Pełne sprawozdanie z obrad

Środa, 8 lipca 2015 r. - Strasburg

15. Wyzwania w zakresie bezpieczeństwa w regionie Bliskiego Wschodu i Afryki Północnej i perspektywy na stabilność polityczną (debata)

  Die Präsidentin. – Als nächster Punkt der Tagesordnung folgt die Aussprache über den Bericht von Vincent Peillon im Namen des Ausschusses für auswärtige Angelegenheiten über die sicherheitspolitischen Herausforderungen im Nahen Osten und Nordafrika und die Perspektiven für politische Stabilität (2014/2229(INI)) (A8-0193/2015).

  Vincent Peillon, rapporteur. – Madame la Présidente, Monsieur le Commissaire, nous avons parlé tout l'après-midi de sujets comme le Yémen ou les droits de l'homme, et nous aurions aussi pu parler du conflit israélo-palestinien, autant de sujets qui sont au cœur du rapport sur la stabilité dans la zone du Moyen-Orient et de l'Afrique du Nord (MOAN). Ce rapport est certes un peu dense, mais il accompagne la volonté de la Commission de donner une ligne stratégique à l'action de l'Europe dans cette région.

Nous avons été obligés, dans ce rapport, de passer en revue tous les différents sujets: la Syrie, la Libye, l'Iraq, le Yémen, la Tunisie, la lutte contre le groupe "État islamique". En même temps, ce n'est pas dans l'accumulation de cas particuliers que nous avons cherché à dégager une ligne stratégique précise et à long terme. Les principes que nous avons adoptés dans ce rapport sont d'abord des principes de responsabilité. Il n'y aurait rien eu de pire, pour nous, Parlement européen, que de nous diviser en relevant ce défi, alors que notre Sud est déjà dans l'état que nous voyons et notre impéritie avérée. Nous avons donc recherché en permanence à nous écouter les uns les autres et à trouver un consensus.

De ce point de vue-là, je tiens vraiment à remercier très chaleureusement l'ensemble des rapporteurs fictifs, Mme Mănescu pour le PPE, M. Nart pour les libéraux, M. Belder, M. Smith pour les Verts, M. Iglesias, M. Permuy, M. Castaldo, Mme Vergiat.

Quelles que soient les orientations politiques, à part ceux qui sont franchement anti-européens, nous avons cherché à construire une position commune, responsable et qui puisse être entendue.

Les principes qui nous ont guidés sont les suivants, et sachez qu'il n'a pas été simple de les définir. Premièrement, ne pas considérer que le défi de la sécurité doit se résumer à la sécurité elle-même. Bien entendu, nous devons relever ce défi, et il n'y a aucune excuse au terrorisme, ni économique ni sociale. Il a des fondements idéologiques. De ce point de vue d'ailleurs, nous assumons nos responsabilités en demandant un renforcement et une meilleure coordination de l'action sécuritaire de l'Europe. Mais en même temps – c'est la ligne stratégique que nous voulons adopter – nous savons que la paix et la stabilité ne pourront revenir que si nous traitons les causes à long terme: la question démocratique et celle des droits de l'homme, que nous venons d'aborder, la question économique et la question sociale.

Sur les trois parties du rapport, deux sont consacrées à la question économique et sociale, à la question démocratique et à celle des droits de l'homme. C'est ce qui nous a permis de trouver un consensus, dans un équilibre où il n'y aurait pas une seule cause, mais des actions multifactorielles. Oui, nous devons intervenir sur la question sécuritaire, nous devons renforcer l'action de l'Europe, nous devons prêter assistance aux États, nous devons mieux aider à surveiller les frontières, nous devons bien entendu faire tout ce que nous pouvons pour former ceux qui doivent assurer la sécurité sur notre flanc sud et en même temps, nous devons déployer des actions économiques et sociales.

La deuxième ligne fondamentale de ce rapport est assez nouvelle et structure l'ensemble de la démarche. C'est d'admettre que l'Europe ne peut pas – comme elle a un peu tendance à le faire, on l'a entendu dans les débats précédents –  espérer résoudre à elle seule tous les problèmes, en Syrie, en Iraq, au Yémen, par un certain nombre d'invocations ou d'ingérences.

Ce rapport repose sur un équilibre entre la volonté d'avoir une action concertée, à long terme, cohérente et, en même temps, de nous appuyer, d'une part, sur les États, mais aussi sur tous les instruments multilatéraux qui existent, en particulier dans le Sud.

Pour conclure, Madame la Présidente, je crois que sur ces deux aspects, nous avons trouvé une stratégie et nous avons réussi à nous rassembler autour de l'idée que l'Europe doit être davantage présente pour mener une action plus résolue.

  Johannes Hahn, Member of the Commission. – Madam President, I appreciate the opportunity to speak to you today upon the presentation of your excellent report on ‘The security challenges in the MENA region and the prospects for political stability’. You have very accurately described the main political developments in the region over the last four years and well highlighted the areas in which the EU could play an important role.

As you know, the geopolitical landscape of the MENA region has been utterly transformed during this period. Today, the EU is facing an arc of conflicts and crises – from Iraq, Syria and an unresolved Middle East conflict, to Libya and the Sahel, with spillover effects throughout the region. At the same time, the talks with Iran give us hope that a more cooperative order in the region is indeed possible, and therefore once again I think it is justified that our High Representative is there and participating very actively in these discussions.

Let me briefly mention the state of play and how the EU sees the situation in some of these countries. In Tunisia, following the attacks in Sousse, we are more united than ever to ensure success of the transition with the Tunisian people. I have instructed my services to use accelerated procedures to deliver our support, including measures directed at the tourism sector, which is demoralised as a result of this attack, and may I recall that we were able to discuss this issue in extenso earlier today.

In Libya, the EU – together with the international community – has deeply engaged with the country, but I cannot emphasise enough my plea to Libyan participants to accept the UN proposals in good faith in the interests of the Libyan people.

On the unresolved Middle East conflict, the EU stands ready to work with both Israel and Palestine, and all other major stakeholders, to return to negotiations with the aim of achieving a comprehensive peace agreement based on a viable two-state solution.

The situation in Syria and its neighbourhood is a strong reminder of the urgency to reignite an inclusive Syrian-led political process on the basis of the Geneva Communiqué. We fully support the UN Special Envoy Staffan de Mistura, and along with the UN we have launched an urgent humanitarian appeal for the region.

As underlined in ‘The EU regional strategy for Syria and Iraq as well as the Da’esh threat’, we are determined to support the efforts of those countries hosting a huge number of refugees. In this context I must mention the efforts of Lebanon, Jordan and Turkey: the burden they are carrying is enormous. We are also ready to cooperate with Iraq and other neighbouring countries on security and counter-terrorism issues and to move towards implementation of much-needed political and socio-economic reforms.

Against this background, we welcome your excellent report on ‘The security challenges in the MENA region and the prospects for political stability’. We thank in particular Vincent Peillon for his work as rapporteur, the Committee on Foreign Affairs (AFET) and all MEPs for their constructive approach to the challenges faced in the Mediterranean region. I would also include in my thanks, of course, the shadow rapporteurs.

I fully agree with your conclusion that the conflicts in Syria, Iraq, Yemen and Libya and the increase in tensions in the MENA region are major sources of destabilisation, that the risks these developments entail for European security are serious, and that it is a huge challenge to effectively enunciate and implement a coherent conflict resolution strategy.

I also agree with your conclusion: to effectively deal with this challenge, the European Union and its Member States must think strategically in the medium and long term. We must look at all issues from a broad, global perspective; we need to develop all-round policies, responding to the emergencies but also dealing with their deep causes; and we need to keep strengthening our cooperation with all relevant regional actors, for complex threats require coordinated responses.

Crisis management is important, but it is not enough. Think of terrorism: in the long term, I believe that functioning and inclusive democracies, human rights, education and good jobs are the best antidote to radicalisation.

As stated in your report, fighting terrorism must go together with supporting genuine democratic reform in the region. Some believe that countering terror requires repression. In fact it is the exact opposite: in the long run, a democratic environment is the only cure for radicalisation. Mostly this is about providing opportunities to the youngest members of society. Young people must be inspired by values that reject violence, create peace and build inclusive, open societies. This is why supporting education is so important. But education is of little use if we cannot also create jobs, and good jobs. This is vital to ensure that everyone finds a positive role to play in society.

All communities must be given a chance to contribute to the social, economic and political life of their own countries. Entire religious and ethnic groups – Christians and others – are being forced to flee from lands they have inhabited for centuries. This has little to do with a ‘clash of civilisations’: the terrorists often know very little about the Qur’an. It is not a war of religion but a struggle for power and regional hegemony. The EU is doing all it can to halt and prevent this violence. We will not let sectarianism prevail.

Moreover, I fully agree that the engagement and empowerment of women in the public, political, economic and cultural spheres is key to fostering stability, peace and economic prosperity in the long run. Women’s rights and gender equality must be basic components of the political and human rights dialogue between the EU and the MENA countries.

The EU is committed to ensuring that human rights are mainstreamed in all its activities. Since 2012, the EU has engaged regularly with the League of Arab States, including the Arab Human Rights Charter Committee and the Arab National Human Rights Institutions.

As you rightly point out, in the past the European Neighbourhood Policy sometimes failed to adequately take into account the specificities of each of our partners, including with regard to identifying civil society partners needing support and capacity-building assistance. The review of the Neighbourhood Policy that is on the way is an opportunity to introduce changes that will help the EU to be a stronger player. We intend to propose ways and means to further the European Neighbourhood Policy, to allow more tailor-made offers and solutions specially designed for each partner. I would also like to thank the European Parliament for the constructive input you have given and will, no doubt, continue to give.

