-building, on justice, on the rule of law, the work we do on development programmes, the work we do on tackling the issues of climate change, the work that we do on providing support to governments and to people – all of that is engineered to make us more secure, stable and prosperous but actually, by doing so, we are creating a more secure, stable and prosperous world.

Those objectives are extremely important.

I agree with you completely about women. We need to get more women, for example, into our policing missions, where there are very few that I have seen so far. We need to make sure that women are firmly integrated into the service at all levels. That is a challenge we need to make sure that we address. But, most importantly, what I would say to you is that the External Action Service is at the service of the whole of the European Union.

So, what we do on justice and home affairs across the world, what do parliamentarians wish to do with other parliaments? We must use the Service as we build it to be able to be your servant in helping you address those issues on the ground. I think on those issues, we are in exactly the same place.

Mr Tannock: assertive leadership that is up to the challenge. Well, I hope that you will start to see what you would recognise as assertive leadership. It is very important, as you say, that we address some of these critical issues: the Balkans and the transatlantic relationship are absolutely core and central to what we do. It is why we spend a lot of time in discussion with the United States and why I personally spend a lot of time in discussion and dialogue with them and of course Ukraine.

I hope that you were pleased with my decision to go to the inauguration and then to invite President Yanukovych to come to Brussels where he spent one of his first days. He was inaugurated on Thursday. He was in Brussels on Monday in order to begin to further and deepen that relationship for the future.

Mr Meyer, you talked about the issues of foreign policy and disarmament and the issues of whether it is appropriate to think in military terms. Let me just give you two very quick examples, one of which I have already described which was at Atalanta and the importance of having a comprehensive approach to what we do.

We have, off the coast of Somalia, ships which have been extremely successful this weekend, by the way, with the French navy in capturing pirates who were determined to create havoc in that part of the sea. Linked to that is making sure that they are prosecuted and treated properly by reference to our own judicial standards in the countries of that region.

Linked to that is the development programme that the Commission is working on to try and support the economy in Somalia so that it improves. Linked to that is the work that we are about to start on training people to be able to provide security in the region. In other words, it is a joined-up approach and it is a comprehensive approach. That means you use the tools that you need to be able to address the problems that people face.

Another example: having been in Haiti last week I must pay tribute to the Italians that I saw working there. People fresh from the tragedy of Aquila, but here we had the navy, we had the fire fighters, we had NGOs, we had civilians, we had doctors, we had psychiatrists, we had dentists, we had nurses, all working under the umbrella of the commander, actually, of the ship who had a hospital ship full of people who were being treated from the direct consequences of the earthquake. Young people with amputations; children who had terrible burns who were being treated; teams out there to support them.

What I am trying to say is that I think you have to think about the comprehensive strategy and approach that we can offer that involves using the means that we have and using them to greatest effect.

Mr Provera, on development cooperation immigration, you make an important point, which is that, if people feel they have no other choices, then they will take risks, often with their lives, to leave the country where they live and were born and want to live. Most people want to be able to live in the country in which they have grown up.

So the important thing about development, in my view, has always been to be able to support the economic livelihoods of people in order to enable them to be able to stay and live where they wish to live in order to be able to get the educational support, the health support and so on.

That is going to be a very big part of what we are doing on the ground, and that helps particularly in states where instability, because of climate change, could be very difficult.

Finally, Mr Mölzer, do not be so pessimistic, is what I want to say to you. It is not about operating above the heads of Member States. It is about building something uniquely European – not the same as what happens in Member States, whether it is Germany, Italy, France, the UK or wherever. It is not the same. We are building something different that is about long-term security and stability, economic growth on the ground that we can contribute to that is in our interest but that actually is also about the values that we hold dear.

And, as for my languages, oui, je peux parler français, mais je ne suis pas très bien en français. Ich habe auch zwei Jahre in der Schule Deutsch gelernt, aber ich habe es jetzt vergessen.

So I can do the languages, and I will get better and better. I look forward to getting to the point where I can have a real conversation with you in much better German than I can do today.

 
  
MPphoto
 

  Elmar Brok (PPE). - Herr Präsident, Frau Vizepräsidentin, liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Die Berichte Albertini und Danjean wie auch der Entschließungsantrag zur Nichtverbreitung von Nuklearwaffen zeigen, dass bald wichtige Entscheidungen getroffen werden müssen und wie wir uns darauf vorzubereiten haben. Lassen Sie mich noch ein paar Beispiele herausgreifen. Ich glaube, dass die Europäische Union jetzt eine wichtige Rolle spielen muss, in einer entscheidenden Phase, in der es darum geht zu verhindern, dass der Iran Atomwaffen baut, und dass in der Gruppe 5 + 1 ein hohes Maß an Tätigkeiten entwickeln muss, gerade in der Vorbereitung der Resolution der Vereinten Nationen und des möglichen Ausbaus von Sanktionen, um auch mit nichtmilitärischen Mitteln den Aufbau eines neuen Nuklearstaates zu verhindern. Damit direkt oder indirekt verbunden sind auch die dramatische Situation im Nahen Osten und die Lösung der Probleme dort.

Frau Ashton, ich danke Ihnen für Ihre Reise nach Kiew und die Diskussionen mit Präsident Janukowitsch. Es wird von entscheidender Bedeutung sein, dass es gelingt, solche Länder zu stärken, damit sie keine falschen Entscheidungen treffen, und dass es klar ist, dass eine Zollunion mit Russland und eine Freihandelszone mit der Europäischen Union nicht miteinander vereinbar sind, und dass hier die Vorteile klargestellt werden.

Lassen Sie mich noch eine Bemerkung anfügen. Wir werden im Gegensatz zu manchem Außen- und Verteidigungsminister die Geduld aufbringen, einen vernünftigen Auswärtigen Dienst mit ihnen aufzubauen. Wir wollen diesen Auswärtigen Dienst. Er muss erfolgreich sein. Er ist eine Bedingung dafür, dass wir mit einer Stimme sprechen können. Es wäre falsch, in dieser Frage zu schnelle und damit falsche Entscheidungen zu treffen. Wir stehen hier nicht unter Zeitdruck, es muss etwas Vernünftiges herauskommen. Aber es muss dabei auch berücksichtigt werden, dass die Union in ihrer Geschichte da erfolgreich war, wo sie die Gemeinschaftsmethode angewandt hat, und da, wo sie intergouvernemental agiert hat, nie oder selten erfolgreich war. Aus diesem Grund muss klar sein: Das, was Gemeinschaftspolitik ist, darf nicht schleichend über den Auswärtigen Dienst intergouvernementale Politik werden. Hier müssen wir entsprechende Sicherungen einbauen, damit die Effizienz des einheitlichen Dienstes, gleichzeitig aber auch die Gemeinschaftspolitik und darin eingebunden die Rechte des Europäischen Parlaments, was Haushalt, Haushaltskontrolle und Entlastung angeht, und auch die politischen Kontrollrechte des Europäischen Parlaments gewährleistet sind. Wir hoffen auf eine gute Zusammenarbeit.

(Beifall)

 
  
MPphoto
 

  Hannes Swoboda (S&D). - Herr Präsident, Frau Ashton als Vizepräsidentin der Kommission, aber auch als Hohe Vertreterin – denn im Unterschied zu den Außenministern gehe ich davon aus, dass Sie diesem Haus gegenüber als Hohe Vertreterin auch eine gewisse politische Verantwortung haben! Heute sind es hundert Tage, dass der Vertrag von Lissabon in Kraft ist. Zwei wesentliche Weichenstellungen stehen bevor: Die eine ist – wie Sie auch am Anfang gesagt haben –, die Außenpolitik zu erweitern, weil Klima, Energie und andere Angelegenheiten Teil der Außenpolitik sind, und die andere, einen tatkräftigen, effektiven Auswärtigen Dienst zu schaffen.

Kopenhagen – wenn wir schon von der Energiepolitik reden – hat gezeigt, dass wir, wenn wir uneinig und zersplittert sind, wenn jeder Regierungschef glaubt, er müsse sich da besonders produzieren, noch weniger erreichen, als wir sonst erreichen würden. Nicht dass wir angesichts der Haltung von China und den USA ein tolles Ergebnis gehabt hätten, aber das schlechte Schauspiel, das wir in Kopenhagen geliefert haben, sollte eigentlich das letzte Mal der Fall gewesen sein.

Wir müssen daher – und da schließe ich mich dem Kollegen Brok an – einen tragfähigen Auswärtigen Dienst schaffen. Ich – und das gilt für viele von uns – bin zwar nicht überrascht, aber dennoch entsetzt, wie Ihnen manche Außenminister aus Eifersüchtelei Schwierigkeiten machen. Wir sagen das ganz offen! Manche unterstützen Sie, manche machen Schwierigkeiten. Die können es halt nicht ertragen, dass sie nicht mehr die tragende Rolle spielen, sondern Außenminister sind. Es ist ja auch nicht schlecht, Außenminister zu sein, man muss ja deswegen nicht genau all das bestimmen, was in der Europäischen Union geschieht. Daher sagen wir auch klar von dieser Position aus: Wir werden unsere parlamentarischen Möglichkeiten voll ausschöpfen, nicht um etwas zu verhindern, sondern um etwas Konstruktives aufzubauen. Konstruktiv ist ein Auswärtiger Dienst, der – so wie es auch im Vertrag von Lissabon steht – auch Ihnen, Frau Ashton, klar unterstellt ist, und ein Auswärtiger Dienst, der natürlich mit der Kommission eng zusammenarbeitet.

Wir werden auch nicht dulden, dass etwas, was bisher rechtlich vergemeinschaftet war und auch nach dem Vertrag von Lissabon vergemeinschaftet bleibt, plötzlich intergouvernemental wird. Denn das ist ja die Idee mancher Minister und vielleicht auch mancher Regierungschefs, nicht nur die Kommission ein bisschen auszuhöhlen, sondern auch das Gemeinschaftsrecht auszuhöhlen. Und das ist nicht akzeptabel, da muss eine klare Trennlinie gezogen werden.

Wie sich das jetzt beim Auswärtigen Dienst verhält, darüber wird es in den nächsten Wochen Diskussionen geben – nach wie vor. Damit schließe ich ebenfalls an bereits Gesagtes an. Es ist keine Frage des Zeitpunkts, auch wenn wir rasch eine Lösung haben wollen, sondern der inhaltlichen Vorstellung. Und nochmals sei es gesagt, insbesondere dem Rat der Außenminister: Dieses Parlament wird seine Rechte – nicht mehr, aber auch nicht weniger – nutzen, beim Haushalt und beim Beamtenstatut, weil wir ein Ziel haben, und das ist ein effektiver, effizienter Auswärtiger Dienst.

(Beifall)

 
  
MPphoto
 

  Andrew Duff (ALDE). - Mr President, I think we all expected that there were going to be teething troubles in bringing the Treaty into force and we might apologise for failing to include a clause on time travel in the Treaty, but the thing we failed to expect and cannot accept is a breakdown of trust between the Commission and Council in setting up the External Service. The solution is found in the Treaty, which ought to be appreciated and respected scrupulously.

Article 40 protects the respective functions of the Commission and the Council. Both of them should apply pragmatism to ensure that a strong, effective, coherent diplomacy can be created across the breadth of policy. Catherine Ashton gives us a graphic description of the EU as a rising power from a declining continent. It is quite clear that the Afghan campaign is a problem that commands our attention; a profound reform of strategy and tactics is required. Our task should be to reassess the purpose, cost and duration of our engagement there.

The ALDE Group is anxious to press the accelerator on defence. We must find the common security interests of the 27 states and draw on comparable exercises in these states and a frank appraisal of the strengths of the ESDP missions, creating circumstances for bringing forward permanent structured cooperation in defence.

 
  
MPphoto
 

  Reinhard Bütikofer (Verts/ALE). - Herr Präsident! Lady Ashton! Ich danke Herrn Danjean für seinen sehr guten Bericht, in dem er zeigt, wo wir in der Gemeinsamen Sicherheits- und Verteidigungspolitik stehen. Er zeigt auch, wo wir uns nicht einig sind.

Wenn das Parlament aber diesen Bericht annimmt, wird es in einigen konkreten Punkten weiter sein als Kommission und Rat, weil sich dieser Bericht z. B. noch einmal ausdrücklich positiv auf den Bericht Barnier über einen europäischen Zivilschutz bezieht. Es ist bedauernswert, dass Lady Ashton dieses gleich wieder abgelehnt hat.

Lady Ashton, I regret that one of the few points in in your presentation where you said ‘no’ was to this idea of Mr Barnier’s, whereas on most topics you seem to be at the same place as everybody else.

Der neue Bericht und auch der Bericht Albertini sagen Ja zu einer Ausbildungsmission der Union in Somalia. Dazu sagen wir Grüne Nein. Wir stolpern da in eine Mission hinein, von der weder klar ist, was ihr Zusatzwert ist gegenüber dem, was bis jetzt in der Region gemacht wird, noch klar ist, in welchen breiteren politischen Rahmen das eingebunden ist, oder ob es überhaupt etwas zum nationalen Aufbau in Somalia beiträgt. Die Wahrscheinlichkeit ist extrem hoch, dass wir nur mit teurem Geld das Fußvolk ausbilden, das dann demnächst zum besser bezahlenden Warlord überläuft.

