Fuldstændigt Forhandlingsreferat

Tirsdag den 9. februar 2021 - Bruxelles

12. Situationen i Myanmar (forhandling)

  Przewodnicząca. – Kolejnym punktem porządku dziennego jest oświadczenie wiceprzewodniczącego Komisji / wysokiego przedstawiciela Unii do spraw zagranicznych i polityki bezpieczeństwa w sprawie sytuacji w Mjanmie/Birmie (2021/2540(RSP)).

  Josep Borrell Fontelles, Vice-President of the Commission / High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy. – Madam President, as you know, on 1 February 2021, the Myanmar military declared a state of emergency for one year in Myanmar. All powers were transferred to the commander—in—chief of the army. The opening of the democratically elected parliament was cancelled, hundreds of people were arrested, including the President and the State Counsellor, Aung San Suu Kyi, and the chief channels have been shut down and Facebook blocked.

This event abruptly turned back the clock of history in Myanmar. The path towards democracy, which had started in 2011, and the will of the people, as expressed in the November elections, has been reversed once again by the military power. The military has already appointed new ministers, trying to establish facts on the ground. It’s crucial to act swiftly and strongly and in coordination with our partners.

Specifically, I already issued a statement already on 1 February. On 2 February, the European Union issued another statement agreed by all Member States and contributed to a G7 statement. So first my statement quickly, engaging only my responsibility but quickly, secondly, a 27 Member State statement engaging the responsibility of the Foreign Affairs Council, and then contributing to a G7 statement.

Yes, we are currently reviewing all our actions and we have three tools to use. First, to consider additional targeted sanctions on individuals and business owned by the military. As you know, in this country the military are a big economic power and own an important part of the economic infrastructure of the country. Second, to review our development assistance and, third, to assess the use of the Everything but Arms trade preferences.

Our policy response should follow some basic principles: first, to try to effect change, second, to maintain channels of dialogue, and, third, to avoid affecting the broader population, which are not guilty and they should not be punished.

We are looking carefully at all these actions and, if the Foreign Affairs Council on 22 February gives the political guidance, we will ensure we are doing nothing to legitimise the actions of the military, while trying to maintain support for the people of Myanmar. The review is taking into account how closely we work with the government and its institutions from a legal, financial and technical perspective, as well as the impact on beneficiaries.

At the same time, we should avoid rushing into measures that would adversely affect the most vulnerable part of the population. This often happens when you take restrictive measures. In the end it is the poorest among the poor who bear the consequences. Withdrawing preferences would damage the civilian garment sector, while leaving military business unscathed. Five hundred thousand workers would be at risk, mostly women, so we cannot afford to take these kinds of measures.

Third, coordination. We have been in close contact with all partners since the outset of the crisis. We have engaged with ASEAN, India, the US and Australia, and also discussed the situation yesterday with the Chinese Foreign Minister. We all agree on the need for quick responses to avoid allowing a fait accompli that could last quite a long time. We now need to develop a robust response to this unacceptable seizure of power, which reverses ten years of democratic transition.

This is what I had to inform you, honourable Members, about the situation in Myanmar. I am looking forward to your debate.

  Daniel Caspary, im Namen der PPE-Fraktion. – Frau Präsidentin! Sehr geehrte Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Die zahlreichen Reaktionen auf den Militärputsch in Myanmar in den vergangenen Jahren waren eindeutig und sie sind richtig.

Nämlich ein Ergebnis einer Wahl, einer demokratischen Wahl, unter Angabe von haltlosen Vorwürfen und fadenscheinigen Rechtfertigungen eigenmächtig zu revidieren – das ist einfach undemokratisch. Das ist inakzeptabel. Es ist gut, dass wir gemeinsam aufschreien, die Menschen in Myanmar unterstützen und auch darauf hinwirken und unterstützen und dazu aufrufen, dass die demokratische Situation in Myanmar wiederhergestellt wird. Aber wir müssen aufpassen, dass wir das Kind nicht mit dem Bade ausschütten. Und deswegen bin ich Ihnen, sehr geehrter Herr Vizepräsident, sehr dankbar für Ihre Ausführungen. Wir müssen einen differenzierten Blick bewahren.

Die Entschließung, die wir in dieser Woche zur Lage in Myanmar verabschieden werden, benennt mögliche Sanktionen und Restriktionen, zum Beispiel das Aufheben von Handelserleichterungen wie Everything but Arms. Es ist ein mögliches Mittel, um unseren entschiedenen Protest auszudrücken. Aber wichtig ist mir auch: Solche Maßnahmen dürfen nicht einfach reflexhaft verhängt werden, sondern wir müssen ganz genau abwägen, was die Folgen für die Menschen vor Ort sind. Denn die Sanktionen, die wir oft verhängt haben, sind in der Vergangenheit manchmal auch am Ziel vorbeigeschossen und haben anstatt der Militärs und der Parallelwirtschaft vor allem die Zivilgesellschaft und die zivile Wirtschaft schwer getroffen.