A comprehensive approach needs strong and reliable partners in order to be effective. Both Europe and the Arab world are targets for the terrorists. We need a truly global alliance to fight our common battles. As the report states, regional challenges call for regional solutions. In this sense, the report is very much in line with our commitment for closer co-operation with the League of Arab States and the Union for the Mediterranean. As agreed in the EU-League of Arab States Athens Declaration, we are working closely on counter-terrorism in the MENA region, on capacity-building measures and to address the ‘foreign fighters’ phenomenon.

Before I leave you the floor, let me add something on the naval operation in the Mediterranean. After the mid-April tragedy, Member States asked the European Union to act against the human traffickers’ networks, to save more lives. In the space of two months, we set up and launched the operation. Countries from all sides of Europe are contributing.

Things did not move on so smoothly on the domestic side of the debate. This tells us something. Our problem, most of the time, is a lack of political will. It is not our strength that is being tested, but our resolve. I look forward to hearing your views on this strategic debate.

  Cristian Dan Preda, în numele grupului PPE. – Doamnă președintă, vorbesc în numele Grupului PPE. Raportarea noastră din umbră, dna Mănescu, nu e disponibilă aici.

Vreau să spun în primul rând că nu mai e un secret faptul că Orientul Apropiat și Africa de Nord traversează o perioadă foarte turbulentă. După optimismul pe care l-au generat revoltele arabe, azi suntem foarte preocupați de evoluțiile din regiune. Avem state în prag de colaps, rețele teroriste redutabile, milioane de refugiați și o violență masivă. Ori securitatea Europei este indisolubil legată de stabilitatea și securitatea acestei regiuni. De aceea, aș vrea să îl felicit pe colegul Peillon pentru raport. Ne propune acest raport o analiză aprofundată a evoluțiilor recente și mai multe piste pentru a răspunde provocărilor de securitate.

Mă bucur, totodată, că Înaltul Reprezentant, în documentul de reflecție privind revizuirea Strategiei europene de securitate, recunoștea necesitatea redefinirii abordării Uniunii privind Orientul Apropiat și Africa de Nord. Avem, cred, nevoie de o abordare comprehensivă și ambițioasă, care să ia în seamă cauzele deteriorării rapide a situației din regiune. Amenințarea terorismului ne obligă să utilizăm în mod coerent politicile noastre interne și externe de securitate. Asistența umanitară și cooperarea pentru dezvoltare trebuie, și ele, combinate în mod armonios.

Și, pentru că am vorbit adineauri despre drepturile omului, aș vrea să subliniez un punct foarte important pentru Grupul PPE, și anume încălcarea continuă a libertății religioase în această regiune și, în primul rând, a libertății creștinilor. Săptămâna trecută, Grupul nostru a organizat o conferință pe această temă și am putut auzi mărturii cutremurătoare. De aceea, considerăm că Uniunea trebuie să aibă o strategie foarte clară în privința protejării creștinilor din această regiune.

  Richard Howitt, on behalf of the S&D Group. – Madam President, firstly, we regret the absence tonight of the Vice-President of the Commission/High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy, Ms Mogherini – though for the very best of reasons, because we can remain hopeful that a comprehensive nuclear deal may be struck with Iran this week, something which could help the country start to re-engage with us in Europe and others in the international community, and which can play an important role in advancing security for the region as a whole.

Of course any deal must be fair, credible and fully verifiable. But this is a week where we also hope there may be genuine progress in another set of long-standing negotiations which at times had seemed intractable: the reconciliation talks in Libya. What marks both sets of negotiations is the real human suffering caused by lack of agreement, and the huge political obstacles existing which obstruct agreements from being achieved. If they are – and tonight’s debate must encourage that – it will be a victory for patient diplomacy, where I am proud that the European Union is playing the leading role in both cases.

In a third conflict in the region between Israel and Palestine – seemingly the most intractable of all – this Parliament should welcome and encourage the more active role in political diplomacy which the High Representative is prepared to play there. I look forward to the debate with her in September.

Vincent Peillon’s excellent report recognises that there are issues of mistrust and resentment about Europe in the region, based on history and on sometimes justified criticism of double standards against European countries ourselves. We have to impress on the countries of the Middle East and North Africa, and their populations, that Europe does not want to return to colonialism. We have to learn lessons by being consistent in our support of respect for democracy and for human rights amongst the countries, despite any considerations of alliance. When I sit in this Chamber and listen to statements about migration and terrorism, these are proper concerns. But we need to articulate them in a way which shows the countries of the region that we want to support peace, prosperity and development for them and their peoples, in their own interest first and not just through the prism of managing issues which are problems to us. Our response to the Mediterranean refugee crisis is a true test of our good intent in that respect.

The new phenomenon of ISIS-Daesh is a huge and terrible concern. I add my own personal condolences for the deaths of tourists in Tunisia who came from my own country, Great Britain, but also from fellow European nations Belgium, Germany, and Ireland too.

We need a better security response. Territorial advances against ISIS in Syria and Iraq are important if they are to be denied the claim of statehood which their name of so-called ‘Islamic State’ implies. We have to be careful in our own words and actions not to add to the narrative of extremism – which is ultimately self-defeating – by generating radicalisation rather than diminishing it. For example, at Parliament’s Middle East and North African working group, which I am proud to chair, the European External Action Service recently told us that reports that terrorists were entering Europe under the cover of being refugees are not supported by one shred of evidence. Let us learn by what I started with – the value of patient diplomacy – rather than ramping up the rhetoric as we deal with the countries of this region.

Finally, whether in Yemen, which we were discussing earlier, or in Libya, which I have already referred to, and in several other countries, we have to recognise that religious sectarianism is a huge cause of conflict and instability. One thing we must do, as Europe, is to engage with political Islam – not to agree with them, but to talk with those who represent political Islam – if we are truly to have a dialogue to pursue the common interests of our continent and theirs.

  Bas Belder, namens de ECR-Fractie. – Precies een week geleden was ik met enkele collega's op de Golanhoogte. Wat zich daar, op enkele kilometers afstand, voor onze ogen afspeelde, was werkelijk gruwelijk. Syrische dorpelingen worden er onophoudelijk gebombardeerd door Jabhat al-Nusra, Hezbollah en vervolgens Islamitische Staat. Gruwelijk!

Ik moet u eerlijk zeggen dat je een gevoel van schaamte bekruipt als je ziet hoe het moorden gewoon maar doorgaat terwijl de wereldgemeenschap passief is. De VN is weliswaar aanwezig in Zuid-Libanon en op de Golanhoogte maar staat er machteloos. Daar staat alleen Israël.

Ik wil op deze plaats hulde brengen aan de medische dienst van het Israëlische leger. 's Nachts, om niet het gevaar te lopen door sluipschutters te worden neergeschoten, evacueert die gewonden uit Syrische dorpen – inmiddels bijna tweeduizend – en biedt ze onder levensgevaar medische verzorging aan. De Israëlische militairen verrichten daar vaak heldendaden. Dat wil ik gezegd hebben.

Vanmorgen vroeg las ik in de Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung een indrukwekkend indringend vraaggesprek met de verdreven bisschop van Mossoel. Die had het ook over ons. Er werd hem namelijk gevraagd hoe hij tegen ons aankeek. Ik citeer: "De mensen in het Westen strijden voor het behoud van diersoorten die met uitsterven worden bedreigd. Hoe kunnen ze dan passief toekijken hoe een heel volk wordt verdreven en uitgemoord? Hoe kunnen ze toekijken hoe langzaam maar zeker een volk uit de geschiedenis van de mensheid verdwijnt? Als een derde deel van de Syrisch-katholieke Kerk over de hele wereld wordt verstrooid, betekent dit eigenlijk de ondergang van deze Kerk. Ik verzoek, ik bid het Westen en de wereldmachten om hulp. Span u in om IS uit ons land te verdrijven. Vandaag zijn deze strijders bij ons. Morgen zullen ze bij u zijn." (Einde citaat.)

Ik voeg hieraan toe: ze zijn er al, de Syriëgangers! Wanneer worden we wakker?

  Javier Couso Permuy, en nombre del Grupo GUE/NGL. – Señora Presidenta, nosotros tenemos muchas cosas que señalar en cuanto a este informe, porque entendemos que la seguridad en la zona tiene mucho que ver con las intervenciones que se han desarrollado anteriormente.

También tiene mucho que ver el tratamiento represivo de todas las personas que quieren huir de ese caos que precisamente nuestras intervenciones unilaterales —o incluso, utilizando esos eufemismos, de «responsabilidad de proteger»— han provocado. Por tanto, no entendemos cómo esta cuestión se puede enfocar solo a través de la represión, de Frontex, y no a través de la inversión, de un cambio en la asimetría entre unas relaciones desiguales entre el centro de la Unión Europea y nuestros países de la vecindad.

Solo así podremos tener verdadera seguridad: no injiriendo, no desestabilizando y, sobre todo, no teniendo una economía y un intercambio comercial desiguales.

  Alyn Smith, on behalf of the Verts/ALE Group. – Madam President, there is much to admire in this report, and I would add my own congratulations to Mr Peillon and his team for some genuinely good cross-party work on this. Our group is broadly supportive and, as rapporteur for my group, I am very pleased to see that our wording on social injustice and inequality, and on how that is a breeding ground for radicalisation, is included, as are security, instability and corruption and how they interplay. The wording on the Israeli settlements and their malign influence within the wider region is also included.