Lassen Sie mich eine dritte Bemerkung machen. In diesem Bericht ist die Rede von dem Ziel der strategischen Autonomie Europas in der Sicherheits- und Verteidigungspolitik. Das halte ich für überzogen, da nehmen wir den Mund zu voll. Ich glaube nicht, dass irgendein Mitgliedstaat in der Lage ist, die gigantischen Militärausgaben zu stemmen, die wir bräuchten, wenn wir die Formulierung „strategische Autonomie" ernst nehmen würden. Ich halte es übrigens auch strategisch für verfehlt. Europa muss seine Rolle finden in einem Geflecht europäischer und globaler Sicherheit, und diese Rolle kann nicht das strategische Stand-alone sein. Deswegen wäre es besser, wir würden uns sehr vernünftig und realistisch darauf einigen, die Kapazitäten und Strukturen zu verbessern, die uns erlauben, autonomer handlungsfähig zu sein.

 
  
MPphoto
 

  Paweł Robert Kowal (ECR). - Pani Przewodnicząca! Panie Przewodniczący! Wpływowy rosyjski wojskowy oświadczył, że gdyby Rosja posiadała Mistrale, to inwazja na Gruzję trwałaby kilkadziesiąt minut. W tym samym czasie Francja sprzedaje Mistrale Rosji pomimo, że plan Sarkoziego nie został wykonany. W tym samym czasie Francja udziela poparcia Gazociągowi Północnemu.

Trudno mówić o bezpieczeństwie Europy, jeżeli uciekamy od dyskusji o sytuacji na wschodniej granicy Unii Europejskiej, a tak było – i mówię to z wielkim żalem do przewodniczącego podkomisji do spraw obrony – podczas całych prac nad sprawozdaniem. Starano się za wszelką cenę nie mówić o takich sprawach jak manewry „Zapad 2009”, starano się nie mówić o tym, tak jakby polityka bezpieczeństwa i obrony – wspólna polityka Unii Europejskiej, którą mamy tworzyć – była polityką tylko kilku wielkich krajów. Mówiono bardzo dużo o tym, co się dzieje daleko na antypodach, o tym co się dzieje w każdym prawie zakątku kuli ziemskiej, natomiast za wszelką cenę (taką postawę przyjęło także wielu posłów) starano się uciec od istotnych problemów na wschodniej granicy Unii. Było to wyjątkowe pomieszanie swego rodzaju megalomanii europejskiej z ignorowaniem interesów niektórych państw członkowskich. To jest powód, dla którego nie będziemy popierali tego sprawozdania, ale to jest też moja prośba do Pani Przewodniczącej.

(Przewodniczący odebrał posłowi głos)

 
  
MPphoto
 

  Presidente. − Chiedo scusa onorevole ma Lei ha parlato per un minuto e 44 secondi, rispetto al minuto assegnato.

 
  
MPphoto
 

  Sabine Lösing (GUE/NGL). - Herr Präsident! Im Namen meiner Fraktion, der GUE/NGL, erkläre ich hier, dass wir zutiefst besorgt sind über die Entwicklung der EU-Außenpolitik hin zu Militarisierung und zunehmender Interventionspolitik. Das ist eine gefährliche Entwicklung. Ich möchte in aller Deutlichkeit sagen, dass wir einen militärischen Ansatz zur Konfliktlösung oder zur angeblichen Stabilisierung von Ländern oder Regionen für den absolut falschen Weg halten, um mehr Sicherheit für die EU und die Welt zu erreichen. Militärische Interventionen – da ist Afghanistan ein leider sehr aktuelles Beispiel – bringen Leid, Tod und anhaltende Verwüstung, aber keinen Frieden und keine Verbesserung der Situation der Bevölkerung.

Im Bericht von Herrn Danjean werden sogenannte Schlüsselbedrohungen aufgelistet, die eine Herausforderung für die zukünftige Sicherheitspolitik der EU darstellen. So etwa der doch von den westlichen Industrieländern maßgeblich verursachte Klimawandel. Wenn Menschen in den Ländern des Südens fliehen müssen, weil sie kein Wasser mehr haben und die Lebensmittel immer knapper werden, dann werden sie für Europa ein Sicherheitsproblem. Das ist zynisch und menschenverachtend! Wenn Staaten infolge der neoliberalen Wirtschaftspolitik in sich zusammenfallen, dann werden sie ein Sicherheitsproblem. Was wir brauchen, ist nicht mehr Militär, was wir brauchen, ist eine Umkehr, eine Beendigung der neoliberalen Ausrichtung der EU.

Durch den Europäischen Auswärtigen Dienst, die Europäische Verteidigungsagentur, die Bildung des Crisis Management and Planning Directorate und die geplanten Anschubfonds zur Finanzierung von Militäroperationen soll die EU zum militärischen Global Player gemacht werden. Zentralisierungsbestrebungen im Europäischen Auswärtigen Dienst halten wir für eine gefährliche und undemokratische Entwicklung. Die EU sollte eine Führungsrolle in Bezug auf Entmilitarisierung und Abrüstung, vor allem im Bereich der atomaren Abrüstung, einnehmen. Es muss darauf gedrängt werden, dass die Verpflichtung der Atomwaffenstaaten nach Artikel 6 des Atomwaffensperrvertrags, sprich die vollständige Abrüstung, endlich eingelöst wird. Dies war ein zentrales Versprechen, weshalb viele Staaten den Atomwaffensperrvertrag unterzeichnet und damit dauerhaft auf Atomwaffen verzichtet haben. Verlässliche Nichtangriffsgarantien sind die besten Maßnahmen zur Proliferationsverhinderung, da ansonsten Länder, die mit Intervention bedroht werden, versuchen, solche Angriffe mittels Atomwaffen abzuschrecken.

Nicht zuletzt möchte ich in diesem Zusammenhang und insbesondere in Bezug auf den Iran darauf hinweisen und warnen, dass Militäreinsätze oder militärische Aktivitäten jeder Art zur Verhinderung von Proliferation absolut kontraproduktiv und hochgefährlich sind. Wir werden den Danjean-Bericht ablehnen und haben eine eigene Entschließung zum Atomwaffensperrvertrag eingebracht.

 
  
MPphoto
 

  Bastiaan Belder (EFD). - Voorzitter, 'Chinese miljarden voor de Balkan', een recente krantenkop die zeker in dit debat om een Europees vervolg vraagt. Want het nieuwe Chinese investeringsterrein bestrijkt per slot van rekening staten die, hetzij reeds EU-lid zijn, of dat aspireren.

Raad en Commissie, hoe kijkt u aan tegen de rol van China op de Balkan? Deze omspant immers een waaier aan economische activiteiten: van financier en uitvoerder van grote openbare werken, industrieel agrarisch pachter tot havenbaron. Cruciaal punt blijft wel dat de benadering van China bepaald niet strookt met westerse standaarden. De grote vraag is nu: doorkruist deze Chinese agenda soms de moeizame uitbreidingsagenda van de Europese Unie voor deze regio? Hoe dit zij, de Chinese klok tikt ook hier sneller en coherenter dan de westerse.

Tot slot, mevrouw de hoge vertegenwoordiger, u gaat op reis naar het Midden-Oosten. Noam Shalit, de vader van de bijna vier jaar geleden ontvoerde Israëlische soldaat Gilad Shalit, rekent op uw volle inzet om Gilad vrij te krijgen. Ik ook.

 
  
MPphoto
 

  Martin Ehrenhauser (NI). - Herr Präsident! Lassen Sie mich kurz zwei Dinge ansprechen. Erstens lässt sich die Beistandspflicht natürlich nicht mit der österreichischen Neutralität vereinen, und aus diesem Grund wäre es auch wichtig gewesen, Folgendes in diesem Bericht zu verankern: Erstens, dass die Beistandspflicht keine Rechtsverbindlichkeit besitzt, zweitens nicht zwingend den Einsatz militärischer Mittel erfordert und drittens dem einzelnen Mitgliedstaat den Beurteilungsspielraum hinsichtlich des Inhalts des Beistands gewährt.

Der Ausschuss hat das vor allem inhaltlich nicht akzeptiert. Auch die Art und Weise, wie das hier abgelehnt wurde, zeugt meines Erachtens von einer großen Respektlosigkeit. Von Ihnen, Frau Ashton, verlange ich hier in diesem sehr sensiblen Bereich für uns Österreicher mehr Respekt.

Zweiter Punkt – Minderheitenbericht: Die Qualität von Demokratien und Gesellschaften zeigt sich natürlich immer wieder im Umgang mit Minderheiten. Ich finde es sehr, sehr gut, dass es diese Möglichkeit des Minderheitenberichts gibt. Ich bin nicht mit allen Punkten einverstanden, aber ich bin sehr froh, dass Frau Lösing eben diese Möglichkeit genutzt hat.

(Beifall)

 
  
MPphoto
 

  Mario Mauro (PPE). - Signor Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, anch'io approfitto delle ottime relazioni dei colleghi Danjean e Albertini per tornare a intervenire a sostegno del ruolo chiave dell'Alto rappresentante. Per il bene di tutti è auspicabile che lei, Baronessa Ashton, si renda conto di quanto sia importante il suo ruolo, lo difenda e sia determinata nel rivendicare quel ruolo nella trasposizione in fatti concreti di quanto previsto dal trattato, ad esempio rafforzando le relazioni dell'Unione europea con i suoi partner strategici e consolidando la propria leadership nelle sedi multilaterali.

È urgente insomma che venga fuori la strategia che identifica finalmente i veri interessi che intendiamo perseguire ed è importante il coinvolgimento degli Stati membri in obiettivi rilevanti. È importante altresì che non si lasci condizionare da eventuali dissidi interistituzionali sulla divisione delle competenze – mi riferisco in particolar modo al futuro Servizio europeo per l'azione esterna. La vogliamo, insomma, signora Ashton, protagonista. La vogliamo protagonista in un modo non burocratico.

Mi permetta, perciò, di farle questa osservazione: sono realmente addolorato per il fatto che Lei abbia deciso di non partecipare oggi alla nostra discussione su Cuba. So che Lei può addurre motivazioni formali e che parteciperà prima alla discussione, anche quella importantissima, sull'Artico. Ma Cuba libre non è solo il nome di un cocktail: è il grido di democrazia che moltissimi in questo parlamento si portano nel cuore. Mi auguro quindi che Lei trovi il tempo di poter presenziare, di intervenire e di sostenere con la sua forza e con la forza del suo ruolo la risoluzione del Parlamento. Lei partecipa al dibattito sull'Artico e vedrà che con un po' di ghiaccio il Cuba libre è più gustoso.

 
  
MPphoto
 

  Кристиан Вигенин (S&D). - Докладът на комисията по външна политика относно годишния доклад на Съвета беше подготвен в дух на сътрудничество и диалог, какъвто е нашият подход по всички стратегически въпроси. Важна част от доклада е посветена на последиците от Договора от Лисабон.

В тази връзка бих искал да обърна внимание на един важен аспект от нашата обща работа. Успехът на общата външна политика и реалните резултати от институционалните нововъведения се превръщат в основен фактор, който ще определя отношението на европейските граждани към способността на Европейския съюз да защитава интересите им, да се променя и да се развива. Оправдано или не, очакванията за рязко нарастване на ролята на Европейския съюз на световната сцена са големи и ние нямаме право да разочароваме европейските граждани.

За съжаление, в последните седмици европейската преса не без основание отразява външната политика в изключително негативна светлина: като една надпревара между страните членки за позиции в новата Служба за външна дейност, като състезание между институциите чия шапка ще носи баронеса Ashton по-често - тази на Комисията или на Съвета, като една неравна борба на Европарламента да постигне по-голямо влияние.

Разбирате, че това ни вреди във вътрешен план, но е и особено вредно като послание към нашите външни партньори. Разделението ни прави слаби в техните очи.

Ето защо си позволявам в този дебат да отправя един призив. Всички ние, които имаме отношение към изграждането и развитието на общата външна политика и политика на сигурност, да се концентрираме върху важните стратегически въпроси и да се опитаме в най-скоро време да покажем реални резултати чрез повече диалог и конструктивизъм. Дължим на европейските граждани самочувствието, че са част от един Съюз, чиято дума се чува и тежи в глобалната политика.

 
  
MPphoto
 

  Pino Arlacchi (ALDE). - Mr President, the joint motion for a resolution on the Non-Proliferation Treaty is a very important one, and the ALDE Group and I are very proud to have contributed to its elaboration. The resolution is holistic because it encompasses all the disarmament matters, from the NPT review conference to the issue of nuclear-weapon-free zones.

This resolution calls for a Middle East free of nuclear weapons and for the withdrawal of all tactical warheads from European soil, in the context of a brotherly dialogue with Russia. This resolution also frequently refers to a nuclear-weapon-free world, a target to be achieved through a special convention and within an ‘ambitious’ time-frame – this means a short one.

Our resolution is the European answer to President Obama’s proposal of the abolition of nuclear weapons. This document should be considered, therefore, as a step on the road to the total ban of atomic weapons. It means to end the paradox of the possession of nuclear devices by some countries, which is legal on the one side, and the complete prohibition of chemical and biological arsenals for all countries, on the other side. Atomic bombs must be made illegal and their possession should one day be considered a criminal act. I am confident this Parliament will continue in this direction with even more drive and more vision.

 
  
MPphoto
 

  Ulrike Lunacek (Verts/ALE). - Herr Präsident, sehr geehrte Frau Vizepräsidentin der Kommission, Hohe Vertreterin! Als Kosovo-Berichterstatterin dieses Parlaments freut es mich, von Ihnen gehört zu haben, dass der Westbalkan für Sie ein Schwerpunkt in der europäischen Außenpolitik ist und dass die EU es sich nicht leisten kann zu versagen.