Gleichzeitig bedeutet eine neue Sanktion eine weitere Schwächung unserer Position als Wirtschaftsmacht in der Region. Wir haben schon heute gerade mal acht Prozent der Auslandsinvestitionen in Myanmar. China hingegen ist nach Singapur bereits heute der zweitgrößte Investor im Land. Und wenn wir uns die Hintergründe des Putsches und der aktuellen Entwicklung anschauen, habe ich den Eindruck, dass China sich sehr, sehr schnell auf die neue Situation einrichten wird. Versuchen wird, Vorteile dort zu ziehen. Und deswegen ist mir ganz wichtig, dass wir in einen Dialog eintreten, dass wir das auch deutlich machen, aber dass wir uns wirklich überlegen, wann ein richtiger Moment ist, um Sanktionen dann einzuführen. In diesem Sinn sage ich eindeutig „Ja“ zu einer genauen Beobachtung der Lage.

Blinder Aktionismus darf aber am Ende nicht Peking und China helfen, sondern wir müssen wirklich die Menschen im Land im Blick haben. Und in dem Sinne. Vielen herzlichen Dank für Ihre Ausführungen heute.

  Marianne Vind, for S&D-Gruppen. – Fru formand! Jeg støtter befolkningen i Myanmar i deres demonstrationer imod militærkuppet. Derfor vil jeg holde et minuts stilhed til støtte for dem. (Taleren påbegyndte straks sit minuts stilhed. Det blev afbrudt af formanden efter kort tid)

  Przewodnicząca. – Pani Poseł, proszę zabrać głos, inaczej udzielimy głosu następnemu mówcy. Pani Poseł!

Pani Poseł, proszę zabrać głos, inaczej udzielę głosu następnemu mówcy.`

(The President gives the floor to the next speaker)

  Urmas Paet, on behalf of the Renew Group. – Madam President, the situation in Myanmar following the coup d’état on 1 February 2021 is extremely difficult. After the military seized power of the country and detained numerous top government figures, the situation has only escalated. Despite their martial law, the digital blackout created by the military and the limited ability to gain information, we see ongoing protests on the streets which are met with rubber bullets, water cannons and tear gas. It is imperative that this crackdown on the protesters does not turn deadly again, as it did in 2007.

Myanmar is home to around 135 major ethnic groups and seven ethnic minority states who are constantly discriminated against. The human rights record in Myanmar is appalling. In addition to Rohingya genocide, other minorities face human rights violations as well.

The Council should impose targeted sanctions to those responsible for the coup, as well as those responsible for what might constitute acts of genocide against Rohingya. Those responsible for human rights violations in Myanmar must be brought to justice.

  Jérôme Rivière, au nom du groupe ID. – Madame la Présidente, il y a six mois, le Parlement européen, tout imbu de sa certitude d’incarner seul le respect des droits de l’homme, avec la conscience tranquille du bourgeois philanthrope, se fendait d’un communiqué à la dignité auto-satisfaite: Aung San Suu Kyi était formellement exclue de la communauté du prix Sakharov. Cette décision n’a évidemment aucune influence sur les événements récents et l’incarcération de Aung San Suu Kyi. Y voir un lien de cause à effet serait surévaluer l’influence diplomatique de l’Union européenne qui, à force de reculades et de ridicule, ne pèse plus rien. En témoigne, Monsieur le Haut représentant, votre piteuse escapade en Russie.

L’Union européenne, championne autoproclamée de la liberté et de la démocratie, est soumise aux pires intégrismes. Quand on en vient aux sujets sérieux des relations internationales, c’est l’émotion et la bien-pensance qui prennent le dessus. C’est cette émotion qui vous a fait choisir Aung San Suu Kyi comme prix Sakharov, c’est cette même émotion qui vous a fait le lui retirer. Toujours cette émotion qui vous voit aujourd’hui bégayer face à ce que vous avez été incapable de prévoir.

C’est cette bien-pensance qui vous a fait choisir toujours les mêmes victimes à travers le monde en oubliant systématiquement certaines autres. Votre Union européenne préfère les Ouïghours aux catholiques persécutés en Chine. Elle préfère les Rohingyas au peuple karen, persécuté depuis des décennies. Elle préfère les Black Lives Matter et leur cortège de violences aux classes moyennes, dépossédées de tout. Aujourd’hui, vous êtes contraints de slalomer entre des positions idéologiques opposées car jamais dictées par les réalités et la complexité des relations internationales.