The all-out oppression of the Assad regime within Syria, the use of drones, the strategic importance of the Nile and the need to accelerate human rights in the EU – League of Arab States dialogue, is, we think, all very positive wording. That is not to say that we are entirely satisfied. This is a report about the security challenges in the wider region, yet it does focus very much on Daesh – mentioning Daesh 21 times. Daesh is, of course, a dreadful organisation, but it is one organisation amongst many in a very complex picture. Often it is as much a symptom as a cause.

I would personally like to see much more vocal criticism of Israel’s actions in the region, given that it is a recruiting sergeant for radicalisation. There are forces of progress within Israel, and we must reach out to them and assist them in their efforts to have a constructive debate within Israel and with Palestine. The EU could play a leading role in that, but we are not. We also call, in the report, on some states to refrain from exporting terrorism. I am not sure that is helpful language; I am not sure it adds much value either. We also call for the EU to provide a safe haven for Christians, in particular from the Middle East, in the EU. If we are trying to criticise sectarianism, we should refrain from it ourselves. The plight of any refugee, regardless of their ethnicity or their religion, is equally dreadful. But all in all, we are satisfied with this report. I think it is a good contribution to a very complex situation, and I congratulate the rapporteur for his work.

  Fabio Massimo Castaldo, a nome del gruppo EFDD. – Signora Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, desidero esprimere i miei ringraziamenti al collega Vincent Peillon per il suo lavoro, che è stato molto inclusivo. Mi ha fatto piacere constatare l'attenzione nei confronti di molte delle istanze che abbiamo avanzato.

Giudico questa relazione un passo avanti abbastanza consistente nella giusta direzione. Si parla giustamente, come sottolineava il collega Smith prima, di alcune delle vere e più fondamentali cause di instabilità, che sono la povertà, l'emarginazione e la discriminazione. Si cerca quindi un approccio che sia politico, economico, sociale e culturale e che non si limiti esclusivamente a guardare all'aspetto di sicurezza.

Chiaramente mi rendo conto che il teatro è preda di una grandissima instabilità e che fornire un'analisi dettagliata di ogni singolo contesto è in questa sede impossibile. Però, ci tenevo a sottolineare l'importanza di aver messo nero su bianco il conflitto latente tra Arabia Saudita e Iran e la necessità di una confidence building che si deve appunto rafforzare nel tempo e, soprattutto, il richiamo forte alla Turchia ad assumere un ruolo meno ambiguo rispetto a quello che abbiamo visto nel corso degli ultimi anni.

Esprimo anche, ovviamente, la preoccupazione per la politica israeliana d'insediamento nella Cisgiordania palestinese ed esprimo la speranza che questa relazione possa spingere anche le parti a riavviare seriamente un processo di pace credibile, visto che è uno dei focolai storicamente, ma anche attualmente, più difficili e pericolosi da affrontare.

Mi preme sottolineare due concetti fondamentali che dobbiamo sempre tenere a mente se vogliamo una soluzione durevole. In primis, l'islam politico deve essere necessariamente un interlocutore e deve essere quell'interlocutore che ci consente di isolare decisamente l'estremismo. Il secondo è che dobbiamo, secondo me, concentrarci molto lavorando con i paesi modello – penso appunto alla Tunisia ma anche al Libano, nonché alla Giordania – focalizzando la nostra attenzione su di loro e premendo per una sana cooperazione con le organizzazioni di cooperazione internazionale, come quella del Golfo, possiamo ottenere risultati importanti.

  Aymeric Chauprade, au nom du groupe ENF. – Madame la Présidente, chers collègues, d'abord je voudrais remercier M. Peillon pour son rapport et ajouter quelques éléments d'ordre géopolitique que je n'ai pas lus dans ce document.

Tout d'abord, la tragédie du Moyen-Orient est le bilan de la politique euro-américaine qui a détruit les projets de modernisation du monde arabe et qui a renforcé, de fait, l'islam dans les sociétés de culture musulmane. Ensuite, cette politique a réveillé la fracture chiite-sunnite, qui s'est transformée en une guerre exacerbée par la concurrence stratégique entre l'Iran et l'Arabie saoudite.

Et puis, il y a aussi cet "État islamique", qui a permis aux États-Unis de mettre en œuvre leur stratégie pétrolière. Dès l'été 2014, le prix du baril, je vous le rappelle, chers collègues, s'est effondré brutalement, passant de 105 à 55 dollars, au moment précisément où "l'État islamique" mettait sur le marché mondial du pétrole vendu à bas prix. Cette stratégie d'effondrement du prix du baril a directement frappé les États dont les budgets dépendaient fortement du prix élevé du pétrole, comme l'Iran, le Venezuela et la Russie. L'Iran a été poussé à négocier sur le nucléaire et, comme pendant les années 1980 avec Reagan et l'URSS, la Russie, qui était déjà visée par les sanctions économiques de l'Union européenne, a subi de plein fouet la chute du baril.

Voilà quelques réalités géopolitiques auxquelles je vous invite à réfléchir et qui dépassent je crois, les vœux pieux que nous partageons tous pour l'avenir du Moyen-Orient. La réalité est que la destruction du Moyen-Orient a servi largement la politique américaine pour bloquer l'émergence d'un monde multipolaire.

  Tunne Kelam (PPE). – Madam President, we face a negative and destructive synergy in the Middle East and North Africa. What have been, for a long time, internal conflicts have spilled over to the whole region now. The most dangerous thing is the melting down of borders between states in conflicts. These conflicts have become now international and vacuums are being filled by Islamic State and other extremist groups. Lawlessness, extreme violence and terrorism have become a new normality in large areas of Syria, Iraq, Libya and elsewhere.

By the way, Middle East countries represent only 5% of the world population but provide one third of world refugees. Eighty per cent of civilians are unable to meet their basic needs now. Eleven million children lack possibilities for education. They form the ever widening basis of a new generation of terrorists.

There are two points I would like to make. Among the different minorities, Christians have suffered most widely. Violence against them presents existential danger for the future. As a result, this ancient community will disappear from the region where Christianity was born, mainly as a result of the determined efforts of Muslim extremists to cleanse this area of all other religions. This is something the EU should address with the utmost seriousness, providing them with active protection and probably safe havens.

Secondly, the situation in Iran, which has been for years a source of the exporting of terrorism and instability. To hope that cooperating with the Tehran regime and its Revolutionary Guards would help the fight against ISIS is, I would say, naive and would be like attempting to oust the devil with the help of Beelzebub. Why has Mosul stayed for more than one year under ISIS? Because local Sunni minorities are equally afraid of Shia militias, who do not make any difference between them and ISIS terrorists. So, Iran has first to demonstrate credible political will that it is really interested in restoring stability, especially in Yemen and Iraq.

(The speaker agreed to take a blue-card question under Rule 162(8))

  Tibor Szanyi (S&D), Kékkártyás kérdés. – Képviselő úr! Ön végigvette tulajdonképpen elég szépen azt a problematikát – mert ez egy nagyon súlyos probléma – ami a különböző vallások között feszül, ugyanakkor én úgy látom, hogy az eddigi európai külpolitikában ennek az elemnek azért nem volt olyan nagy jelentősége. Ön mennyire vinné bele a konfliktusrendezésbe a vallási kérdéseknek a rendezését?

  Tunne Kelam (PPE). – Could you ask the question once again, please?

  Tibor Szanyi (S&D), blue-card question. – I will just repeat this, but shift into English as well. My question was that your point of view, and then your panorama of the religious conflicts, was a mainly new element in the interpretation here in this room, and I was just wondering whether you feel a need for a further development of this argument. That was all my question was about.

  Tunne Kelam (PPE), blue-card answer. – As far as I can understand this question, of course, we need to generate a more intense and widespread approach to religious conflicts and, as I confirmed, our special care should be Christian minorities, which have suffered most as a result of fighting between Sunnis and Shias.

  Javi López (S&D). – Señora Presidenta, en primer lugar, lo que quiero es agradecer al ponente, Vincent Peillon, su trabajo como ponente de un informe muy relevante para nosotros.

El resultado del informe es muy positivo porque mantiene un buen equilibrio entre lo que es general y lo que es específico, entre lo que es regional y lo que es nacional, frente a uno de los desafíos más importantes que tiene hoy Europa, que es hacer frente a las crisis que padecemos en Oriente Próximo: desde el EIIL hasta la crisis migratoria, pasando por el caos libio, cosas muy diferentes, interrelacionadas, que interpelan directamente a la Unión Europea.

El informe cubre todos los grandes desafíos que tiene Europa y es muy positivo que dé un enfoque multidimensional, que no solo hable de seguridad, que no se limite solo a eso, sino que también hable de cuestiones culturales, de diálogo intercultural, de pobreza y de desigualdad, algo que es obvio: muchas veces detrás de estos grandes problemas existe este tipo de soluciones, por lo que hay que ir más allá o intentar ir más allá de la superficie.

En cuanto a la crisis siria, en primer lugar, hace bien en apoyar las acciones tomadas por los Estados miembros en la coalición internacional, pero hay que ser muy consciente de que la acción militar no será suficiente, no es suficiente, para acabar con el EIIL. Por supuesto que no lo será. La Unión Europea ha asignado 400 millones de euros en ayuda humanitaria a Siria y a sus vecinos, algo que tampoco es suficiente. Hay que recordar que algunos países como Jordania o el Líbano siguen acogiendo a millones de refugiados, mientras nosotros somos incapaces, desgraciadamente, de acordar con los Estados un sistema de cuotas mínimamente solidario.