Aber Sie haben gesagt, Bosnien sei jetzt stabilisiert. Frau Ashton, bei dem Zustand, in dem Bosnien derzeit ist, sind Stabilität und Stabilisierung eher gefährlich. Es können nicht alle Menschen am demokratischen Prozess teilnehmen. Die Verfassung, wie sie jetzt ist – die Dayton-Verfassung –, war in den neunziger Jahren ein Zeichen für Stabilität, ist es aber heute nicht mehr. Was für eine Strategie haben Sie, haben wir als EU, um das zu verändern? Sie haben gesagt, Sie haben eine Strategie für Bosnien. Der Umgang mit dem Office des High Representative – wo ist die Strategie der EU? Das wollte ich gerne von Ihnen hören! Ich denke, die EU muss hier noch eine Strategie entwickeln.

Kosovo: Sie haben gesagt, EULEX sei ein Erfolg. Nur zum Teil. Es gibt hier noch vieles zu tun, z.B. die Visa-Liberalisierung für die Bürgerinnen und Bürger. Frau Ashton, ich fordere Sie auf, dass die Kommission sofort mit der Erstellung einer Roadmap beginnt, um den Bürgerinnen und Bürgern des Kosovo klarzumachen, dass sie nicht alleine bleiben werden.

Eine Frage meiner Kollegin Brantner haben Sie leider nicht beantwortet. Eine eigene Abteilung, eine eigene Generaldirektion für Peacebuilding im Auswärtigen Dienst wäre Gebot der Stunde. Sie stimmen mit uns überein, dass Peacebuilding wichtig ist. Aber wie werden Sie es im Auswärtigen Dienst verankern? Werden Sie eine eigene Generaldirektion für Peacebuilding einrichten? Das wäre notwendig, um klarzumachen, wohin die Europäische Union geht.

Zum Bericht von Herrn Danjean: Ich bin sehr froh, dass der Ausschuss akzeptiert hat, dass weitere Entwicklungen der Europäischen Sicherheits- und Verteidigungspolitik die Neutralität und Bündnisfreiheit einiger Mitgliedstaaten voll respektieren. Das bedeutet, dass diese selbst entscheiden, wo, wann und wie sie teilnehmen und Beistand leisten.

 
  
  

PRESIDE: ALEJO VIDAL-QUADRAS
Vicepresidente

 
  
MPphoto
 

  Geoffrey Van Orden (ECR). - Mr President, where the EU can add value and when it does not undermine our sovereign interests or compete with organisations such as NATO, we can support it.

For the most part this will mean adopting common positions on certain key issues and civil tasks in the field of humanitarian assistance or post-conflict reconstruction and development, although I have to say that the track record of EUPOL in Afghanistan does not inspire much confidence.

The simple truth is that your role as EU foreign minister is to act as handmaiden for EU political integration. The effect of the External Action Service, the chain of EU embassies around the world, will be to undermine national representation in many capitals, armed perversely with cash that has come from our nations in order to take forward someone else’s foreign policy.

The report before us on EU security and defence policy is a manifesto for EU military integration, deliberately confusing military and civil crisis management in order to justify an EU role. It relies on a bogus narrative concerning EU operations and increasingly seeks to involve the Commission in areas which are properly the responsibility of our nations and of the Council.

Virtually every paragraph of this report advocates ratcheting up military EU integration at the expense of NATO and the sovereign integrity of individual European countries.

I recall one of the great red lines of the British Labour Government’s negotiating stance when it said it would resist the idea of a separate and permanent EU operations centre responsible for operational planning and conduct of military operations as this would be the clearest example of duplication of NATO, whose SHAPE headquarters performs precisely this role.

Baroness Ashton, when I asked you about this on 11 January, you said you agreed with the position I took then. Now you seem to have changed your mind. I would be very interested to know what you really think now.

 
  
MPphoto
 

  Νικόλαος Σαλαβράκος (EFD). - Κύριε Πρόεδρε, πράγματι η έκθεση του κ. Albertini είναι εξαιρετική· τον συγχαίρω για αυτό! Είναι σοβαρός άνθρωπος και πάντα σοβαρές εκθέσεις θα κάνει. Εξίσου σημαντική και εξαιρετική είναι και η παρουσίαση της Λαίδης Ashton.

Πιστεύω ότι καλύπτονται πολλά θέματα της εξωτερικής πολιτικής, πλην όμως όλα αυτά τα οποία αφορούν οι δύο εκθέσεις για μία ουσιαστική άσκηση εξωτερικής πολιτικής και πολιτικής ασφάλειας θεωρώ ότι συνδέονται άρρηκτα με δύο πράγματα: πρώτον, το σαφή καθορισμό των συνόρων της Ευρωπαϊκής Ένωσης με τρόπο ώστε η Ευρωπαϊκή Ένωση να αντιμετωπίζεται με ενιαίο σεβασμό και, δεύτερον: πόροι , «δη δει χρημάτων»· περί πόρων δεν είδα τίποτε στις δύο εκθέσεις, ενώ είναι ό,τι βασικότερο χρειάζεται για μία αποτελεσματική εξωτερική πολιτική.

Πιστεύω, κύριε Πρόεδρε και κύριοι συνάδελφοι, ότι η νέα τάξη έφερε μία νέα παγκόσμια οικονομική αταξία. Μία αταξία κοινωνική, μία αταξία πολιτική και επί θύραις βρίσκεται μία αταξία νομισματική. Θέλω λοιπόν να συντονίσει η Λαίδη Ashton την Επιτροπή Οικονομικών Υποθέσεων και την Επιτροπή Εξωτερικών Υποθέσεων, για να ζητήσουμε τους πόρους για την υποβοήθηση της πολιτικής που θα ασκήσει.

 
  
MPphoto
 

  Philip Claeys (NI). - Voorzitter, mevrouw de hoge vertegenwoordiger, ik vrees dat u hier vooral een catalogus gebracht heeft van aandachtspunten, een catalogus van gemeenplaatsen. Maar van een strategische visie hebben wij jammer genoeg weinig kunnen merken.

Wat stelt u bijvoorbeeld voor om ervoor te zorgen dat er meer toenadering komt met Rusland, in plaats van Rusland verder te laten afglijden in samenwerking met misdadige regimes, zoals die van Iran en Noord-Korea? Wat zijn uw voorstellen in verband met de pogingen van Iran om kernwapens te ontwikkelen? Welke houding zult u aannemen tegenover de groeiende antiwesterse en anti-Europese tendensen in de islamitische wereld? Een tendens die overigens ook vast te stellen valt in een kandidaat-lidstaat als Turkije.

Bent u bereid, mevrouw Ashton, om Europese verworvenheden, zoals het recht op vrije meningsuiting en de scheiding van kerk en staat, op een duidelijke en compromisloze manier te verdedigen ten opzichte van de groeiende politieke islam? De zwakke houding die de EU een aantal jaren geleden aannam in verband met de Deense cartooncrisis is wat mij betreft niet voor herhaling vatbaar.

Ik zou u ook willen vragen, net zoals mijnheer Provera, of u bereid bent om het gemeenschappelijk buitenlands en veiligheidsbeleid in te schakelen om de massale immigratiestromen naar Europa onder controle te brengen? Ik heb het zowel over illegale als legale immigratiestromen. U hebt daar geen antwoord op gegeven.

 
  
MPphoto
 

  Jacek Saryusz-Wolski (PPE). - Mr President, I welcome the High Representative, Vice-President, and Chair of the Foreign Affairs Council under those three hats. She has three hats. Our reports refer to the old times. Your office, Baroness Ashton, was meant to be a new era, so I will refer to the new era. You are representing a newborn office, an institution just born, which is having a difficult childhood.

It is a hybrid with an electric engine of Community method and a diesel engine of intergovernmental method. It is an orphan, whose supposed parents, Member States, Council, Commission, look at it with a certain suspicion and distance. Parliament is ready to fill the gap of parenthood.

At this early stage there are risks that this Service being torn apart by diverging institutional rivalries and interests. Our Parliament was and is the strong proponent of strong EU foreign policy. You can count on us.

Please look at Parliament as your ally, maybe also as an honest broker among those who would be tempted to see only one hat on your head and not all three of them.

Parliament would expect the new institution like others to be linked with us by an interinstitutional agreement clearly setting out the rules of cooperation. We intend to codecide, as the Treaty provides for, on financial and staff regulations in the spirit of the integral EEAS, not torn-apart EAS. Please consider strengthening your office in terms of competence and political weight by installing deputies to your office – kind of ‘vice-ministers’, including parliamentary ones. That would solve the problem that the day only has 24 hours, the problem which cannot be otherwise solved. You are needed everywhere and we would like you to multiply your possibilities to act on our behalf and on behalf of the Union.

 
  
MPphoto
 

  Μαρία-Ελένη Κοππά (S&D). - Κύριε Πρόεδρε, Λαίδη Ashton, οι Σοσιαλιστές και Δημοκράτες πιστεύουμε σε μία Ευρωπαϊκή Ένωση με ισχυρό ρόλο στη διεθνή σκηνή. Μία Ένωση με κοινή εξωτερική πολιτική που μπορεί να εκφραστεί με μία φωνή σε έναν ολοένα και πιο σύνθετο κόσμο. Μία Ένωση με ξεχωριστή αμυντική ταυτότητα, που της εξασφαλίζει αυτονομία επιλογών και δράσης αλλά και έναν ιδιαίτερο ρόλο στο διεθνές στερέωμα. Θα αναφερθώ ειδικά στην πολύ καλή έκθεση του συναδέλφου κ. Danjean, τον οποίο θα ήθελα να ευχαριστήσω για την παραγωγική συνεργασία.

Θα αναφέρω τέσσερα σημεία:

Πρώτον, ειδικά μετά τη θέση σε ισχύ της Συνθήκης της Λισαβόνας είναι σημαντική η αναφορά που γίνεται στον κεντρικό ρόλο του συστήματος του ΟΗΕ καθώς και η έκκλησή του για ενίσχυση της πολυμερούς συνεργασίας.

Δεύτερον, υποστηρίζουμε τη στενή συνεργασία με το ΝΑΤΟ. Υπογραμμίζουμε ωστόσο πως η συνεργασία αυτή δεν θα πρέπει να εμποδίζει την αυτόνομη ανάπτυξη των αμυντικών ικανοτήτων της Ευρωπαϊκής Ένωσης. Αντίθετα πρέπει να λαμβάνει πλήρως υπόψη τη διαφορετική φύση των δύο Οργανισμών και να μη θίγει την ανεξαρτησία τους, κυρίως όσον αφορά τη λήψη αποφάσεων.

Τρίτον, θεωρώ αναγκαία μία παράγραφο σχετικά με την ανάγκη ενισχυμένης συνεργασίας με τη Ρωσία, χώρα που αποτελεί στρατηγικό εταίρο για την Ένωση σε τομείς όπως η ενεργειακή ασφάλεια, η διαχείριση των κρίσεων και άλλα.

Ολοκληρώνοντας θα ήθελα να εκφράσω την ικανοποίησή μου που τώρα η έκθεση περιλαμβάνει αναφορές στην ανάγκη γενικότερου αφοπλισμού με έμφαση στα ελαφρά όπλα, νάρκες κατά προσωπικού καθώς και τα πυρομαχικά διασποράς. Παράλληλα όμως θεωρώ ότι το Ευρωπαϊκό Κοινοβούλιο θα έπρεπε να πάρει σαφέστερη θέση και να ζητήσει από τα κράτη μέλη να στηρίξουν έμπρακτα την πρωτοβουλία Ομπάμα για έναν κόσμο χωρίς πυρηνικά όπλα. Ο αφοπλισμός και η μη διάδοση των πυρηνικών επιτυγχάνονται όταν όλοι αλλά και ο καθένας ξεχωριστά κάνουν ένα βήμα για την επίτευξη αυτού του τελικού στόχου.

 
  
MPphoto
 

  Norica Nicolai (ALDE). - Doresc să salut calitatea celor două rapoarte, al domnului Albertini şi al domnului Danjean. Asta dovedeşte că în Parlament există expertiză şi sper, doamnă Ashton, să profitaţi de această expertiză, este în interesul nostru, al tuturor.

Subliniez în mod deosebit recomandarea din raport cu privire la cooperarea în supervizarea politicilor UE de către această adunare. În lumina paragrafului 1 al Tratatului de la Lisabona, cred că putem partaja responsabilitatea acestui Parlament şi a parlamentelor naţionale, pentru o mai bună coerenţă în acest demers politic.

Îmi exprim însă, doamnă Ashton, în continuare nevoia de a aştepta o strategie mult mai coerentă a dumneavoastră în materie de politică de securitate şi, în ceea ce priveşte Serviciul pentru acţiune externă, cred că resursa umană care va servi acest Serviciu şi cetăţeanul european trebuie să reprezinte proporţional expertiza statelor membre, pentru că, din păcate, foarte multe instituţii au ajuns la un nivel nedeclarat de incompetenţă şi birocraţie, care ar putea impieta asupra unei viziuni globale şi coerente a Uniunii.

În final, aş dori să vă adresez întrebarea cu privire la grupurile de luptă, structuri pe care le-am creat dar, din păcate, nu le-am utilizat. Ele ar putea să impieteze asupra imaginii politicii de securitate, şi aş dori să văd care este viziunea dumneavoastră. În ceea ce priveşte misiunea Atalanta, îmi exprim opinia că e nevoie de o abordare mult mai realistă, pentru că, din păcate, succesele forţelor noastre nu sunt proporţionale cu intensitatea manifestărilor de piraterie.

Vă mulţumesc.