Le coup d’État au Myanmar et la restauration brutale de la junte militaire sont bien sûr totalement condamnables. Et l’Union européenne aurait les moyens de l’exprimer à la place des injonctions morales, dont les autocrates se moquent. Utilisons des mesures concrètes. Les préférences commerciales permettant au Myanmar d’exporter vers l’Union européenne sans droits de douane dans le cadre de l’accord «Tout sauf les armes» doivent être suspendues. Non seulement la junte militaire sera effectivement sanctionnée, mais en plus cette décision permettrait de mieux protéger les intérêts de certains de nos États membres.

Mes chers collègues, ces événements sont une nouvelle leçon diplomatique pour l’Union européenne qui, décidément, a bien du mal à progresser. Esclave de son idéologie, l’Union européenne ne saurait donner de leçons de liberté, puisqu’elle ne représente aucun peuple. L’Union européenne n’a pas vocation à devenir une voix dans le monde, qu’elle laisse aux nations le soin de défendre leurs intérêts dans un monde où celles-ci retrouvent une place toujours plus importante.

On dit que l’homme politique pense à la prochaine élection, que l’homme d’État pense à la prochaine génération. En matière diplomatique, si elle souhaite éviter le ridicule, il serait bon que l’Union européenne pense plus loin qu’à sa prochaine communication.

  Heidi Hautala, on behalf of the Verts/ALE Group. – Madam President, indeed, today’s news tells us that the situation in Myanmar is escalating. Police have fired rubber bullets against peaceful demonstrators as thousands have defied a ban on protesting in the administrative capital of Naypyidaw. But also, European businesses should be aware of the risks of doing business with this military conglomeration, which the High Representative has mentioned. There should be no links in the value chain of European businesses to the Myanmar military’s economic imperium.

I would like to highlight that here we have yet another crystal clear example that there should be no complicity with repression, grave human rights violations or environmental destruction. The EU Commission should, with this aim, urgently produce an advisory for businesses on how to do business in Myanmar under these very serious conditions.

I could highlight the Japanese brewing company Kirin Holdings. I’m sure you may have tasted its products when having your sushi. Kirin Holdings is among those companies that have already been withdrawing their joint ventures with the military because they find it intolerable to be complicit in anything that has to do with a coup.

Furthermore, the EU needs to launch an investigation on the Everything but Arms (EBA) programme. There should be an investigation into the trade preferences. Are they benefiting the Myanmar military’s conglomerates or ordinary people? I have no opinion on the outcome of this investigation as standing rapporteur in the Committee on International Trade, but I think it’s urgent to do that investigation.

Selective action could already be taken now. There could only be preferences benefiting private civil entities, if there are any. So instead of preferences, EU sanctions on the military’s conglomerates are needed.

  Tomasz Piotr Poręba, w imieniu grupy ECR. – Szanowni Państwo! Jako wiceprzewodniczący delegacji ASEAN w Parlamencie Europejskim z dużą uwagą obserwuję ostatnie wydarzenia w Birmie, gdzie 1 lutego tuż przed zaprzysiężeniem nowego parlamentu miał miejsce wojskowy zamach stanu. Widać wyraźnie, że wybory które się odbyły w tym kraju 8 listopada, a w których ogromną większość głosów zdobyła partia Narodowa Liga na rzecz Demokracji zostały sfałszowane, po czym wprowadzono stan wojenny i dyktaturę wojskową.

Jeżeli do tego dodamy, że w wyniku zamachu aresztowano również prezydenta tego kraju, a także około 200 bardzo ważnych polityków Birmy, to myślę że jako Unia Europejska powinniśmy podejść do tego, co się dzieje w tym kraju, niezwykle poważnie. Należy przede wszystkim jak zawsze potępić działania przywódców wojskowych i wezwać ich do natychmiastowego uwolnienia liderów politycznych i wszystkich aresztowanych osób, a także podjąć się działania na rzecz ustabilizowania sytuacji w tym kraju z aktywnym udziałem Unii Europejskiej.

  Marisa Matias, em nome do Grupo The Left. – Senhor Presidente, Senhor Alto Representante, o golpe de estado de 1 de fevereiro é uma clara violação da Constituição. Mais de 100 mil pessoas manifestaram-se pacificamente contra o golpe, já mais de 160 pessoas foram detidas e foi decretada a lei marcial com recolher obrigatório e a proibição de ajuntamentos com mais de cinco pessoas.

Os militares envolvidos não interferiram apenas diretamente na ordem democrática do país, como existem várias alegações do seu envolvimento em esquemas de corrupção, de concentração de poder e de controle da economia. O Secretário Geral das Nações Unidas, António Guterres, classificou este golpe de absolutamente inaceitável e foram já diversos os países a condenar o golpe militar.