Sobre Egipto, el informe pide al Gobierno que respete los derechos humanos y las libertades políticas. Apreciamos los esfuerzos que está haciendo en la lucha contra el terrorismo el Gobierno egipcio, pero lo que no puede pasar, como está pasando, es que el Presidente Al Sisi se escude en la lucha contra el terrorismo para, sistemáticamente, violar los derechos humanos y, en algunos casos, cometer crímenes, encarcelando a manifestantes pacíficos o condenando a muerte a opositores políticos.

En cuanto a las negociaciones con Irán, sobre su programa nuclear, la Alta Representante, Federica Mogherini, necesita ahora más que nunca nuestro apoyo —ya sabemos que hoy no está aquí porque está trabajando en esta cuestión—, un apoyo cerrado, claro y rotundo del Parlamento Europeo, a fin de que lleguen a buen puerto las negociaciones para poner fin a al sistema de sanciones actual. Cabe recordar que este nuevo puente que abrimos reubica todas las relaciones geopolíticas que tiene Europa con Oriente Próximo y dentro del propio Oriente Próximo.

Quiero hablar, para ir acabando, sobre la situación del conflicto de Israel y Palestina. Sabemos que el statu quo es absolutamente insoportable, insostenible, que necesitamos reiniciar el proceso de paz, que la composición del actual Gobierno tampoco nos deja mucho espacio para el optimismo, y que la Unión Europea debería plantearse medidas adicionales. El sistema de etiquetaje de productos procedentes de asentamientos israelíes es un mínimo, como lo es también utilizar algunas de las herramientas que tenemos, como la Unión para el Mediterráneo, algo que debemos aprovechar y que está en una fantástica ciudad que se llama Barcelona.

(El orador acepta responder a una pregunta formulada con arreglo al procedimiento de la «tarjeta azul» (artículo 162, apartado 8, del Reglamento))

  Jonathan Arnott (EFDD), blue-card question. – Mr Lopez, you have done a good job of summing up the problems that we face with ISIS, as many have already done in this Chamber this evening.

It is a question where we hear a lot about the problems, but very little in terms of specific solutions. You said yourself that what we are doing now is not enough. So what do we do? Do we have more military intervention, given the problems that were caused in Iraq and in Afghanistan previously? We cannot apply sanctions to these countries. What is your proposal for action here?

  Javi López (S&D), respuesta de «tarjeta azul». – Señor Arnott, en primer lugar, ¿por qué aparece el Estado Islámico? Por la situación que hay hoy en la zona, por el vacío de poder producido; si resolvemos la situación en Siria y resolvemos la situación que vive hoy Irak tendremos la mejor fórmula para ayudar a acabar con el Estado Islámico. Pero no es solo eso: lo segundo que tenemos que hacer es el diálogo con el mundo árabe, con los socios en la zona, que ellos se vean involucrados en la lucha que, por supuesto, hay que llevar a cabo frente al EIIL. Y, en tercer lugar, debemos pensar en las razones culturales y económicas que hay detrás de esta cuestión. Esto no es fácil, no tiene una respuesta simple, pero, por eso, hay que ponerse manos a la obra.

  Geoffrey Van Orden (ECR). – Madam President, I have no doubt that Mr Peillon has put a lot of effort into this report, but it seems to be a ‘catch-all’ for every possible difficulty, tension and crisis across a vast region. Many of these countries are unrelated in the nature of the problems that they face. The main answer for him seems to be the European Union, as well as large helpings of motherhood, apple pie and blinding statements of the obvious.

I seriously question the point of this sort of unfocused report and the associated hand-wringing. In any case, given the difficulties the EU is having in sorting out its own internal problems, I think a little more modesty would be useful. The EU’s main resource is money – it has been endowed by our taxpayers with over-generous financial resources. However, at the moment we are clearly not getting a good return for our money. We should try and use our resources on a more targeted and wiser basis. There I specifically pick up what was said about the Middle East peace process. We have leverage on the Palestinians and we should use that leverage to bring them to the negotiating table.

  Bodil Valero (Verts/ALE). – Fru talman! Jag vill också börja med att säga att jag tycker att det finns väldigt mycket som är bra i det här betänkandet och att det är mycket brett och omfattande. Men jag vill också ta upp några frågor som jag tycker fattas. Det är två frågor i synnerhet som jag tycker fattas.

Det första är att man inte någonstans nämner Västsahara, och det trots att det är 40 år i år som landet har varit ockuperat. I det betänkande som vi ska diskuter efter det här, det betänkande som handlar om grannskapspolitiken, där talas det om att det inte är acceptabelt att ett land ockuperar ett annat lands territorium. Men det gäller ju av någon anledning inte i fallet med Västsahara, för där låter vi ständigt ett partnerland hindra den utlovade folkomröstningen. Man låter dem lägga beslag på naturresurser och man låter dem förändra befolkningsstrukturen utan att det får några som helst konsekvenser.

Västsaharierna har valt ickevåld. Jag tror på ickevåld, men man måste också ge dem ett erkännande för det ickevåldsarbete de gör. Vi kan inte glömma bort dem bara därför att de inte använder sig av våld.

Den andra frågan som också fattas här är vapenexporten till regionen. Det talas i betänkandet om att det är en ny situation i hela Mena-regionen och att vi måste anpassa våra åtgärder till den nya situationen, men vi talar inte om det som vi själva bidrar med till den här regionen. Mellan 2010 och 2014 stod vi för 32 procent av all vapenexport. År 2013 sålde vi vapen för ett totalt värde av 9,6 miljarder euro och år 2012 10,7 miljarder euro. Vi måste nu på allvar börja fundera över om vi verkligen ska försätta att sälja vapen till en region där de kanske väldigt snart börjas användas emot oss.

  David Coburn (EFDD). – Madam President, I find myself agreeing with my colleague and esteemed opponent, Geoffrey van Orden. This report seems to be extremely windy and very worthy, but I am afraid that it does not have any practical or sensible solutions to the Middle East.

Quite frankly, I think the European Union should not be involving itself in this matter. It should be left very much to the great powers and to NATO, who can better deal with it. One of the things I find interesting about North Africa is that the countries we have not interfered with, such as Morocco, have a stable government and an emerging democracy. The more we keep out of interfering in those affairs, the better.

But what we should be concentrating on is the threat from ISIS coming across the Mediterranean from North Africa. We should not be encouraging people to come across. We should try to stop that. There are far too many woolly words about people and refugees. This must be stopped for the good and safety of Europe, or we will have even more problems being imported into Europe itself.

We should also stop arguing with Russia. With Russia we have a common enemy in a medieval, religious conflict which, quite frankly, we do not want to be part of. Russia has a similar problem in its southern republics to the one that we have. I think we were better off cooperating with Russia rather than fighting with Russia. At the moment, all the European Union seems to do is squabble with Russia over Crimea, which is not at all sensible. Let us leave that out. Let us be friendly with Russia. Let us try to make sure we do something sensible in the Middle East and not carry on the sort of nonsense we have been doing up until now.

  Michael Gahler (PPE). – Frau Präsidentin! Die letzte Wortmeldung vor mir in Bezug auf die Russlandpolitik teile ich dezidiert nicht, und ich glaube, die Mehrheit des Hauses auch nicht. Aber da das nicht das Thema dieses Berichts ist, will ich darauf auch nicht weiter eingehen.

Ich glaube, man kann natürlich in kurzer Zeit nicht alle Aspekte berühren. Deswegen will ich mich konzentrieren zum einen nochmal auf das Stichwort Tunesien, was wir vorhin bereits diskutiert haben.

Ich hatte angeregt, dass wir überlegen, ob wir unsere suspendierte EU Border Assistance Mission Tunisia-Libya vielleicht umwandeln in eine Grenzschutz-Unterstützungsmission direkt für die tunesische Seite, um auf diese Art das Einsickern von Terroristen vor allen Dingen aus Libyen zu stoppen.

Libyen ist mein anderes Stichwort. Ich denke, wir wissen alle, wie die Situation in der Phase des Sturzes von Gaddafi gewesen ist. Es war richtig aus meiner Sicht, dass wir dort nicht als EU, aber als einige Mitgliedstaaten interveniert haben. Ich glaube nach wie vor, dass wir in Bengasi ein wirkliches Massaker verhindert haben. Aber – und das ist das große Aber – danach war es nicht gewünscht, dass wir mit unseren bewährten Programmen – zum Beispiel Reform des Sicherheitssektors – vor Ort aktiv geworden sind. Ich glaube, wir hätten das gut leisten können, auch deswegen, weil die Libyer wenigstens Geld hatten, und da hätten wir dann als Gegenleistung unter anderem eine Sicherheitssektorreform durchführen können.

Das ist dann nicht passiert. Wir wissen, wie die Lage dort jetzt ist, und deswegen halte ich es für richtig, dass wir die Anstrengungen der Vereinten Nationen, aber auch den Einsatz Algeriens und Marokkos zur Stärkung des innerlibyschen Dialogs unterstützen. Das ist ja ausdrücklich in diesem Bericht drin.

Und danach, wenn es tatsächlich zu einem Erfolg führt, wenn wir hoffentlich bald eine Einheitsregierung in Libyen haben, dann sollten wir mit den Angeboten wieder auftreten und den Libyern unter anderem eine Reform des Sicherheitssektors anbieten, aber auch andere Dinge, um einen Staatsaufbau möglich zu machen. Das ist der Schlüssel dazu, dass wir auch ein Ende des Flüchtlingsstroms über Libyen erreichen können.