 
  
MPphoto
 

  Paul Nuttall (EFD). - Mr President, please allow me to speak frankly as one Lancastrian to another, because this is not going very well, is it? It really is not. Earlier on, Baroness Ashton, you said that Europe needs a credible foreign policy. How can we have a credible foreign policy when it has an incredible High Representative?

You seem as if you are stumbling from one crisis to another. So much so that the British Foreign Secretary had to write you a letter this week asking you to buck up, to get on your game. But we in UKIP were on to this from the start. We opposed your appointment because we said you would be clearly out of your depth – and we are being proved right.

It was said that your appointment, made by the Commission, would stop the traffic in Tokyo and Washington. But you have not even been able to appoint the Ambassador to Washington because old Barroso did you up like a kipper!

It is also claimed in the British press that you do not turn your phone on after 8 p.m. at night. But, Baroness Ashton, you are the highest-paid female politician in the world. You are paid more than Frau Merkel, you are paid more than Hillary Clinton: it is a 24-hour job. To top it all, yesterday it was reported that you are being provided with a Learjet. You are expected to do 300 000 miles per year. That would get you to the moon, and most people now would like you to stay there.

 
  
MPphoto
 

  Cristian Dan Preda (PPE). - (Nu era rândul meu, dar voi continua.) Doresc să îl felicit în primul rând pe domnul Albertini pentru excelentul raport pe care l-a redactat şi care evidenţiază rolul pe care Uniunea trebuie să îl joace pe scena internaţională ca un actor global, un actor de primă importanţă.

Salut în mod special introducerea în text a paragrafului 47, care subliniază importanţa cooperării regionale în cadrul Parteneriatului estic şi al Sinergiei Mării Negre, deoarece consider că această zonă este una în care intervenţia Uniunii poate aduce o reală schimbare, atât în domeniul economic, cât şi în cel politic.

Pe de altă parte, aş vrea să adresez domnului Arnaud Danjean felicitările mele pentru redactarea unui raport care reuşeşte performanţa de a aborda toate provocările şi, în acelaşi timp, toate realizările Uniunii în sfera politicii de securitate şi de apărare. Consider că în momentul aniversării a zece ani de la demararea acestei politici, propunerile din raportul Danjean sunt foarte importante pentru a ameliora acţiunea Uniunii, ceea ce va contribui, desigur, la securitatea cetăţenilor europeni şi, în cele din urmă, la pacea şi securitatea internaţională.

Aş vrea să insist aici asupra unui singur punct din acest excelent raport, şi anume asupra importanţei parteneriatului cu Statele Unite în sfera gestiunii crizelor, a menţinerii păcii şi, în general, pe teme militare. În acest sens, proiectul sistemului de apărare antirachetă lansat de partenerii americani este important nu numai pentru ţara mea, România, care a decis să fie implicată, ci şi, într-un sens mai larg, pentru că proliferarea rachetelor balistice reprezintă o ameninţare serioasă la adresa populaţiei europene.

Menţionez că am susţinut amendamentul 34 depus la paragraful 87 al raportului pentru că sunt de părere că, dacă proiectul scutul antirachetă ar putea beneficia de instaurarea unui dialog la nivel continental, referinţa la dialogul cu Rusia nu îşi are rostul în acest context.

Vă mulţumesc.

 
  
MPphoto
 

  Ioan Mircea Paşcu (S&D). - Mr President, the reports drawn up by Mr Albertini and Mr Danjean are very important documents coming at a crucial moment: the Lisbon Treaty has just entered into force, the EU has a new Parliament and transatlantic cooperation looks more promising.

Mr Danjean’s report addresses the new security challenges facing EU members. To that effect it calls for a white paper which would trigger a public debate and raise the profile of the CSDP, establishing a clearer relationship between objectives and interests, on the one hand, and the means and resources to attain them, on the other.

The report also comes up with – and this is a very good thing – concrete proposals, and points to the areas which need further effort in the military domain. At the same time some of the proposals, such as the introduction of a European preference principle for defence acquisition and a call for the obligatory participation of the European defence industry in the coming US missile defence system, look pretty impossible to reconcile, while answering every need with a new institution is not always practical.

In general, with Europe constantly diminishing its military expenditure since the end of the Cold War and a public disinclined to support military action in general, the approach to CSDP should not only be mechanical but equally political. Restoring political will in this respect is thus indispensable for a successful CSDP.

Finally, the report is important because it addresses the very topical issue of the role of the European Parliament with respect to CSDP. I want to thank Mr Danjean and my colleagues for their contributions.

 
  
MPphoto
 

  Mirosław Piotrowski (ECR). - Panie Przewodniczący! Przedłożony projekt rezolucji Parlamentu w sprawie wspólnej polityki bezpieczeństwa i obrony zmierza między innymi do utworzenia militarnych struktur w ramach Unii Europejskiej. Apeluję o utworzenie specjalnej rady obrony i militarnego centrum operacyjnego Unii. Instrumenty te służą nadaniu Unii charakteru światowego gracza w dziedzinie wojskowości.

Przypomnieć wypada, że na 27 krajów członkowskich Unii Europejskiej aż 21 jest członkami NATO, tylko 6 krajów Unii do niego nie przynależy, a większość z nich opowiada się za neutralnością. Rodzi się więc zasadnicze pytanie – czy przedłożony projekt ma na celu zagospodarowanie kilku krajów Unii, czy też jest poważnym krokiem na drodze do budowania odrębnego bloku militarnego konkurującego z Paktem Północno-Atlantyckim? Nawet w perspektywie średnioterminowej nie da się utrzymać podwójnego członkostwa w obu organizacjach. Dlatego głosowanie za tym sprawozdaniem w dniu dzisiejszym de facto zburzy cywilny charakter Unii, będzie pokazaniem czerwonej kartki NATO i początkiem budowy alternatywnego bloku wojskowego.

 
  
MPphoto
 

  Ernst Strasser (PPE). - Herr Präsident, Frau Vizepräsidentin, meine sehr geehrten Damen und Herren! Zunächst möchte ich den beiden Kollegen herzlich zu ihren Berichten gratulieren, die die Grundlage für eine sehr gute Diskussion mit hervorragenden Ergebnissen sind. Es gibt einige Leitlinien, die ich ansprechen möchte. Zuerst der Punkt der Gemeinsamen Außenpolitik. Leider haben wir derzeit ein vielstimmiges Bild der Europäischen Union. Ich möchte Sie, Hohe Vertreterin, bitten und auffordern, dass wir da mithelfen und dafür sorgen, dass Europa mit einer Stimme spricht. Das ist sehr notwendig für eine gesamteuropäische Ausrichtung.

Zum Zweiten: Zu Recht wurden die transatlantischen Beziehungen angesprochen. Wir brauchen im diplomatischen Bereich, im wirtschaftlichen Bereich, in der Sicherheitspolitik, in der Verteidigungspolitik eine enge Partnerschaft mit unseren Kollegen in den USA, allerdings auf gleicher Augenhöhe und als gleichberechtigte Partner. Es muss auch gelten, dass die Bürgerrechte und die Sicherheitsfragen gleichberechtigt behandelt werden, wie es das Parlament auch zuletzt eindrucksvoll bei SWIFT verlangt hat.

Zum Dritten: Zu Recht ist der Westbalkan ein ganz entscheidendes Moment für die Europäische Sicherheits- und Außenpolitik der Zukunft. Hier müssen wir europäische Perspektiven geben. Das bedeutet politisch stabile Verhältnisse, persönliche Sicherheit, wirtschaftliche Entwicklung. Das alles soll und muss – und hier haben Sie das Parlament an Ihrer Seite – ein Europäischer Auswärtiger Dienst mithelfen zu erfüllen. Diesen Europäischen Auswärtigen Dienst verstehen wir als einen Dienst für Europa und nicht für die Mitgliedstaaten, für die Institutionen, die europäisch denken und arbeiten, und nicht für andere Interessen. Hier werden Sie das Parlament auf Ihrer Seite haben.

Natürlich unterstütze ich auch den deutschen Außenminister, der Deutsch als eine Arbeitssprache für den Europäischen Auswärtigen Dienst verlangt.

 
  
MPphoto
 

  Wolfgang Kreissl-Dörfler (S&D). - Herr Präsident! Baroness Ashton, verehrte Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Ja, wir brauchen eine Gemeinsame Außen-, Sicherheits- und Verteidigungspolitik, aber lassen Sie uns diese doch dazu nutzen, eine atomwaffenfreie Welt zu schaffen. Wir wissen, dass das nicht morgen geschehen wird, dazu kämpfen wir schon zu lange dafür. Aber vielleicht gelingt es uns, zusammen mit Präsident Obama und Präsident Medvedjev diesem Ziel entscheidend näher zu kommen.

Ich begrüße es auch, dass die Deutsche Bundesregierung in ihrem Koalitionsvertrag den Abzug US-amerikanischer Atomwaffen aus Deutschland fordern will. Das wäre auch ein eindeutiges und klares Zeichen. Ebenso begrüßen wir es, dass der Generalsekretär der NATO eine umfassende Debatte darüber führen soll, dem übergeordneten Ziel einer atomwaffenfreien Welt näher zu kommen, ohne die Sicherheitsinteressen vernachlässigen zu müssen. Auch das wäre ein entscheidender Schritt nach vorne.

Ich glaube, Lady Ashton, dass Sie, zusammen mit einem gut durchstrukturierten Auswärtigen Dienst sehr viel leisten können. Da bin ich durchaus hoffnungsvoll gestimmt, und bei manchen Kommentaren, die man sich hier anhören muss – besonders von einer sogenannten parlamentarischen Gruppe aus Großbritannien –, muss ich schon sagen, dass die Qualität in diesem Hause verdammt gelitten hat.

 
  
MPphoto
 

  Eduard Kukan (PPE). - Výborné správy kolegov Albertiniho a Danjeana obsahujú mnohé podnetné návrhy, pokiaľ ide o zefektívnenie hlavných aspektov a základných možností pri realizácii spoločnej zahraničnej a bezpečnostnej politiky.

Chcem zdôrazniť, že práve teraz, keď sa vypracúva koncepcia vzniku a budúceho fungovania Európskej vonkajšej akčnej služby, je mimoriadne dôležité, aby sa hneď na začiatku táto služba postavila na maximálne racionálny základ. Teda tak, aby slúžila výsostne objektívnym potrebám Európskej únie a jej snahe posilniť svoje postavenie vo svete.

Ako vidíme už dnes, nie je to jednoduchá a ľahká úloha. Pri vypracúvaní koncepcie služby sme už dnes svedkami toho, že sa stretávajú záujmy, často protichodné, rôznych európskych inštitúcií, ich jednotlivých zložiek a v ich rámci niekedy aj skupín a jednotlivcov. K tomu ešte môžeme pridať národné záujmy individuálnych členských štátov. V tejto situácii treba, aby všetci hráči, účastníci tohto procesu, boli zodpovední, veľkorysí, objektívni, aby sa dokázali povzniesť nad vlastné egá a mali na mysli hlavne spoločný cieľ, teda vznik diplomatickej služby, ktorá bude fungovať ako homogénny prvok slúžiaci výhradne potrebám Európskej únie a jej členských štátov. Tu je veľmi dôležitá lídrovská úloha – Vaša, barónka Ashtonová. Bolo by chybou, keby partikulárne záujmy a snaha za každú cenu presadiť vlastný názor na úkor druhého s cieľom demonštrovať vlastnú dôležitosť a postavenie zvíťazili nad potrebou širšieho nadhľadu. Lebo aj výsledok tohto snaženia bude svedectvom toho, či nám naozaj ide o silnejšiu Európsku úniu, alebo iba o ďalšie predvádzanie sa a súťaž o tom, kto má najsilnejšie postavenie v štruktúrach Európskej únie.

 
  
MPphoto
 

  Roberto Gualtieri (S&D). - Signor Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, signor Alto Rappresentante/Vicepresidente, vorrei sottolineare il fatto che stiamo discutendo tre ottimi documenti elaborati dal Parlamento: documenti ambiziosi che esprimono delle posizioni chiare, compiono delle scelte nette e sui quali esiste un largo consenso tra i gruppi che in questo Parlamento hanno a cuore l'Europa e il suo futuro. È un fatto importante che dimostra la volontà e la capacità del Parlamento di candidarsi a svolgere un ruolo centrale anche nel settore della PESC/PSDC sulla base di una lettura, vorrei dire, dinamica del trattato di Lisbona.

Questo ruolo intendiamo esercitarlo nel processo di costruzione del Servizio di azione esterna, non solo per garantire le prerogative del Parlamento, ma anche per contribuire a fare del servizio una struttura capace di assicurare coerenza ed efficacia all'azione esterna dell'UE, rafforzando al tempo stesso ed estendendo progressivamente il metodo comunitario.

Per quanto riguarda la relazione Danjean, vorrei sottolineare come il concetto di autonomia strategica venga qui prospettato nel quadro di un approccio multilaterale e come esso sia una condizione per rafforzare la partnership strategica con gli Stati Uniti, così come vorrei sottolineare il fatto che il Parlamento è unito nella richiesta di un Centro operazioni, e ho apprezzato che Lei, signor Alto rappresentante, si sia dichiarata disponibile a un dialogo, a un approfondimento e a una discussione su questo tema.

Sulla risoluzione sulla non proliferazione, vorrei sottolineare l'importanza dell'assunzione della prospettiva di un mondo privo di armi nucleari e il netto giudizio sull'anacronismo delle armi nucleari tattiche e la valorizzazione delle posizioni recentemente prese da alcuni governi europei a questo riguardo. Dal Parlamento giunge quindi un chiaro messaggio, realistico e ambizioso, e auspichiamo che l'Alto rappresentante sappia coglierlo e farlo proprio.