  Francisco Assis (S&D). – Senhora Presidente, eu queria começar por saudar o autor do relatório pela qualidade do mesmo e sobretudo pela visão lúcida sobre a questão do Médio Oriente e do Norte de África que é possível produzir a partir da Europa.

Em primeiro lugar, há uma recusa clara da teoria do choque das civilizações, do confronto entre uma suposta essência ocidental por oposição a uma essência do mundo islâmico, que seriam homogéneas e estariam condenadas a defrontar-se. Pelo contrário, há uma compreensão muito clara da complexidade da situação no Norte de África e no Médio Oriente. É uma realidade histórica de uma extrema complexidade e marcada por profundas clivagens – clivagens de ordem política, clivagens de ordem religiosa, clivagens de ordem cultural, clivagens de ordem social e económica e que, de facto, hoje conduzem a uma situação algo caótica em toda aquela região.

E qual deve ser a reação da Europa para com esta região vizinha? A reação tem que ser sempre colocada no plano político e no plano diplomático. E creio que aqui é que tem que estar o segredo da nossa intervenção, e está bem colocado no relatório. Transformar tudo isto numa questão essencialmente no plano político.

O relatório trata de algumas questões da maior importância: o conflito entre Israel e a Palestina, a questão das negociações em curso para resolver a questão nuclear iraniana, o apelo a que a própria União Europeia dê um contributo político para melhorar as relações entre o Irão e a Arábia Saudita, para superação de um conflito que é hoje um conflito estruturante de toda aquela região. Faz uma abordagem muito séria e realista daquilo que é hoje um dos maiores desafios com que estamos confrontados naquela zona, que é o desafio do terrorismo, e faz uma avaliação sem qualquer tipo de contemplações. Há várias respostas a serem dadas e nenhuma delas pode ser excluída, porque elas devem, aliás, ser articuladas umas com as outras.

E queria, por fim, centrar-me numa questão em que o orador que me antecedeu se centrou, que é a questão da Tunísia. A Tunísia hoje é um país especial naquela região. Foi na Tunísia, como sabemos, que se iniciou a Primavera Árabe. É hoje muito fácil contestar a Primavera Árabe e até lançar a ideia de que, verdadeiramente, aqueles países não estão preparados para a construção de um Estado de direito e de um verdadeiro regime democrático e que a Primavera Árabe acabou por aumentar a conflitualidade e para aumentar o caos na região. Mas a verdade é que nós não podemos, enquanto europeus fiéis a um determinado conjunto de valores, permanecer insensíveis àqueles que nesses países lutam justamente pela construção de um Estado de direito, pela separação entre a esfera pública e a esfera privada em matéria religiosa, pela consagração das liberdades, pela edificação de uma verdadeira democracia. Foi na Tunísia que se iniciou a Primavera Árabe, e a Tunísia é o exemplo, até agora o único exemplo bem-sucedido, dessa mesma Primavera Árabe. E, infelizmente, tem sido atacada por isso mesmo. O recente atentado que ali se verificou é um atentado não apenas contra o povo tunisino, mas é um atentado contra uma reivindicação de construção de um Estado de direito democrático em toda aquela região. E a União Europeia tem um dever de solidariedade adicional para com a Tunísia. A Tunísia tem manifestado essa vontade, tem feito apelos no sentido do reforço da cooperação, e nós temos que estar à altura das nossas responsabilidades. É um vizinho, e é um vizinho que, neste momento, significa muito mais do que a sua própria dimensão histórico-geográfica e merece por isso uma atenção especial por parte da União Europeia.

  Marek Jurek (ECR). – Opisujemy zagrożenia i wyzwania na Bliskim Wschodzie i w Afryce Północnej, przed jakimi stoimy, ale właściwie jakie na to mamy odpowiedzi. Przed chwilą mój przedmówca wspominał arabską wiosnę. To arabska wiosna miała być tą odpowiedzią, tylko co ona przyniosła? Wojnę, wzrost zagrożenia chrześcijan, zagrożenie dla bezpieczeństwa w regionie. I to – nową falę imigracji, z którą nie możemy sobie poradzić. Te decyzje finansowe, które wczoraj podejmowaliśmy, to jest też następstwo arabskiej wiosny.

Zastanówmy się może, co możemy zrobić konkretnego. Widzimy, że to wszystko trwa, widzimy, co się dzieje na Synaju: ataki na siły rządowe, ataki na Izrael. Pomyślmy może o rzeczach konkretnych, takich na przykład jak zrealizowanie zapowiedzi walki z infrastrukturą przemytników, którzy zorganizowali ogromny przemysł przemycania ludzi do Europy i którym się mieliśmy przeciwstawić. Do tej pory nie wystąpiliśmy o zgodę Narodów Zjednoczonych na działania przeciwko ich infrastrukturze tam, gdzie powstaje: w portach. I pomóżmy naprawdę tym, którzy potrzebują pomocy. Syriaccy chrześcijanie czekają na pomoc w sprzęcie: kto ma im pomóc? To my, to państwa Zachodu powinniśmy im pomóc. I to są konkretne rzeczy, które możemy zrobić dla bezpieczeństwa tego regionu.

  Francisco José Millán Mon (PPE). – Señora Presidenta, en primer lugar, quiero felicitar al señor Peillon por su informe. Abarca, desde luego, una temática muy amplia, muy compleja, también de especial actualidad y, desde luego, ha sido mucho el esfuerzo que ha tenido que hacer para poder comprimir esta realidad tan amplia en su texto.

Digo de especial amplitud y actualidad porque desde Túnez hasta Irak y Yemen se abre un largo arco de inestabilidad, de crisis, de conflicto desde hace años, que incluye los enfrentamientos en Libia y la guerra en Siria. Desgraciadamente no está cerca su final —me estoy refiriendo, por ejemplo, al conflicto en Siria o al largo conflicto israelo-palestino— porque, pese a los esfuerzos realizados por la comunidad internacional en estos años, no parece que vaya a solucionarse pronto.

Digo también que es una realidad compleja porque engloba situaciones muy diversas, muchas de ellas vinculadas, como aquí que se ha dicho, a los levantamientos conocidos como «primavera árabe», pero también están presentes, en algunos de estos países, graves diferencias de carácter religioso; me refiero, por ejemplo, a la oposición entre suníes y chiíes. Y se trata de un informe, por ende, muy importante para la Unión Europea, porque se refiere en buena parte a la vecindad, a esa vecindad, a esos países tan cercanos con los que nos unen numerosos vínculos humanos, económicos, incluidos también, entre estos vínculos, los energéticos.

Lo que allí sucede tiene impacto en Europa y lo estamos viendo; lo estamos viendo en los flujos de inmigración y también en la trágica amenaza del terrorismo, que golpea no solo en los países árabes, sino que también lo sigue haciendo en Europa, y señaladamente en Francia.

Por todo ello, creo que es conveniente una mayor implicación europea, una mayor atención a esa zona. Pensemos en la gravísima amenaza que representa el llamado Estado Islámico o Daesh, que además tiene recursos petroleros y que encima tiene una implantación territorial impresionante, aprovechando las estructuras estatales tan débiles de las zonas donde se encuentra.

Por consiguiente, una involucración europea es necesaria, con las dificultades que tiene eso para Europa y sin olvidar tampoco el respeto de los derechos humanos y nuestros principios. Comprendo que es un problema difícil. Necesitamos un diálogo intenso, no solo con los países árabes, sino también con sus organizaciones. Estoy pensando en la Liga Árabe y en el Consejo de Cooperación del Golfo.

Y una última palabra para resaltar, Presidenta, la preocupación por la situación de los cristianos en la zona, en varios de estos países, que siguen siendo perseguidos

  Andrej Plenković (PPE). – Gospođo potpredsjednice, najprije zahvaljujem povjereniku Hahnu na njegovim uvodnim riječima na ovu važnu temu Bliskog istoka i sjeverne Afrike, a posebno zahvaljujem kolegi Vincentu Peillonu na njegovom dokumentu koji je dobio veliku potporu i u Odboru za vanjske poslove, a koji zaista dotiče niz tema, u smislu funkcionalnih tema, ali isto tako bitnu geografsku cjelinu na rubu Europske unije koja danas predstavlja jednu od glavnih globalnih kriza i praktički nema zemlje koju ste spomenuli u svome izvješću, a da ona nije na određeni način ili u ratnom stanju ili u stanju terorizma, kao što smo nažalost nedavno vidjeli u Tunisu, ili predstavlja prijetnju migracijskih rizika prema obalama Europske unije i zahtijeva našu snažnu reakciju.

Htio bih ovdje istaknuti da smo kao zastupnici, dio izaslanstva Odbora za vanjske poslove, nedavno bili u Teheranu i nastojali dati doprinos naporima koje Visoka predstavnica Mogherini zajedno s ostalima u šestorci nastoji napraviti kao politički dogovor, kao provedbu dogovora u Lausanni, ovih dana u Beču.

Smatram da je to izuzetno bitno i za stabilnost same regije jer je to na neki način prepoznavanje uloge Irana, koji praktički kroz sukobe sa Saudijskom Arabijom, tzv. proxy ratove dovodi širu nestabilnost u regiju.

U tom pogledu moramo učiniti maksimum napora za borbu protiv Daeša, protiv Islamske države koja je zaista svojevrsna tvorevina koju nitko nije anticipirao, a koja na teroristički način pokazuje kakva je sve zvjerstva moguće raditi na početku 21. stoljeća.

U tom smislu također želim reći da je progon kršćana kojem smo svjedoci proteklih nekoliko mjeseci, pa možda i zadnje dvije godine, nedopustiv i da moramo učiniti sve kao Europska unija, bilo političkim djelovanjem, bilo prisutnošću naših misija da se to spriječi.

  Ryszard Czarnecki (ECR). – Pani Przewodnicząca! Panie Komisarzu! Inaczej niż mój przyjaciel Andrej Plenković, ja nie będę deklarował wsparcia dla pani komisarz Mogherini. Ja deklaruję wsparcie dla naszych braci chrześcijan w tych regionach – to znacznie ważniejsze. Chciałbym powiedzieć, że mam duży szacunek dla pracy, którą wykonuje pan komisarz, natomiast myślę, że byłoby lepiej, gdyby pani komisarz czasem milczała, a nie mówiła. Jej wypowiedzi ostatnio były bardzo kontrowersyjne. Ważniejsze jednak jest to, co powinniśmy my robić dla tego regionu. Politycy muszą oceniać sytuację po faktach, a nie po ideach. Jeżeli arabska wiosna zakończyła się katastrofą, to trzeba powiedzieć to otwarcie – tak, to była katastrofa i niestety nie możemy w tej kwestii być ludźmi ślepymi na rzeczywistość.

  Die Präsidentin. – Danke, Herr Czarnecki! Darf ich es Ihnen sagen und Frau Mogherini kurz verteidigen? Es ist sehr wohl ihre Aufgabe, sich zu diversen Punkten zu äußern. Denn Sie meinten, sie solle den Mund halten. Es ist ihre Aufgabe, ihre Arbeit zu machen und auch öffentlich dazu Stellung zu nehmen.

  Андрей Ковачев (PPE). – Г-жо Председател, г-н Комисар, миграционната вълна към Европа е по-сериозно предизвикателство пред нас дори и от сегашната нестабилност в Гърция. В нашето близко съседство има милиони хора, които виждат спасение от насилието и мизерията, щурмувайки границата на Европейския съюз.

Най-важният въпрос, на който трябва да си отговорим, е как ние можем да отвърнем на това предизвикателство и да допринесем за политическа стабилност в страните от Близкия изток и Северна Африка. Такъв отговор не е лесен, но е от огромен интерес за нас. За съжаление смятам, че въздушни и евентуални сухопътни операции срещу екстремистката групировка "Ислямска държава" трябва да бъдат направени. Но промяната трябва да дойде и отвътре. Разбира се, съгласен съм с колегите, които казаха: Решение трябва да се намери на палестинския въпрос.

Европейските държави следва да подобрят сътрудничеството и със събирането и обмен на информация както помежду си, така и с някои от правителствата от този регион. Религиозните общности трябва да бъдат насърчени да сътрудничат помежду си. Добър пример е тези 800 християнски доброволци, които преди два дни се включиха в шиитското опълчение, за да участват в действията по освобождаването на иракския град Мосул от "Ислямска държава".

Основната отговорност в борбата срещу фундаментализма би трябвало да бъде на мюсюлманските общности и особено тяхното разграничаване от злоупотребата с религията от терористите. Една подобрена координация между службите за сигурност на страните членки и тези от региона, примерно Турция, Ирак, Ливан, би трябвало да прекрати притока на средства към "Ислямска държава" от продажба на незаконни енергийни източници; както и доставчиците на интернет услуги и социални платформи трябва да разкриват тези, които искат да се присъединят към "Ислямска държава" и екстремистката пропаганда.

  Ангел Джамбазки (ECR). – Г-жо Председател, уважаеми колеги, уважаеми г-н Комисар, ситуацията в Близкия изток и Северна Африка безспорно е най-сериозното предизвикателство пред сигурността на европейските нации. Разпадът на редица държави в този регион под напора на организираните арабски пролети поражда поне две съдбоносни заплахи пред нас.

От една страна, това е огромната мигрантска вълна, която залива европейския континент, заплашва да срине икономиките на европейските държави и да промени завинаги демографски и културно, религиозно и всякак континента ни и то в посока, с която аз не съм съгласен. От друга страна, бездържавието в региона стана благодатна почва за развитието и възхода на крайни екстремистки салафистки ислямистки организации, като Ал Шабаб, Боко Харам, Ал Кайда, „Ислямска държава“ и прочие.

Те всички воюват срещу нас, срещу нашите традиции, обичаи, култура и ценности. Искат да ги заменят с халифат. Днес режат глави вече не само в Ирак и Сирия, а в Лион, Франция. Крайно време е да погледнем на тази заплаха отговорно. На тази заплаха има един-единствен адекватен отговор. Той не е декларация и изявления. Той е военен такъв.

  Arnaud Danjean (PPE). – Madame la présidente, l'instabilité dans la zone couverte par l'excellent rapport de M. Peillon n'est malheureusement pas une nouveauté. Mais jamais, sans doute, son ampleur n'a été aussi grande, jamais, sans doute, elle n'avait été porteuse de menaces aussi directes pour notre propre sécurité et jamais, sans doute, un paramètre dans un des coins de cette région n'avait eu autant d'influence sur l'ensemble de la région, de sorte qu'il est extrêmement complexe, aujourd'hui, diplomatiquement, d'isoler une des crises de la région d'une autre. Cela, c'est un défi tout à fait inédit.

À partir de ce constat très général, je voudrais insister sur trois points. Le premier, c'est de bien rappeler à tous nos collègues que nous ne sommes pas face à une crise ponctuelle. Nous sommes face à une crise structurelle, je dirais même tectonique, qui affecte au plus profond toutes ces sociétés du Proche et du Moyen-Orient. La dimension sécuritaire n'est que la partie la plus spectaculaire de ces mutations sociologiques, économiques et institutionnelles. Ce phénomène va durer des années, peut-être même des décennies, et nous devons agir et nous préparer à agir en conséquence.

Deuxième point, dans ce type de mouvement, il est illusoire, malheureusement, d'espérer des développements qui soient spontanément vertueux. C'est un peu le défaut qu'on a eu dans la lecture des Printemps arabes, qui n'étaient qu'un épisode de ces mutations profondes. L'Égypte ne deviendra pas du jour au lendemain la Suède. Par conséquent, nous devons également, là aussi, non pas abdiquer nos valeurs, absolument pas, ni nos normes, mais nous devons hiérarchiser nos priorités, ainsi que la façon dont nous apprécions les interlocuteurs locaux avec lesquels nous avons à traiter.

Troisième point, il faut aussi reconnaître que nos moyens d'action sont relativement limités, d'autant plus si nous agissons en ordre dispersé. Aucun de nos États, seul, n'est en mesure d'avoir un impact déterminant sur les mutations de cette région. Nous devons donc agir collectivement, parce que cela incitera les pays de la région à agir collectivement, eux aussi.

Voilà les principaux points, à mon avis, que nous devons inclure dans notre action, qui doit, je le répète, s'inscrire dans la durée.

PRESIDENZA DELL'ON. ANTONIO TAJANI
Vicepresidente

Procedura "catch-the-eye"

  Jaromír Štětina (PPE). – Pane předsedající, minulý týden pořádal v Bruselu Kurdský národní kongres konferenci o Kobani, městě, které bylo ze sedmdesáti procent zničeno v bojích mezi jeho kurdskými obyvateli a extrémisty ISIS. Na konferenci zazněl apel k mobilizaci mezinárodního společenství k obnově Kobani. Kobani potřebuje humanitární pomoc. Zástupce starosty Kobani Enver Muslim upozornil na to, že zima je v Kobani krutá a času je málo. Statečnost Kurdů bojujících s islamistickým terorem je obdivuhodná, ať už jsou to Kurdové syrští či iráčtí. Skláním se před statečností Kurdů. Tím, že dobyli zpět Kobani a vytlačili ISIS, dali světu výzvu – potřebujeme pomoc, a to nejen humanitární.

Celá řada zemí Kurdy vyslyšela. Například moje země, Česká republika, věnovala vloni na podzim iráckým Kurdům pět set tun munice. Spojenci pomohli syrským Kurdům otevřít ofenzívu bombardováním pozic ISIS. Účastníci bruselského Kurdského národního kongresu takovou pomoc samozřejmě uvítali, ale uslyšel jsem i naléhavé výzvy ke spojenému vojenskému zásahu proti ISIS. Proto si dovoluji apelovat na našeho silného spojence v NATO, na Turecko. Turecko je dnes hegemonem v oblasti a očekával bych, že dokáže povýšit svůj vztah ke Kurdům nad jakýkoliv nacionalistický postoj a odmítne hlasy vyzývající k zásahu turecké armády proti syrským Kurdům.

  Νότης Μαριάς ( ECR). – Κύριε Πρόεδρε, οι τελευταίες προκλήσεις στη Μέση Ανατολή και στη Βόρεια Αφρική έχουν δημιουργήσει μεγάλες ανησυχίες στον δυτικό κόσμο. Η αύξηση των εντάσεων στην περιοχή καθυστερεί την οικονομική και κοινωνική ανάπτυξη των λαών της περιοχής και δημιουργεί μαζικά κύματα προσφύγων, που κατακλύζουν πλέον την Ελλάδα και την Ιταλία.