 
  
MPphoto
 

  Tunne Kelam (PPE). - Mr President, may I congratulate colleagues Albertini and Danjean on their comprehensive and creative reports on foreign and security policy.

The EU is bound to be a global player, as you said, High Representative, but with seven per cent of the world’s population and one fifth of GDP, it will be possible only on the basis of strengthened transatlantic cooperation based on common values.

First of all the EU should show a determined will to develop coherent strategies in five crucial areas: common strategies for China, Russia, peace in the Middle East, Afghanistan, and energy security.

It is still a major handicap for our credibility and efficiency in the world that often we have not been able to form a unified position in these areas. The principal challenge for you will be to carry into practice your excellent statement about building a single political strategy and taking collective responsibility.

I welcomed paragraph 10 in colleague Danjean’s report which urges the Council and the Commission to analyse cyber threats and to coordinate an efficient response to such challenges based on the best practices. Cyber warfare is not a challenge of the future: it has become an everyday practice. Therefore it is an immediate task for the EU to work out a European cyber security strategy.

Finally, on the European External Action Service: I think the forming of the EEAS should be based on a fair geographical balance and equal opportunities for representatives of all Member States, new and old, with application of the quota system. Only this will guarantee the efficiency and transparency and finally the credibility of the new diplomatic service.

Good luck to you, High Representative, and thank you.

 
  
MPphoto
 

  Richard Howitt (S&D). - Mr President, High Representative Ashton has asked us this morning to change mental maps, to challenge resistance to institutional change and to avoid narrow defence of national interests. If Parliament means what it says on the CFSP we have to send a clear message that we will support a strong, comprehensive and inclusive External Action Service and, in observing our own prerogatives, we will not be part of any vested interests seeking to limit the capacity, and therefore the effectiveness, of that service.

That should mean appointments on merit and merit alone, appointments from Member State foreign ministries from day one and from across all of the European Union; it means incorporation of strategic advice on issues like energy supply and environmental policy; it means organisational structures which reflect global reach and give due weight to Africa and to transatlantic relations as well as to Asia, Latin America and our neighbourhood; it means sufficient financial margin, not just for rapid reaction or humanitarian response, but to move monies to reflect new political priorities; it means endorsing Cathy Ashton’s decision to put disaster response above disaster tourism and for her to provide key direction to financial programming and it means this Parliament supporting new arrangements with deputising which reflect international practice rather than necessarily sticking to our past rules.

Finally, I am delighted to see the Commission seat empty this morning and, for all those who campaigned for the Lisbon Treaty, we should not restrict their or our support for its full implementation.

 
  
MPphoto
 

  Francisco José Millán Mon (PPE). - Señor Presidente, la política exterior de la Unión entra en una etapa nueva, como esta mañana han subrayado la señora Ashton y el señor Albertini.

El artículo 21 del Tratado establece principios objetivos. Además, se crean nuevas figuras, con un Alto Representante, también Vicepresidente de la Comisión, un Presidente estable del Consejo Europeo, el Servicio Europeo de Acción Exterior, una nueva política de Seguridad y Defensa, objeto del informe de mi colega, el señor Danjean, etc.

Con estas innovaciones se busca asegurar una proyección más efectiva de la Unión Europea en el mundo y creo que un instrumento idóneo para ello siguen siendo las cumbres con terceros países. Pues bien, la Unión Europea no celebra muchas cumbres con países individuales. Debemos cuidarlas.

La de la semana pasada, con Marruecos, era la primera con un país árabe y simbolizaba, además, la concesión de un estatuto avanzado a dicho país. Me habría gustado que usted, señora Ashton, hubiera acudido. También lamento la ausencia del Rey de Marruecos. Con esta última ausencia, una cumbre que tenía que haber sido histórica perdió en proyección pública, en trascendencia y en efectividad.

Espero que la Cumbre Euromediterránea de Barcelona sea exitosa también en lo que se refiere al nivel de las delegaciones.

Y, por otra parte, lamento que la cumbre prevista en primavera con el Presidente Obama no se vaya a celebrar. Como el informe Albertini recoge, el Tratado de Lisboa abre un escenario propicio para reforzar los mecanismos de diálogo con los Estados Unidos. Este refuerzo y otros temas podrían haberse abordado en la cumbre.

La Unión Europea y los Estados Unidos no deben desaprovechar ocasión para tratar al más alto nivel temas bilaterales, conflictos y retos globales que hoy se acumulan en la agenda mundial. Sería paradójico — y termino— que, ahora que tenemos el Tratado de Lisboa, corramos el riesgo de caer en la irrelevancia en ese mundo que algunos ya llaman «postoccidental» o «postestadounidense».

 
  
MPphoto
 

  Libor Rouček (S&D). - Vážená paní vysoká představitelko, dámy a pánové, dovolte, abych ve svém vystoupení připomněl nutnost vytváření partnerství s Ruskem. Státy Evropské unie i Rusko čelí mnoha společným výzvám a hrozbám. Zmíním boj proti terorizmu, šíření zbraní hromadného ničení, regionální konflikty na Blízkém východě, v Afghánistánu, změnu klimatu, energetickou bezpečnost včetně bezpečnosti jaderné apod. Ani Evropská unie, ani Rusko nevyřeší tyto problémy samostatně. Nutná je spolupráce, a tato spolupráce by měla být základem pro novou komplexní dohodu mezi Evropskou unií a Ruskem.

Chtěl bych proto vyzvat vysokou představitelku Unie, aby využila svých nových pravomocí a urychlila vyjednávání s Ruskem. Chtěl bych Vás, paní baronko, rovněž vyzvat, abyste využila svých nových pravomocí a účinněji koordinovala stanoviska jak jednotlivých členských států, tak také jednotlivých aktérů naší společné zahraniční a bezpečnostní politiky, protože jen tak budeme moci zajistit jednotný postup a prosazování hodnot, jakými jsou lidská práva, demokracie, právní stát, rovnoprávnost a vyváženost ve vzájemných vztazích.

 
  
MPphoto
 

  Laima Liucija Andrikienė (PPE). - Mr President, I welcome and support both reports and I congratulate both rapporteurs on those documents.

Now for two points. Firstly, on the Danjean report, I would like to bring up an issue that has raised a lot of eyebrows in a number of EU Member States. I am talking specifically about the exclusive talks between Paris and Moscow over the possible sale of four Mistral warships to Russia.

The Mistral warship is clearly offensive in nature and it is indeed very alarming that some EU Member States are engaging in arms sales to third countries, which might have very negative consequences for the security of other EU Member States or the EU’s neighbours.

The Treaty of Lisbon outlines common defence aspirations and includes a clause about solidarity in the area of security and defence. Therefore, what do you reckon Parliament and other EU institutions should push for? A common set of rules inside the EU addressing arms sales from EU Member States to third countries.

As regards Mr Albertini’s report, I would like to stress the importance of stability and security in East Asia. We welcome the efforts undertaken by both Taipei and Beijing to improve cross-state relations and to enhance dialogue and practical cooperation. In this context the EU should strongly back Taiwan’s participation in the International Civil Aviation Organisation and in the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change as Taiwan’s participation in these organisations is important to the EU and global interests.

 
  
MPphoto
 

  Zoran Thaler (S&D). - Spoštovana gospa evropska zunanja ministrica, močno se strinjam z vami, da je boljša in bolj kredibilna evropska zunanja politika vaš ključni cilj. Da je večja stabilnost in varnost v naši soseski, torej na Balkanu, vaš ključni cilj.

Tukaj si res ne moremo privoščiti, da bi nam spodletelo. Zato vam predlagam, da se osebno angažirate v dveh zadevah: pri nujno potrebni rešitvi zadeve med Grčijo in Makedonijo, ki bo končno omogočila naši članici Grčiji, da svobodno zadiha proti severu, in drugič, pri prizadevanjih, da se Srbija, v umetni dilemi med Evropsko unijo in Kosovom, odloči za Evropsko unijo, torej da se ne samoizolira. In morda bi bilo dobro jih večkrat spomniti naše prijatelje v Srbiji na edino realno dejstvo, da bosta Srbija in Kosovo spet skupaj, enkrat ko bosta oba člana Evropske unije.

 
  
MPphoto
 

  Michael Gahler (PPE). - Herr Präsident, Frau Vizepräsidentin! Heute sitzen Sie auf der anderen Seite. Wenn Sie das monatlich abwechselnd machen, kann ich damit gut leben.

Gegen Ende der Debatte sind hier doch einige Hauptbewertungen deutlich geworden. Wir wollen, dass Sie an der Spitze eines Auswärtigen Dienstes stehen, bei dem Sie – wie es ein Kollege sagte – immer beide Hüte tragen. Diese zwei Hüte sollten dabei die einzige Duplizierung sein, bei den Strukturen brauchen wir das nicht. Die Beibehaltung der Gemeinschaftsmethode muss gewährleistet werden, nicht nur über das Budget und die Kontrolle des EP. Um es klar zu sagen: Der neue Dienst darf nicht das exklusive Spielzeug der Außenminister werden, die beleidigt sind, dass sie jetzt beim Europäischen Rat draußen bleiben müssen. Das gilt auch bei der Einstellung des Personals und der Berufung auf wichtige Posten.

Zum Bericht Danjean möchte ich meine volle Unterstützung der Linie des Berichterstatters zum Ausdruck bringen. Beim Thema Ständiges Operationszentrum habe ich wie der Kollege Van Orden festgestellt, dass sich Lady Ashton bei dieser Frage seit ihrer Anhörung bewegt hat, aus meiner Sicht allerdings in die richtige Richtung. Sie sind aus der Ablehnung in eine Prüfungsphase gekommen. Nach wie vor finde ich, wenn wir zivile und militärische Einsatzplanung voll integriert im Auswärtigen Dienst betreiben, dann macht es Sinn, dies anschließend auch mit einem eigenen Operational Headquarter durchzuführen.

Zum Vorschlag unserer Kollegen von den Grünen, eine Generaldirektion Peacebuilding einzurichten: Ich finde im Gegensatz zu den Kollegen, die ganz links sitzen, dass das gesamte EU-Projekt, aber auch unser Außenhandeln ein einziges Peacebuilding-Projekt ist. Von daher weiß ich nicht, ob wir das auf ein Department beschränken sollten.

 
  
MPphoto
 

  María Muñiz De Urquiza (S&D). - Señor Presidente, creemos que las nuevas instituciones requieren cierto tiempo para asentarse y también creemos que no debemos desenfocar el tiro. Lo importante no es, como piden algunos, una presencia ubicua de la Alta Representante en todos los tentáculos de la política exterior europea. Lo importante es que la Unión Europea esté presente en la escena internacional con capacidad de interlocución para defender sus posiciones. Es lo que dicen los dos informes que debatimos hoy.

Por eso, abogamos por una política amplia de la Unión Europea, por relaciones de cooperación con todos los países con los que tenemos intereses, especialmente en materia de derechos humanos, desde Belarús hasta Cuba. Con todos los países con los que tenemos interés en materia de derechos humanos, en materia de seguridad y en materia de retos globales, porque la Unión Europea puede marcar la diferencia, como ya se ha comprobado con la posición conjunta de una mayoría de Estados miembros obtenida bajo Presidencia española en el Consejo de Derechos Humanos en Ginebra y como se debe conseguir en Oriente Próximo o en Cuba. Con un paso adelante, proactivo y renovador de la acción exterior de la Unión Europea. Queremos un Servicio Europeo de Acción Exterior fuerte y verdadero que respalde el trabajo de la Alta Representante y que responda también a las aspiraciones de este Parlamento.

 
  
MPphoto
 

  Krzysztof Lisek (PPE). - Panie Przewodniczący! Pani Przewodnicząca! Chciałbym wyrazić satysfakcję z faktu, że możemy dzisiaj debatować z Panią o wspólnej polityce zagranicznej i o wspólnej polityce bezpieczeństwa i obrony. Wbrew kilku głosom chciałbym powiedzieć, że jestem pewny, że większość tej Izby życzy Pani dobrze i życzy zbudowania wspólnej polityki zagranicznej oraz profesjonalnej służby działań zewnętrznych, służby, w której będzie pani mogła wykorzystać najlepszych dyplomatów z wszystkich państw członkowskich Unii Europejskiej.

Rozmawiamy dzisiaj o wspólnej polityce bezpieczeństwa i obrony, bazując na świetnym sprawozdaniu mojego szefa w podkomisji bezpieczeństwa i obrony, pana Danjeana. Unia oczywiście musi budować zręby wspólnej polityki bezpieczeństwa i obrony. Mamy wiele wyzwań przed sobą, nie tylko konflikty, ale także klęski żywiołowe, zagrożenia terrorystyczne itd. Musimy więc wzmocnić swoje możliwości operacyjne. Unia musi dbać o własne bezpieczeństwo, ale także być aktywna w obliczu wyzwań globalnych. Nie da się tego zrobić bez dobrej współpracy z sojusznikami z drugiej strony Atlantyku. Myślę, że nie tylko ze względu na to, że większość państw Unii należy do NATO, ale ze względu właśnie na te wyzwania wszyscy oczekują, że uda się pani nawiązać dobry dialog i zbudować koherentną współpracę pomiędzy Unią Europejską a NATO.

Kończąc humorystycznie chciałbym wyrazić nadzieję, że Pani, baronesso, przesłała już swój numer telefonu nie tylko Henry'emu Kissingerowi, ale także Hilary Clinton.

 
  
MPphoto
 

  Proinsias De Rossa (S&D). - Mr President, I want to congratulate Vice-President Ashton on a speech with vision and substance.

The problem that some people have with you, Vice-President Ashton, is that you are not a macho general or, indeed, a narrow nationalist. I welcome in particular your emphasis on the rule of law between countries and urge you actively to insist that this is the case in the Middle East. Also your commitment to the important principle of collective gains as against minimal Member State losses.

The Middle East is perhaps the most volatile region capable at the moment of stumbling into a widespread conflagration. You must work closely with the United States and press for the Council statement of 8 December to be central as a framework for progress there.

Finally, I want to recommend strongly that you support the idea of a policy that the Middle East be a nuclear-free zone.

 
  
MPphoto
 

  Андрей Ковачев (PPE). - Смятам, че докладите на г-н Danjean и г-н Albertini са стъпка към така необходимата ни обща визия за Европейския съюз като силен глобален актьор в осигуряването на мир и сигурност, за което ги поздравявам.

С намаляващите бюджети за отбрана и настоящата икономическа криза става пределно ясно, че ако желаем Европа да говори с единен глас в света, със силни и респектиращи послания, е необходимо да използваме наличните средства по-разумно и по-ефективно.

Ролята на Европейската агенция за отбрана, която е засилена с Лисабонския договор, е от решаващо значение за оптимизирането на нашия потенциал чрез колективно възлагане на поръчки, обединяване на ресурси и съвместни обучения. Взаимодействието между цивилните и военни аспекти на общата външна политика и политика за сигурност трябва да бъде използвано, за да се подобри капацитетът и ефективността на нашия Съюз.

Очаквам да видя активната роля в тази посока на ръководителя на Европейската агенция по отбраната, върховния представител г-жа Ashton. И накрая, г-жо Ashton, желая Ви успех при създаването на общата Служба за външно действие и очаквам принципът на географския баланс да бъде спазен при назначаването на служителите на службата, за да може наистина тя да представлява целия Съюз. Европа се нуждае от Вашия успех.

 
  
MPphoto
 

  Ágnes Hankiss (PPE). - Tisztelt kollégák! Mindenekelőtt gratulálva Arnaud Danjean úrnak ehhez az átfogó és ugyanakkor minden részkérdésben rendkívül gondolatgazdag jelentéshez, magam egyetlen szempontról szeretnék szólni. Az Unió tagállamai között számos olyan ország van, így az én hazám, Magyarország is, akik szeretnének az európai biztonság és védelempolitikai együttműködésben teljes jogú, egyenrangú tagként tevékenyen részt venni, ugyanakkor ismert földrajzi és történelmi okokból sem anyagi erőforrásaikat, sem kapacitásukat vagy akár tudásbázisukat tekintve, egyenlőre nem állnak azon a szinten, mint a legnagyobb tagországok. Magam ezért olyan módosító javaslatokat szavaztam meg, amelyek ezt a fajta csatlakozást, felzárkózást szeretnék megkönnyíteni. Egyrészt vonatkozik ez a folyamatos strukturált együttműködésre, amelyet talán lehetne úgy megfogalmazni és lehetett úgy megfogalmazni, hogy ez ne a legerősebb és legnagyobb tagországok elit klubjaként működjön, tehát ne egységes és egyforma követelményekkel lépjen fel minden résztvevő felé, mert ebben az esetben bizonyos országok lemaradnak, hanem speciális képességeik folytán tegyék lehetővé a kisebbeknek a részvételt. A másik pedig a képzési hálózatok ilyen jellegű kialakítása. Köszön szépen elnök úrnak, hogy bevette a jelentésbe ezeket a szempontokat.

 
  
MPphoto
 

  Ivo Vajgl (ALDE). - Spoštovani predsedujoči, spoštovana gospa baronesa, danes bi se rad zahvalil obema kolegoma, ki sta tako briljantno vodila razpravo, ki je pripeljala do tega dokumenta oziroma do obeh dokumentov gospoda Albertinija in gospoda Danjeana.

Rekel bi, da sta dokumenta sprejeta v pravem času, na začetku mandata, da smo na nek kompleksen način pokazali, kaj želimo v zunanji politiki v Evropski uniji. Gospa baronesa, vi ste to priložnost dobro izkoristili, da ste ta dva zelo konkretna dokumenta transponirali nekako v svojo vizijo sveta in jaz vam štejem to v dobro. Seveda ne bom vam vedno štel v dobro, če se ne boste opredeljevali o konkretnih problemih, dilemah in krizah. Danes vam štejem posebej v dobro to, da ste omenili, in to kritično, početje izraelske vlade v zvezi z gradnjo ilegalnih naselbin.

Na koncu bi rekel še samo to: mislim, da bomo morali ob prihodnjih priložnostih nekaj pozornosti več posvetiti našemu staremu in zanesljivemu partnerju Japonski in ne biti toliko fascinirani s Kitajsko in drugimi hitro rastočimi državami.

 
  
MPphoto
 

  Piotr Borys (PPE). - Panie Przewodniczący! Pani Przewodnicząca! Wyrażę poglądy chyba wszystkich obecnych na tej sali, że polityka zagraniczna jest jednym z najważniejszych wyzwań, które stoją przed Unią Europejską i życzylibyśmy sobie tego, aby pod Pani przewodnictwem Unia Europejska była faktycznym regulatorem polityki zagranicznej na świecie.

Skupię się na dwóch elementach. Pierwszy to sytuacja polityczna na Bliskim Wschodzie. Oczekujemy od Pani jasnego stanowiska w zakresie strategii dotyczącej walki z terroryzmem. Oczekujemy głównie tego, aby ta sytuacja, przede wszystkim w Afganistanie, mogła być sytuacją, która daje perspektywę wyjścia. Tutaj chciałbym wskazać na wykorzystanie wszystkich instrumentów, w tym głównie elementów operacji cywilnych w postaci modernizacji tego kraju, który jest dzisiaj zniszczony permanentną 30-letnią wojną. Myślę także, że zaangażowanie polityczne w zakresie odbudowy Afganistanu jest jednym z kluczowych elementów stabilizacji w tym kraju. Drugi element to Iran, który dzisiaj odgrywa kluczową rolę w polityce zagranicznej w tamtym rejonie. Myślę, że zaangażowanie w zakresie walki z rozpowszechnianiem broni jądrowej jest jednym z kluczowych zadań, które stoją także przed Panią. Życzymy tutaj dużych sukcesów i dobrej korelacji z polityką amerykańską.

Myślę, że sytuacja polityczna w Afganistanie, Pakistanie, Indiach oraz Iranie jest kluczową z punktu widzenia polityki bezpieczeństwa światowego. Dlatego Pani rola w tym zakresie jest nieoceniona.

 
  
MPphoto
 

  Izaskun Bilbao Barandica (ALDE). - Señor Presidente, Baronesa Ashton, usted ha calificado de exitosa la operación Atalanta, en el Cuerno de África, contra la piratería.

Sin embargo, la semana pasada hubo un ataque masivo de piratas a barcos pesqueros vascos, españoles y franceses, que ha obligado a la flota pesquera a abandonar la zona y retirarse a lugares donde puedan estar protegidos, pero donde no hay pescado. Sin olvidar los cientos de personas que siguen secuestradas en diferentes barcos.

Le solicito que aplique la resolución que este Parlamento aprobó en el mes de diciembre para que esa operación diera protección a los barcos pesqueros y extienda esa protección, y que se reconsideren las estrategias y se replanteen las técnicas y las formas de la presencia de esta operación en el Índico de manera urgente.

 
  
MPphoto
 

  Struan Stevenson (ECR). - Mr President, 58 people lost their lives on Sunday trying to exercise their right to vote in the Iraqi elections, and 140 were seriously injured. However, violence, intimidation, threats of attack and blackmail did not deter millions of courageous Iraqis from going to the polls.

There have been repeated attempts to manipulate and distort the outcome of the election. The banning of more than 500 secular non-sectarian candidates by the bogus Accountability and Justice Commission, the repeated bomb attacks on polling day and the deeply sinister delay in announcing the results are all disturbing signs of dirty tricks.

The ominous interference of Iran has been a constant feature of this election, and we must today send it this stark warning: do not try to install a puppet prime minister in Iraq, do not try to defraud the Iraqi people of their democratic rights and do not plunge Iraq back into sectarian chaos, because the West is watching you, and you are under the spotlight.

 
  
MPphoto
 

  Andrew Henry William Brons (NI). - Mr President, Baroness Ashton’s role is described in Article 18 of the Treaty on European Union as contributing to the development of a common foreign and security policy, as mandated by the Council, which of course contains the representatives of nation states. However, the same article states that she must be a Vice-President of the Commission, from which she operates. Furthermore, I understand that former Commission staff will be given preference over the staff of diplomatic and foreign ministries when staff are appointed to the External Action Service.

Baroness Ashton, it is clear that your role was designed to undermine continually the influence over foreign policy by Member States, not only individually but also collectively on the Council. You and your successors will be mandated by the Council only on paper. The real driving force behind the EU’s foreign policy will be the Commission; Member States and the Council will be continually marginalised.

 
  
MPphoto
 

  Andrzej Grzyb (PPE). - Polityka spójna i skuteczna to główne przesłanie sprawozdania pana przewodniczącego Albertiniego, któremu gratuluję tego sprawozdania, podobnie jak panu Danjeanowi.

Chciałbym zwrócić uwagę, że wykonanie tych zadań to jest oczywiście też strona personalna. Europejska Służba Działań Zewnętrznych, która pojawia się w sprawozdaniu, mimo że ono dotyczy roku 2008 – szkoda, że nie za rok 2009 już – jest tutaj takim wyznacznikiem, który będzie probierzem, jak rzeczywiście chcemy wykonać te zadania, które stoją przed urzędem pani Ashton. Sądzę, że ten balans geograficzny, którego się domagamy, i role dla Parlamentu Europejskiego oraz parlamentów narodowych w tym procesie wydają mi się tutaj bardzo ważne. Jasne kryteria naboru, rola Parlamentu Europejskiego w kształtowaniu tej służby to jest zadanie, które będzie w sposób szczególny w tej Izbie przedmiotem oceny.

Chcielibyśmy apelować, aby ten proces tworzenia był klarowny, jasny, aby był on zrozumiały również dla nas, jako dla reprezentantów poszczególnych wyborców, którzy tworzą przecież tę Unię Europejską.

 
  
MPphoto
 

  Jelko Kacin (ALDE). - Iskrene čestitke obema poročevalcema, tako gospodu Albertiniju kot tudi gospodu Danjeanu.

Rad bi vas spomnil na tragični dogodek, ki se je zgodil pred sedmimi leti, 12. marca, v Beogradu. Takrat so ubili srbskega predsednika vlade Zorana Đinđića. Ubili so ga zato, da bi zaustavili normalizacijo, demokratizacijo in evropeizacijo Srbije. Niso je ustavili, so jo pa upočasnili. Ta dogodek je negativno vplival tudi na sosednje države in na celotno regijo.

Gospa Ashton, prosim vas, da pomagate in spodbujate proevropske sile povsod v naši neposredni soseščini. Nastopati morate pravočasno in preventivno. Odločili ste se, da prevzamete novo inštitucijo in novo funkcijo, pravzaprav dve vlogi, kar dve inštituciji, in postajate tako rekoč dvojna ikona. Za vas in za nas ni poti nazaj. Za vas je samo pot naprej, zato vas prosim, da upravičite zaupanje, ki smo vam ga dali.

 
  
MPphoto
 

  Franz Obermayr (NI). - Herr Präsident! Umfangreiche Berichte erfordern meist auch unterschiedliche Bewertungen, so auch in diesem Fall. Daher Ja zu einer Gemeinsamen Außen- und Sicherheitspolitik, wenn es um illegale Einwanderung, Visabetrug, Kriminalitätstourismus und Asylmissbrauch geht. Ja auch zu einer Gemeinsamen Außen- und Sicherheitspolitik, wenn es gilt, die Schengen-Grenze zu sichern und die Bekämpfung der organisierten Kriminalität klar anzugehen. Ein kritisches Nein allerdings zu einer Gemeinsamen Außen- und Sicherheitspolitik, die darauf ausgerichtet ist, der EU in militärischen Belangen eine aktive Rolle zu geben, dort, wo bereits UNO und NATO vorhanden sind. Diese Doppelgleisigkeit ist abzulehnen – ich spreche mich natürlich speziell als Vertreter eines neutralen Staates aus. Ebenfalls Nein zu einer Aufhebung des Visumzwangs, einer unreflektierten Aufhebung für Balkanstaaten, wo jetzt bereits, nach wenigen Monaten, circa 150 000 Mazedonier auf dem Weg nach Mitteleuropa sind, von denen bereits zwei Drittel in der Illegalität untergetaucht sind.

So wird man das Sicherheitsbedürfnis der Bürger sicherlich nicht fördern, hier hat man keinen Beitrag zur Sicherheit, und man hebt natürlich auch nicht die Lust unserer Bürger auf Europa.

 
  
MPphoto
 

  Miroslav Mikolášik (PPE). - Som znepokojený faktom, že predchádzajúce konferencie nepriniesli konkrétne výsledky v oblasti nešírenia jadrových zbraní. Dochádza k šíreniu takýchto zbraní a technológie. Rastie hrozba, že sa jadrové technológie dostanú do rúk kriminálnych a teroristických organizácií.