Μετά τις τρομοκρατικές επιθέσεις τον Ιανουάριο του 2015 στο Παρίσι, η καταπολέμηση των τζιχαντιστών πρέπει να είναι αποτελεσματική και να βασίζεται μακροπρόθεσμα στη στήριξη της δημοκρατίας και της οικονομικής ανάπτυξης των χωρών. Ταυτόχρονα όμως η Ευρωπαϊκή Ένωση πρέπει να απομονώσει εκείνες τις χώρες που στηρίζουν τους τζιχαντιστές στη Συρία, στην Αίγυπτο και στη Λιβύη. Κατά τη διάρκεια της πρόσφατης προεκλογικής περιόδου στην Τουρκία, η αντιπολίτευση αποκάλυψε τη συνεργασία της Τουρκίας με τους τζιχαντιστές στη Συρία. Επίσης, πρόσφατα η Χουριέτ αποκάλυψε ότι οι τουρκικές αρχές υποθάλπουν τους διάφορους δουλεμπόρους που μεταφέρουν αντί αδράς αμοιβής στην Ελλάδα χιλιάδες πρόσφυγες από τη Συρία.

Τι μέτρα λοιπόν προτίθεται να λάβει εν προκειμένω η Επιτροπή, κύριε Hahn;

  Ivan Jakovčić (ALDE). – Gospodine predsjedniče, iznimno sam se radovao kad je pokrenuta inicijativa Unije za Mediteran i kada je Unija za Mediteran osnovana. Imao sam čak priliku raditi u jednom dijelu te Unije.

Nažalost, danas možemo reći da Unija za Mediteran, nakon svega što se događalo zadnjih godina, praktički više ne postoji. Zato mislim da moramo naći odgovor, sveobuhvatan odgovor za Mediteran, Bliski istok, zemlje sjeverne Afrike, i mislim da Europska unija danas može iskoristiti svoj kredibilitet i možda lansirati novu sveobuhvatnu inicijativu jer, bojim se, bez obzira na naše prioritete (odnosi s Turskom, odnosi s Izraelom i Palestinom, odnosi sa zemljama koji su dobri primjeri: Tunis, Libanon ili Jordan, odnosi s Egiptom), da će nam ipak biti bitne pojedinačne stvari, ali možda nećemo moći riješiti cijeli problem. Dakle, predlažem da ozbiljno razmislimo o novoj sveobuhvatnoj inicijativi.

  Γεώργιος Επιτήδειος ( NI). – Κύριε Πρόεδρε, λόγω της μεγάλης γεωπολιτικής και γεωστρατηγικής τους σπουδαιότητας, τα όσα συμβαίνουν στη Μέση Ανατολή και στη Βόρεια Αφρική επηρεάζουν άμεσα την παγκόσμια ειρήνη και την πολιτική σταθερότητα και φυσικά επηρεάζουν και την Ευρωπαϊκή Ένωση.

Αυτά τα οποία συμβαίνουν στις περιοχές αυτές τώρα είναι: εμφύλιες συρράξεις, έλλειψη δημοκρατικότητας, πολιτική αστάθεια, οικονομική και ανθρωπιστική κρίση, αυξημένη δράση τρομοκρατών και μεγάλη κίνηση παράνομων μεταναστών προς την Ελλάδα και την Ιταλία. Όλα αυτά έχουν συμβεί διότι μέχρι τώρα η Ευρωπαϊκή Ένωση ακολουθούσε μία πολιτική που δεν εξυπηρετούσε τα συμφέροντά της αλλά είχε ταυτιστεί με την πολιτική των Ηνωμένων Πολιτειών. Πρέπει λοιπόν να αλλάξουμε πολιτική. Οφείλουμε να απαιτούμε από τις κυβερνήσεις των χωρών να διοικούν με τρόπο δημοκρατικό· οφείλουμε να υποστηρίξουμε όλες εκείνες τις χώρες οι οποίες μάχονται κατά της τρομοκρατίας (την Τυνησία, την Αίγυπτο) αλλά να συνδιαλλαγούμε και με τη Συρία, διότι και αυτή μάχεται το ISIS. Eπίσης πρέπει να εμποδίσουμε την ελευθερία κινήσεων των τρομοκρατών και των Ευρωπαίων πολιτών που μάχονται στο πλευρό τους, και, τέλος, θα πρέπει να ανακόψουμε το ρεύμα των παράνομων μεταναστών.

Εδώ πρέπει να επιδείξει Ευρωπαϊκή Ένωση αποφασιστικότητα και όχι να υψώνει τη φωνή και να κινεί το χέρι προς την Ελλάδα και τους Έλληνες, διότι για μια ακόμη φορά απέδειξαν την πατροπαράδοτη αξιοπρέπεια και υπερηφάνεια τους.

  Marijana Petir (PPE). – Gospodine predsjedniče, ISIS djeluje tako da vlada ukidanjem granica, stvarajući tzv. Islamsku državu ubijajući sve koji im se nađu na putu. Islamska država ekstremni je oblik prijetnje kršćanskim zajednicama koje žive na područjima koje smatramo kolijevkom naše vjere, a danas se nalaze pred potpunim nestajanjem.

Međunarodna zajednica je, nažalost, pasivna i samo promatra iz prikrajka kako se ubija ljude i kako se cijeli kršćanski narod briše. Europska unija treba imati jasnu strategiju kako zaštititi kršćane, ali i kako pomoći Izraelu koji se nalazi u okruženju devet terorističkih organizacija i čija sigurnost je također ugrožena. Javna je tajna da se dijelom novca koji Europska unija šalje kao humanitarnu pomoć Palestinskoj upravi financiraju plaće terorista te se tim novcem nabavlja oružje kojim se napada izraelski narod.

Tražim istragu o trošenju novca Europske unije na Bliskom istoku kao što tražim i odbacivanje amandmana kojim izvjestitelj poziva na plaćanje pobačaja silovanim ženama iz proračuna EU-a. To je nehumano jer ženama trebamo dati sigurnost tako da suzbijemo terorizam i spriječimo silovanja, a ne da na nasilje nad ženama odgovaramo novim nasiljem, što pobačaj svakako jest.

  Arne Gericke (ECR). – Herr Präsident, sehr geehrter Herr Kommissar Hahn! Enge Zusammenarbeit mit den arabischen Staaten – mit wem? Ägypten vielleicht, Jordanien könnte sein. Aber sonst?

Religion spielt sehr wohl eine Rolle. Der Islam spaltet sich in Sunna, Schia und viele Sekten. Eine Terrorgefahr, aber kein wirklicher Gesprächspartner. Israel, der einzige demokratische Rechtsstaat im Nahen Osten, einziger glaubwürdiger Partner. Europa hat aber ein schwerwiegendes Imageproblem in Israel, denn wir konfrontieren dieses zuverlässige Land nur mit Sanktionen.

Iran dagegen exportiert Terrorstrukturen nach Lateinamerika, Afrika, Nahost natürlich, Asien. Und Iran wird jetzt sehr reich, wenn die Sanktionen aufgehoben werden. Hier gibt es Wissenschaftler. Ist der Iran ein zuverlässiger Partner im Rahmen der Kernenergie?

Keine Unterstützung irgendeines Partners, der nicht absolut zuverlässig und glaubwürdig ist! Das müsste unsere Maßgabe sein. Iran möchte die Atombombe. Wer will das bestreiten? Da sollten wir die Iraner ernst nehmen. Sie sind zu allem in der Lage. Sie wollen den Staat Israel vernichten und mit ihm das jüdische Volk. Das ist nicht verhandelbar. Das ist in keiner Weise verhandelbar, egal, welcher Staat im Nahen Osten dies als Grundforderung gegen Israel stellt.

  Ivo Vajgl (ALDE). – Predgovornik, gospod Danjean, je zelo lucidno analiziral tektonsko krizo, ki jo doživljamo na Bližnjem vzhodu in v Afriki, ampak mislim, da tudi današnja analiza in razgovor o poročilu ne bi bila popolna, če ne bi vendarle priznali, da je ta tektonska kriza posledica verige naših napak in napačnih ocen situacije na tem področju.

Naše iluzije, da bomo na Bližnji vzhod izvozili evropski model demokracije, naše zmote, da smo podpirali vse, ki so nam pripovedovali, da so borci za demokracijo, naše pasivnosti, ko je diktator Bašir brutalno kršil človekove pravice in izvajal genocid v Darfurju, naša lahkomiselnost pri nastajanju države Južni Sudan, naša neučinkovitost pri dialogu o miru med Palestinci in Izraelom, naša napačna ocena arabske pomladi.

Imamo dovolj znanja v Evropi, moramo ga znati izkoristiti za učinkovito politiko.

(Fine della procedura "catch-the-eye")

  Johannes Hahn, Member of the Commission. – Mr President, first of all thank you for your generosity in giving me ten minutes to recover later on. Secondly, I would also like to ask you to pass on my gratitude to the previous Chair, Mrs Lunacek, as she has rightly clarified that the duties and responsibilities of our High Representative include raising her voice if it is necessary. One can disagree about the content, but the fact that she has to raise her voice is, I think, clear and should not be challenged in any way.

Coming back to the debate, I would like warmly to thank you for an extremely constructive debate on the Middle East and North African region (MENA), a region that is most urgently crying out for the attention of the European Union and the whole international community. Despite accelerated transformations after the Arab upheavals in 2011, political, economic and social dynamics in the region prove that democratic transformation can only come after the consolidation of stability, a genuine conditio sine qua non for democratisation.

As has been stated, instability has, sadly, become a common feature of the MENA region. Therefore the EU needs to work side by side with our partners to help in this process of change. We must therefore jointly address such a security challenge. By the way, I see Mr Gahler is no longer here but, as he has raised this issue twice today, I would like to clarify – concerning the idea of having a kind of border assistance management on the Tunisian side of the Libyan border – that this is something we will take into account and reflect on. But it also depends, of course, on the agreement of the host country.