Únia by mala v tejto oblasti vystupovať jednotne a postaviť sa k problematike ako svetový hráč, ktorý zaručí posilnenie všetkých troch pilierov Zmluvy o nešírení jadrových zbraní a dosiahnutie všeobecného uplatňovania a vykonávania pravidiel a nástrojov ich nešírenia. Považujem za nevyhnutné zaradiť otázku nešírenia jadrových zbraní medzi priority Európskej únie a začať viesť konštruktívny dialóg so všetkými jadrovými mocnosťami, nielen USA a Ruskom. Počet štátov majúcich jadrové zbrane totiž nezodpovedá len piatim členom Bezpečnostnej rady OSN. Únia by preto mala v záujme celkovej bezpečnosti vynaložiť politické a diplomatické úsilie, aby sa krajiny ako Izrael, India, Pakistan a Severná Kórea stali signatármi Zmluvy o nešírení jadrových zbraní.

 
  
MPphoto
 

  Catherine Ashton, Vice-President of the Commission/High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy. − Mr President, I should like first of all to express my thanks for the contributions that have been made and say how much I thought this was an important and valuable debate in terms of our strategic direction.

I want to say at the beginning that I agree completely with all honourable Members who spoke of the value and importance of the scrutiny of this House and the role of this House, not only in terms of that scrutiny but also in terms of the expertise that I know exists within it. It is my intention to call upon that expertise and to hope to have as many occasions as possible where we are able to debate and discuss many if not all the important issues that have been raised today.

I will be relatively brief at this point but I will just try to talk about a few of the key areas that I think honourable Members are most concerned about. I shall begin by saying that I did not say ‘no’ to the Barnier report. What I said was, on the basis of lessons learnt from Haiti and now the support we are offering in Chile, we wanted to look at how much more we could do, how we could operate more effectively, what we should have on standby and whether we should have something on standby. That requires us to consider strategically what we should be doing, and the Barnier report provides the backdrop to do that. I am very grateful to Michel for the contribution that he has made on that – it is the backdrop.

On the Non-Proliferation Treaty: a number of honourable Members have raised the importance of the conference that is coming up in May, all of which I agree with. It is very important that we move forward now in terms of what the opportunity of May will afford us.

I also agree that security begins with strong political relations. We have to consistently view our approach in the wider world as being about developing those strong political relationships in order to promote security, not only for ourselves but also for third states, for states with whom we are seeking to have that relationship or with whom we are in dialogue because of the concerns that we have.

A number of honourable Members quite rightly raised the importance of the Balkans. I have indicated in my priorities that this is an incredibly important area of work. It is very important in the period building up to the elections in Bosnia that we promote the importance of the European Union and make sure that national politicians describe to their people the path that they plan to take to get closer ties with Europe and ultimately to become part of Europe.

I agree on the importance of Valentin Inzko and the work he is doing in the Office of the High Representative. He and I are working together to think about the strategic approach – again for a future that takes us way beyond the elections to where we need to be in the coming months and years in order to retain the security. I take the point about the importance of stability: not only do we have to have it there, but we need to keep it there. There is concern in the region that we are seen to be moving forward and on occasions I feel we have got a bit stuck in what we need to do next. We need to take that forward.

That is particularly true, as a number of honourable Members have said, in Kosovo, where I have met the Government. I have had conversations with the Government and with the Prime Minister in particular, to look at what we would do with them in the future. Then there is Serbia, which is pushing very hard to become a part of the European Union. When I met President Tadić and the government members, it was very clear there too that this is something they see as being their future, and they too understand the issues that we are concerned about on that journey.

Concerning the debate on Cuba, I would have been there. It is simply that we have a clash. There is the Council of Presidents meeting to discuss the External Action Service and I cannot be in two places at once. That is what the European Parliament decided in terms of timing. I must obey and be present at that. However, I think Cuba is an important issue and I have no doubt that we will return to that subject.

Concerning the separate department for peace-building, my response is that it should be in everything we do and I am always nervous about separating out something, as if somehow it is separate from every bit of work we are doing. If you look at how we are going to operate the External Action Service, it is like an umbrella organisation that takes in clearly the responsibilities under the Treaty but also is your servant and the Commission’s servant.

So when the Commission is looking to do things on trade, on climate change, on energy security across the world, the External Action Service can be its tool as well, directly linking the work of the Commission to what happens on the ground. All of that, I would maintain, is about a more secure, more stable world. So for me it is all about how we build in the idea that we are there to support efforts to ensure that we have peace and that we keep peace.

On Atalanta: I think the points made there are very positive. It is a very important mission, but it is a mission that has to be connected to all the other things we are doing in that region. I also take the point that we need to think about fishing and the strategy on that. That is very much understood.

Working groups: I think it is a very good idea for Parliament to have them. I think senior officials are linking with them well at the moment and we need to continue to do that.

On the operational headquarters: it is not that I have changed my position. What I said in January was that I remain to be convinced. We have now been looking at this, because, as I have been in the job a little bit longer, I am more engaged in the work that we are doing in terms of our missions abroad, whether in Kosovo, whether in Bosnia or whether in discussing what we are doing in Atalanta or indeed what we have just been doing in Haiti, and so forth.

In my speech I said that we need to look at what is necessary and then decide how best to achieve it. There are different views, but those views, I believe, will converge around a common theme, and that is what we ought to do. So it is about being convinced one way or the other as to how we do it.

On human rights: I want to describe that as a silver thread. The projection of our values and human rights is essential to everything that we do in the European Union and in the wider world. It is about how we make sure that it is a thread that runs all the way through all our actions in terms of support for the work that we are doing across the world to promote the values of the European Union. I want to look very carefully at how we do that, so it is not something that just becomes an add-on extra to a dialogue. It becomes an integral part of everything that we do.

I agree as well about the strong relationship transatlantically with the United States. They are a strong partner with us on a whole range of things, particularly on crisis management, and it is very important that we build on that. I am also very keen to build on the work that we do with the US in areas of development, for example particularly in Africa, where there is a potential – I believe, anyway – to do a lot more, certainly in the light of my experience with Aid for Trade as the Trade Commissioner.

We also need to think about other big partnerships. I have been talking to the Brazilian Foreign Minister about the potential of again working together on development where the economies of scale and the ability to collaborate enable us to release resources in a much more effective way to certain parts of the world which are in real need.

I agree too on the cyber threats. This is a very important issue. It is here now. It is an issue we are going to have to keep looking at because inevitably the threats change all the time.

Just a little bit on the External Action Service. The geographical breadth of the European Union has to be represented within the External Action Service. I agree with that completely, but it will take me time to do it. One of the things that I have said to all the foreign ministers and I say to Parliament is: please resist the temptation to assume that, because the first four or five appointments I make are not from a Member State that you might know best, it does not mean that I will not make appointments in the future from those Member States. We simply have to build it stage by stage. Remember, as honourable Members know, it does not exist at all at the moment. I do not have a team or a staff for the External Action Service because. Until the legal basis is done, we do not have anything. We simply have what we had before, trying to bring it together in a more coherent way.

I will appoint on merit and nothing else. There are no favourites here. It is on merit. I want the brightest and the best and that is what I have said to Member States and the institutions. I want the delegations on the ground to be an umbrella, able to support the work of the European Union in all its different elements, as it is represented to third countries, as it works with third countries.

It is essential that it does that as otherwise we will end up fragmented again. The question is how to do it, and that is why we are in dialogue with the Council and the Commission at the moment. If it were very simple, we would have done it by now. We just have to make sure that we do it properly and effectively. We will work that out in the next few weeks.

In terms of resources, I am going to argue for flexibility. I am going to argue that, if you have a crisis in a particular country or if you realise that you need to be able to move resources, we should deal with it, but deal with it within the context of parliamentary scrutiny. And again we need to think about how to make that work, not just now but in the future.

We absolutely must avoid duplication; otherwise we will have gained nothing except more bureaucracy, which is not what we want to do. We have to make sure that this is a cohesive service that runs well, operating as an entity within the European Union, supporting and being supported by the other institutions. And, as I have said, we must remember that it does not exist yet. Let us hope that we can get the work done in the next few weeks. With Parliament supporting me I am sure we will, so we can get this into being. We can lay the foundation stones but it will take time to build it, and that is so important that I hope that every honourable Member will understand.

A couple of final points. On summits: we have lots of different summits. The question that we always have to keep in mind is the value and importance of them. I cannot go to all of them. There are simply too many. I will be at some. We were well represented at the Morocco summit because both Presidents were there. I honestly believe that if the Presidents of the Council and the Commission are there, we have to start saying that is a strong EU representation at the summit. It does not always require me to be there as well, and they would agree with that.

Finally, honourable Members talked about relationships with countries like Japan, with countries important to us in strategic partnership like Russia, the importance and value of the Middle East, where I will travelling from Sunday onwards, and the importance and value of the Quartet, because I will travel through the Middle East. I think I visit five countries and then I will end up in Moscow for the Quartet meeting in order to discuss and debate what we do next.

Finally, honourable Members, thank you for noticing I am on the Council side and there is no Commission. I will change sides. Until there is a seat in the middle, I will keep moving across. It will be your responsibility to remember which side I should be on as I come in.

And, finally can I again thank Mr Albertini and Mr Danjean very much for excellent reports which have given me the opportunity to put forward my views today.

(Applause)

 
  
MPphoto
 

  Gabriele Albertini, relatore. − Ringrazio i colleghi, che così numerosi sono intervenuti, sia quelli che hanno – e qui il mio ringraziamento è del tutto particolare – approvato i tratti essenziali della relazione elogiandone il contenuto e riconoscendosi nella stessa, ma anche coloro che hanno espresso critiche e lo hanno fatto soprattutto con una volontà di superare gli eventi, purtroppo tragici, dell'impiego della forza e di sognare un mondo di pace. Un grande filosofo greco, Platone, disse che solo i morti vedranno la fine della guerra. Ma noi non ci rassegniamo a questo pensiero e cerchiamo comunque di evitare che questo avvenga, anche se la realtà dei fatti ci impone l'impiego della forza anche per le missioni di pace.

Mi compiaccio con l'Alto rappresentante/Vicepresidente Ashton, che ringrazio per aver citato la mia relazione: mi piace molto del suo approccio questa sua dualità, che però vuole essere sinergia, tra i compiti del Consiglio e della Commissione. La stessa sua collocazione fisica – che sarà, una volta, tra i banchi del Consiglio, in questa sede, e una volta della Commissione –esprime questa sua volontà di interpretare entrambi i ruoli.

Noi dobbiamo come Parlamento, credo, sostenere e promuovere questo impegno sinergico. La Commissione europea ha programmi di sviluppo, di vicinato, di stabilità, di promozione dei diritti dell'uomo e della democrazia; il Consiglio sviluppa missioni di pace e di realizzazione dello Stato di diritto. Questo insieme di argomenti deve trovare il fulcro nel Servizio esterno diplomatico europeo: deve essere efficiente, efficace, dotato delle competenze e delle risorse necessarie perché possa svolgere degnamente il suo ruolo e noi ci impegneremo in questo senso.

Ringrazio anche – e noi svilupperemo questo tema il 23 – l'Alto rappresentante per la sua prossima presenza all'audizione della commissione esteri su questo tema del Servizio esterno, che avrà modo di essere approfondito. La nostra collaborazione comincia oggi ma non finisce certo questo giorno.

 
  
MPphoto
 

  Arnaud Danjean, rapporteur. − Monsieur le Président, Madame la Haute représentante, chers collègues, merci pour toutes les interventions qui, encore une fois, ont permis d'enrichir le débat, d'enrichir ce rapport.

Je voudrais rassurer celles et ceux qui ont exprimé des doutes, des suspicions parfois, sur le fait que ce rapport pouvait ouvrir la porte à plus de compétition, plus de concurrence, avec l'OTAN notamment, voire à un isolement. Ce n'est pas du tout le cas, je ne le crois absolument pas, d'ailleurs ça ne figure pas dans le traité, bien au contraire. Vous pouvez en croire un député européen français qui a pleinement milité pour le retour de son pays dans les structures intégrées de l'OTAN.

Quand on parle d'autonomie stratégique, quelle est l'idée que nous développons, la politique qui est développée depuis dix ans? C'est la capacité de l'Union européenne à intervenir par des missions civiles et militaires, ou militaires, dans des zones où d'autres organisations, dont l'OTAN, ne le peuvent pas. L'OTAN n'aurait pas pu intervenir pour mettre un terme au conflit en Géorgie, où il n'y a ni l'ONU, ni l'OSCE. L'OTAN n'est pas intervenue plus tôt que nous dans la Corne de l'Afrique pour mettre fin à des phénomènes qui menacent nos intérêts de sécurité.

L'autonomie stratégique, c'est aussi la capacité à intervenir avec une gamme d'instruments que nous sommes les seuls à avoir: des instruments civils et militaires, des instruments juridiques, des instruments financiers, des instruments de développement. Cette approche globale, l'Union européenne est la mieux à même de la développer dans des zones de crise.

Notre autonomie stratégique, c'est aussi notre capacité, le cas échéant, à ne pas intervenir, soit dans des aventures militaires unilatérales, soit – et cela a été signalé par plusieurs collègues autrichiens – parce qu'il y a des pays neutres parmi nous et que nous respectons ces statuts.

Voilà ce que sont la défense et la sécurité européennes. Voilà ce qu'est l'autonomie stratégique que nous développons à travers cette politique. Et n'oublions jamais d'où vient cette politique européenne de sécurité et de défense. Elle vient d'un échec tragique, sanglant: celui des Balkans, dans les années 90, où l'Union européenne a été incapable de faire face à un défi majeur en termes de sécurité sur son propre continent. Ne l'oublions pas. Nos citoyens européens ne l'oublient pas et ils ne nous pardonneraient pas de renoncer à l'ambition de voir l'Europe jouer un rôle sur la scène internationale.

(Applaudissements)

 
  
MPphoto
 

  El Presidente. − Hemos sustanciado este punto. Se cierra el debate. Para cerrar el debate se han presentado seis propuestas de resolución(1) de conformidad con el apartado 5 del articulo 115 del Reglamento.

La votación tendrá lugar hoy.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Elena Băsescu (PPE), în scris. – În primul rând doresc să îl felicit pe domnul Albertini pentru redactarea acestui raport. Mă bucur că amendamentele propuse de mine au fost adoptate. Comisia Europeană a anunţat săptămâna trecută finanţarea a 43 de proiecte energetice majore, inclusiv 4 care privesc România. Pe viitor, Comisia trebuie să acorde importanţa cuvenită Conductei Petroliere Pan-Europeane Constanţa – Trieste, precum şi dezvoltării relaţiilor cu ţările din Parteneriatul Estic. De asemenea, trebuie intensificate eforturile pentru a pune în aplicare proiecte din cadrul Sinergiei Mării Negre pentru a se asigura o cooperare mai eficientă în această zonă. Republica Moldova poate juca un rol important atât în cadrul Parteneriatului Estic cât şi în cadrul Sinergiei Mării Negre. Uniunea Europeană trebuie să acorde atenţie deosebită relaţiilor cu această ţară şi să o sprijine în drumul său către UE. Uniunea trebuie să se implice mai mult în soluţionarea conflictelor îngheţate din zona Mării Negre inclusiv cel din Transnistria. Dezvoltarea parteneriatului transatlantic trebuie să fie o prioritate pentru politica externă şi de securitate a Uniunii Europene. Relaţiile cu Statele Unite sunt foarte importante în procesul de consolidare a securităţii şi stabilităţii mondiale. Instalarea unei părţi din sistemul american antirachetă pe teritoriul României este o dovadă de încredere acordată ţării mele.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Ilda Figueiredo (GUE/NGL), por escrito. – É lamentável que o processo de desarmamento multilateral tenha sido interrompido e que há vários anos não tenha havido vontade política para o retomar. Assim, é de particular importância a próxima conferência de revisão de 2010 entre as partes no Tratado de Não Proliferação de Armas Nucleares.

Como se refere na proposta de resolução que subscrevemos, é profunda a apreensão que temos pelo perigo que representa uma nova corrida ao armamento nuclear. Por isso, impõe-se o cessar imediato do desenvolvimento, produção e armazenamento de armas nucleares.

É preciso que os EUA ponham termo ao desenvolvimento das novas gerações de armas nucleares de combate e, pelo contrário, assinem e ratifiquem o Tratado de Proibição Total de Ensaios Nucleares.

Insistimos também numa solução pacífica para a disputa sobre os programas nucleares do Irão e solicitamos o recomeço das negociações, reiterando a nossa oposição a qualquer acção militar ou ameaça de utilização da força, advertindo para o facto de que qualquer acção militar pode conduzir a uma crise ainda mais profunda na região.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Edit Herczog (S&D), írásban. – Tisztelt elnök úr! Tisztelt képviselőtársak! 2010 áprilisában-májusában megrendezésre kerül az Atomsorompó Szerződés felülvizsgálati konferenciája. Ezen fontos, hogy az Európai Unió tagállamai egységes álláspontot képviseljenek és megerősítsék a szerződés mindhárom pillérét: a nukleáris fegyverek terjedésének megakadályozását, a leszerelést és az együttműködést az atomenergia polgári célú felhasználása területén. A tagállamoknak ki kell fejezniük elkötelezettségüket a nukleáris fegyverekkel való kereskedelem visszaszorítása mellett, a már meglévő nukleáris fegyverarzenálok fokozatos leépítése, illetve a nukleáris fegyverek előállításához szükséges anyagok gyártásának és az ahhoz szükséges termékek birtoklásának szigorú ellenőrzése mellett. A tagállamoknak vezető szerepet kell vállalniuk az ENSZ BT által 2009 őszén (szeptember 24-én) hozott 1887. határozat alkalmazásában: ezen határozat értelmében a tagállamoknak nagy hangsúlyt kell fektetniük arra, hogy egy átfogó nemzetközi szerződést hozzanak létre, amely a nukleáris fegyverek leszereléséről hivatott rendelkezni szigorú nemzetközi felügyelet mellett. Ezenkívül törekedniük kell konkrét intézkedések bevezetésére a fent említett területeken, hogy példát statuáljanak a világ számára. Az Unió tagállamainak elő kell segíteniük az átfogó Atomcsend Szerződés ratifikálását, illetve az Amerikai Egyesült Államok és Oroszország közötti START egyezmény megújítását. Az Európai Uniónak kiemelt területként kell kezelnie a nukleáris fűtőanyagokkal kapcsolatos teendőket, a tárolásukra, szállításukra, kereskedelmükre vonatkozó szabályozások egységesítését, átláthatóvá tételét, szigorítását.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Filip Kaczmarek (PPE), na piśmie. – Szanowni Państwo! Muszę powiedzieć, że podejrzewam, iż sprawozdanie roczne na temat WPZiB za rok 2008 nie wzbudzi takich emocji, jak nasza debata na ten temat w przyszłym roku. Mam nadzieję, że za rok będziemy bowiem wiedzieli, jak wygląda Europejska Służba Działań Zewnętrznych. A ta nowa służba będzie miała z kolei wielki wpływ na kształt europejskiej polityki zagranicznej.

Unia Europejska ma ambicje bycia globalnym graczem. To dobrze, ale ambicje te nie będą łatwe do zrealizowania. Czeka nas wytężona praca. Instytucje europejskie muszą się porozumieć w sprawie ESDZ. Nie będzie to zadanie proste, ale bez tego nie uda się usprawnić naszych polityk zewnętrznych. Powinniśmy wrócić do podstawowych wartości Unii Europejskiej. I na ich podstawie budować naszą politykę zagraniczną.

Musimy ciągle pamiętać o solidarności, o równości, o jednolitych standardach, o prawach człowieka i obywatela. Musimy pamiętać o równowadze wewnętrznej, o tym, że powinniśmy bronić tych interesów wszystkich członków Unii, które nie są wzajemnie wykluczające się. Jedną z kluczowych spraw jest zdecydowane poprawienie koordynacji między instytucjami wspólnotowymi i państwami członkowskimi. Partykularne interesy narodowe nie powinny uderzać w naszą spójność, naszą wspólnotę. Paradoksalnie nawet te państwa, które chcą uchodzić za motor integracji europejskiej, działają czasami przeciw zbiorowym interesom Unii. Zmieńmy to.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Kristiina Ojuland (ALDE), kirjalikult. – Lugupeetud eesistuja, mitmed eelkõnelejad on tõstatanud Lissaboni lepingu jõustumise järel töösse läinud Euroopa Liidu välisteenistuse moodustamisega seonduva probleemistiku. Pean äärmiselt oluliseks, et välisteenistuse moodustamisel järgitaks geograafilise tasakaalu printsiipi ning sarnaselt teiste Euroopa Liidu teenistustega rakendataks uute liikmesriikide esindajate suhtes positiivset diskrimineerimist, mis väljendub üleminekuperioodis ning võimaldab kiirendatud karjääri. Uute liikmesriikide esindajatel puudub vajalik aastakümnetepikkune töökogemus Euroopa Liidu institutsioonides, mis on eelduseks kõrgemate ametikohtade täitmiseks. Oleks ebaõiglane, kui kõik olulisemad positsioonid täidetaks ametnikega vanadest liikmesriikidest ning uute liikmesriikide ametnikud peaksid veel pikki aastaid oma järge ootama. Tegemist oleks ilmselge ressursi raiskamisega, sest näiteks Malta esindajatel võib olla oluliselt paremal tasemel oskusteave suhetes Põhja-Aafrika riikidega, Küprosel Lähis-Idaga, Bulgaarial Türgiga, Poolal Valgevene ja Ukrainaga, Balti riikidel Venemaaga ja nii edasi. Ma loodan, et Euroopa Liit ei tee seda viga, et võimaldab üksnes vanadel liikmesriikidel kujundada moodustatava välisteenistuse näo, vaid leiab optimaalse lahenduse, mis rahuldab kõiki liikmesriike.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Czesław Adam Siekierski (PPE), na piśmie. – Sytuacja w świecie stawia nowe wyzwania przed unijną polityką zagraniczną i wymaga szerszego pojmowania problemów bezpieczeństwa. Powstają nowe potęgi które wchodzą do czynnej gry w polityce globalnej w różnych obszarach. Potrzeba przeto dialogu w wymiarze światowym i ustalenia nowych zasad współpracy i podziału ról. Ogromną rolę jaką wypełnią NATO i USA w zakresie bezpieczeństwa światowego musimy uzupełnić stworzeniem przy Unii specjalnych mobilnych sił do walki ze wszelkiego rodzaju klęskami żywiołowymi, kataklizmami. Unia będzie postrzegana nie tylko jako instytucja walcząca o demokrację, prawa człowieka ale także jako instytucja, która przychodzi z pomocą w trudnych momentach. Bardzo wyraźnie nasilają się inne formy zagrożeń, stąd ważne staje się bezpieczeństwo energetyczne czy żywnościowe. Wydaje się, że konieczne jest opracowanie koncepcji funkcjonowania unijnej służby zewnętrznej, gdzie określi się obszary wspólnotowe oraz zasady jej tworzenia, podziału ról i współpracy z dyplomacją krajów członkowskich. Jaka rola przypadanie poszczególnym instytucjom UE. Brak wypracowania już na początku podziału ról i kompetencji może być przyczyną nieporozumień pomiędzy różnymi instytucjami i przywódcami w Unii oraz pomiędzy UE a państwami członkowskim. Pierwsze doświadczenia z funkcjonowania Wysokiego Przedstawiciela ds. Polityki Zagranicznej i Bezpieczeństwa powszechnego oczekiwania na jego aktywność, obecność w różnych miejscach nakazuje zastanowić się na stworzeniem funkcji jego zastępców, bądź w te obszary działalności włączyć szerzej innych komisarzy, których mamy tak szerokie grono.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Traian Ungureanu (PPE), în scris. – Salut raportul Albertini referitor la principalele orientari ale politicii externe si de securitate comune şi, in particular, paragrafele despre dezvoltarea Parteneriatului Estic şi politicii europene în zona Mării Negre. Parteneriatul Estic şi adunarea parlamentară EURONEST oferă cadrul potrivit pentru apropierea vecinilor estici ai UE de standardele europene, precum şi pentru clarificarea perspectivei de aderare europeană a unor state ca Republica Moldova. Subliniez în mod special importanţa asistenţei rapide si concrete ce ar trebui acordată guvernului pro-european al Republicii Moldova. În aceasta direcţie, două acţiuni europene necesită urgentare: accelerarea procesului de acordare a asistenţei macrofinaciare UE şi eliminarea regimului de vize pentru călătoriile în UE ale cetăţenilor Republicii Moldova. În regiunea Mării Negre, este esenţială continuarea obiectivului european de asigurare a securităţii energetice a UE. Sprijin paragraful 21 din raport, care insistă ca UE să asigure implementarea deplină şi cât mai rapidă a proiectului Nabucco. Nu mai puţin importantă în această dezbatere este o apreciere corectă a dezvoltării proiectului american de apărare anti-racheta şi a importanţei sale pentru securitatea europeană. Implicarea României în acest proiect demonstrează că Romania a devenit un furnizor net de securitate la nivel european şi are toata capacitatea de a-şi onora angajamentele de securitate faţă de aliaţi.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Janusz Władysław Zemke (S&D), na piśmie. – Chciałbym przekazać kilka uwag w sprawie europejskiej strategii bezpieczeństwa oraz wspólnej polityki bezpieczeństwa i obrony.

W projekcie rezolucji Parlamentu Europejskiego zdefiniowano poprawnie główne zagrożenia i wyzwania, przed jakimi stoi Europa. Problem w tym, że nie potrafimy na nie wystarczająco odpowiedzieć, przynajmniej nie zawsze dostatecznie szybko. Są trzy główne słabości, których przezwyciężenie radykalnie poprawiłoby skuteczność wspólnej polityki bezpieczeństwa i obrony. Pierwsza słabość – to brak determinacji wszystkich państw tworzących Unię Europejską w prowadzeniu wspólnej polityki, a nie tylko werbalnym deklarowaniu jej potrzeby. Po drugie – to słaba koordynacja poczynań licznych instytucji europejskich. Dalej na poziomie Unii nie ma centrum reagowania w sytuacjach krytycznych. Wreszcie – po trzecie – zbyt mały jest potencjał wojskowy i cywilny, jakimi w rzeczywistości dysponuje Unia, a nie tylko poszczególne państwa.

Przysłowiowe już są przykładowo problemy z transportem lotniczym, co ma zasadnicze znaczenie dla szybkości reakcji w sytuacjach kryzysowych. Dopiero postęp w tych trzech obszarach poprawiłby skuteczność wspólnej polityki bezpieczeństwa i obrony.

 
  
 

(Se suspende la sesión durante unos instantes a la espera del turno de votaciones.)

 
  
  

IN THE CHAIR: Edward McMILLAN-SCOTT
Vice-President

 
  

(1)Véase el Acta.

Aġġornata l-aħħar: 26 t'April 2010Avviż legali