But quite honestly, I do not believe we have any choice, as friends, partners and neighbours. With a series of common threats ahead of us, we need to seek overlapping areas of consensus, forging an ever stronger link between the EU and the Arab and Muslim worlds, as well as others in the region. We can say without contradiction that we face regional challenges and that such challenges call for regional solutions and these solutions need to be carried out by, and with, regional actors.

Bilaterally we have, of course, to express respect for diversity. Diversity is the core feature of our European history and it is our strength, but we should also show respect for diversity when we look outside our borders. We need to understand diversity and complexity. All this should be done in a comprehensive manner and not just with a focus on the hard security issue. Together with our partners in the region, we must jointly address the links between security and development, involving civil society in our cultural dialogue and fully respecting human rights standards with a view to widely tackling all horizontal issues, from migration to economic integration. We need to work in both bilateral and regional frameworks across the region. Everyone has a responsibility to contribute and everyone should be given a chance – Muslim, Christian, Jew or non—believer, Sunni or Shia, Arab or Kurd. Only inclusive democracies can navigate such tough times.

Finally, let me reiterate that it is the common understanding of the High Representative, myself and all the other members of the Commission that, when it comes to our neighbourhood – in particular in the Mediterranean – we should be in the driving seat to resolve the problems; we should be there and take care of the situation. Of course we need some allies there, but it should be clear that it is our immediate interest and we should, once again, be the ones who are pushing hopefully sustainable resolutions.

  Vincent Peillon, rapporteur. – Monsieur le Président, tous ceux qui pourraient penser qu'on peut se désintéresser de notre Sud se trompent. Le problème de la stabilité au Sud, c'est aussi le problème de la stabilité chez nous, et tel que nous l'avons abordé, le problème du développement économique, social, humain et démocratique du Sud aura évidemment des retentissements en Europe.

Ceux qui rêvent de faire de l'Union européenne une forteresse seront démentis par l'histoire. Cela n'a pas été comme cela dans le passé, ce n'est pas comme cela dans le présent, ce ne sera pas comme cela dans l'avenir. Nous avons donc, dans notre intérêt propre à nous soucier du Sud.

En ces temps de crise en Europe avec la question grecque, avec le Conseil sur les migrants, il y a quand même un élément d'optimisme dans le travail que nous avons fait, car nous avons évité un certain nombre de banalités ou de répétitions. Nous avons essayé de construire ensemble, et j'en remercie encore les différents rapporteurs fictifs, une vision stratégique commune.

Bien sûr, l'Europe peut se reprocher des choses, mais l'instabilité de la région du Moyen-Orient et de l'Afrique du Nord n'est quand même pas l'unique responsabilité de l'Europe. Et l'Europe est attendue.

J'ai entendu certains dire que l'Union européenne doit avoir sa propre politique, mais ce sont les mêmes qui s'opposent à une politique étrangère et de sécurité commune. La solution, c'est qu'il y ait davantage d'Europe et qu'on accepte une politique étrangère commune. Ce n'est pas encore tout à fait le cas et on voit bien que dans cette zone aussi, un certain nombre d'États européens jouent leur propre partition. Il n'y a pas de politique étrangère commune sans politique de sécurité commune.

Nous avons élaboré ce rapport dans le respect de nos principes et en tenant compte de la multiplicité des facteurs que nous avons évoqués. C'est pour cela que nous devons soutenir les initiatives de la haute représentante et de la Commission. D'abord, plus de générosité envers les migrants. Ce qui a été fait est insuffisant. Le président Juncker l'a rappelé ce matin. Il a raison: nous ne nous en sortirons pas comme cela.

Deuxièmement, il faut évidemment davantage d'initiatives politiques et donc de cohérence entre nous. Ce rapport est une modeste contribution, mais nous avons relevé le défi de trouver une pensée commune. Si nous voulons agir ensemble, nous devons d'abord penser ensemble, être intelligents collectivement et définir une stratégie ensemble. Je crois que le résultat est plutôt positif. J'en suis très reconnaissant à tous ceux qui ont collaboré à ce travail, quelle que soit leur place sur l'échiquier politique.

  Presidente. – La discussione è chiusa.

La votazione si svolgerà domani, giovedì 9 luglio 2015.

(La seduta, sospesa per qualche istante, è ripresa alle 21.35)

Dichiarazioni scritte (articolo 162)

  Miriam Dalli (S&D), in writing. – As I have stated before and will state again, there is no security in Europe without security in the Mediterranean. This is why the EU must contribute all its efforts to help decrease the tension in the Middle East and North Africa by ensuring that its internal and external policies reflect today’s realities. We must review our policy action relating to the region to ensure that they reflect the post-Arab Spring environment and concerns of growing terrorism in the area. Terrorism in the MENA area is not simply a regional problem – we have seen that if we continue to ignore the situation in the area this could have dire consequence on the entire world. We have already seen the dangerous consequences of the destabilisation of certain regions due to serious security and humanitarian crisis. That of the horn of Africa region resulted in millions of internally and externally displaced persons and led to a situation where refugees have found themselves living in protracted situations for over three decades. We must not make the mistakes of the past, and we cannot allow the same thing to happen in the MENA region.

  György Hölvényi (PPE), írásban. – Továbbra is egységesen kell kiállnunk a közel-keleti térségben növekvő mértékű erőszakkal és a gyilkosságokkal szemben, amelyeket a Dáis hajt végre vallási kisebbségek, így a keresztények ellen is. Az Európai Unió vezető szerepet tölt be a menekültek segélyezésében. Erkölcsi kötelességünk Európában mindemellett, hogy tovább növeljük az üldözöttek védelmére irányuló erőfeszítéseket. A segítségnyújtás hatékonyságát jelentősen növeli, hogy a Dáis által elüldözött keresztény és más őshonos kisebbségek érdekében kritikus fontosságú erőfeszítéseket tesznek a helyi egyházak. Nélkülük már régen az eddigieknél is súlyosabb katasztrófába torkollt volna a szélsőséges iszlám előretörése a Közel-Keleten. Konkrét példákra hivatkozom: több százezer menekült napi gondozásáért vállal felelősséget jelenleg Észak-Irakban a káld katolikus egyház, vagy Szíriában a Jesuit Refugee Service. Mindezt leginkább saját forrásokból és nemzetközi egyházi adományokból valósítják meg.

Az egyházak bevált projekteket működtetnek, és közvetlenül érik el a legnagyobb szükséget elszenvedőket. A jelenlegi uniós segélyezési eljárás azonban nem tekinti partnernek a helyi egyházakat, és akadályozza közvetlen részvételüket az európai segélyprojektekben. Elengedhetetlen, hogy az Unió segélyezésért és fejlesztésért felelős intézményei partnerként tekintsenek a professzionális egyházi segélyszervezetekre a humanitárius akciókban. Nem tehetjük meg, hogy a helyzet megoldásából kihagyjuk a leginkább érintetteket. Az uniós döntéshozók sürgős együttgondolkodására van szükség, hogy a helyi partnerekkel közösen kerekedjünk felül a humanitárius válságon.

  Ioan Mircea Paşcu (S&D), in writing. – For decades, the Middle East has been dominated by the Arab-Israeli conflict. The Muslim communities in the major EU countries have naturally been affected by these ups and downs, in turn, influencing the diplomatic position of those countries – consequently, of the EU – on the conflict itself and the attempts to find a durable solution to it.

Coupled with the radicalization generated by the current world economic and financial crisis, the number of anti-Semitic manifestations in Western Europe has increased and the official EU positions on the Arab-Israeli conflict got tougher in consequence.

The reality is much more complex: the Middle East and North Africa have become the object of a border-breaking process: Libya, Syria, Iraq and Yemen have now, for all practical reasons, fluctuating borders, nobody knowing how they will look in the future.

The attempts of ISIL – a product of an intra-Muslim bitter conflict – of filling the vacuum thus created is already contributing to the radicalisation of the EU Muslim communities, displacing the old Arab-Israeli conflict as the number one cause of it. Consequently, the EU should revise its traditional perception centred around the latter, refocusing instead on the redrawing of borders in the Arab world.

  Janusz Zemke (S&D), na piśmie. – Uważnie przeczytałem sprawozdanie nt. wyzwań w zakresie bezpieczeństwa na Bliskim Wschodzie i w Afryce Północnej, a także perspektyw na stabilność polityczną w tym regionie. Ten liczący 27 stron dokument jest – moim zdaniem – pełen ogólników i sformułowań, z których niestety niewiele wynika.

Słusznie w sprawozdaniu tym stwierdza się, że narasta napięcie w regionie Bliskiego Wschodu i Afryki Północnej, wysoce niepokojące są utrzymujące się konflikty w Syrii, Iraku, Jemenie i Libii. Sytuacja nie poprawiła się także po arabskiej wiośnie, a efekty walki z Państwem Islamskim są słabe. To wszystko jednak wiemy.

Problem polega na tym, że europejska odpowiedź na te zagrożenia jest ciągle niewystarczająca. Zajmujemy się głównie ograniczaniem skutków tego globalnego kryzysu, pomocą dla migrantów, a nie likwidacją źródeł tego rozległego kryzysu. Ponieważ sprawozdanie nie przedstawia precyzyjnych rozwiązań, które poprawiłyby bezpieczeństwo w regionie Bliskiego Wschodu i Afryki Północnej, uważam, że jest to materiał rozczarowujący.