É por tudo isto que condenamos este golpe militar e expressamos o nosso apoio ao povo de Mianmar na sua luta pacífica e legítima pela democracia. Mas também não esquecemos que no país persistem sérias violações dos direitos humanos, em particular contra a minoria roinja e que o próprio governo democrático de Mianmar falhou e tem falhado no reconhecimento desta população, tendo mesmo ocorrido uma limpeza étnica em 2017 como foi reconhecido pelas autoridades internacionais que levou a um êxodo maciço das pessoas do país.

Apesar de todos os apelos internacionais os roinjas continuam a ser perseguidos. Da mesma forma que condenamos este golpe militar, também chamamos a atenção para os roinjas e para a defesa dos direitos humanos como fundamental no Mianmar.

  Dorien Rookmaker (NI). – Madam President, dear Commissioner, dear Mr Borrell, dear colleagues, democrats in Myanmar, or Burma, fear for their life and country, and as we are all democrats, we must take a stand against a military coup.

It seems that the action of Ms Suu Kyi, who tried to limit the power of the military, led to a coup, in a part of the world where the EU has little or no influence and China is the major factor. It needs no debate that the coup should be condemned by the EU, as Mr Borrell correctly did.

I have only one question. Does Mr Borrell agree that considering our limited influence in this part of the world, our best chance to contribute to positive developments lie in coordination of our actions, in close relations to the United States?

  David McAllister (PPE). – Madam President, as the European Parliament we have always followed developments in Myanmar very closely.

In a number of resolutions throughout the last few years we have, for instance, strongly condemned all past and present human rights violations, especially against the Rohingya population.

Since 2015, and previous speakers have underlined this, the European Union has politically and financially supported Myanmar’s process of democratic transition. We have undertaken enormous efforts to promote peace, human rights and development in this country.

Unfortunately, all these positive developments have been abruptly reversed by the recent coup. This coup was a clear violation of Myanmar’s constitution, which we ought to all strongly condemn. I am deeply concerned by the detention of political leaders and civil society activists, including State Counsellor Aung San Suu Kyi and President Win Myint.

I call upon the military to immediately end the state of emergency. I call on the military to restore power to the democratically elected government. I call upon the military to respect human rights and the rule of law, and I call upon the military to release all those unjustly detained.

The November election results, as well as the Constitution, must be respected, and the national parliament should be convened at the earliest opportunity. Power should be returned to democratically elected representatives and to a civilian government as soon as possible.

For the European Union, all instruments should be on the table in order to react. As the European Parliament, we should send a strong message that we stand with the people of Myanmar who want to see a democratic future of their country.

High Representative, thank you for your good words on this issue.

  Łukasz Kohut (S&D). – Madam President, the coup d’état carried out last week in Myanmar by the armed forces is a clear violation of the Myanmar constitution. It means a dramatic break from the country’s democratic transition process. The international community must condemn it.

Let us not forget that Myanmar benefits from the European Union’s Everything but Arms scheme, designed to encourage the development of the world’s poorest countries. We need to make sure that this scheme does not profit an unelected military power, but its people. We need to make sure that humanitarian and development aid is not channelled through the Myanmar government’s networks to the military.

Last but not least, the EU reaction to situations such as this could be so much more efficient if the Union had more tools in this area. The past has shown us repeatedly that 27 Member States on their own and limited coordination from the EU institutions is not a recipe for a strong Union in the global context.

  Dita Charanzová (Renew). – Madam President, it seems like Myanmar has gone back 15 years through a time machine, back to when Václav Havel was calling for the international community to keep the pressure on the military junta to free the democratic opposition leaders and hand over power.

Many fear that the past decade was all for nothing. The people of Myanmar want democracy. We have seen the images of tens of thousands rallying around the country to protest against the coup. We in Europe stand with them.

But this cannot be just with words. We need action. Those responsible for the coup must be sanctioned. Those responsible for the crimes against the Rohingya must be brought to justice, and what must be crystal clear from the debate today is that the European Union will not be silent.

  Alessandro Panza (ID). – Signor Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, signor Alto rappresentante, la situazione in Myanmar a seguito del colpo di Stato avvenuto nel corso della scorsa settimana desta pesanti e molteplici preoccupazioni.

Desta preoccupazione la mancanza di notizie della presidente eletta nelle scorse libere e democratiche elezioni dello scorso novembre, Aung San Suu Kyi, e l'arresto di centinaia di leader politici.

Desta preoccupazione l'introduzione della legge marziale nelle principali città del paese, decisione presa con il solo scopo di reprimere le proteste che stanno riempiendo le strade in tutto il paese, causando numerosi feriti colpiti da proiettili di gomma e gas lacrimogeni. Desta preoccupazione questa escalation che rischia di compromettere il fragile percorso avviato verso la democrazia compiuta.

Ma soprattutto desta preoccupazione il ruolo della Cina, che da più parti viene indicata come il vero regista che ha portato al potere il generale Min Aung Hlaing, e il veto posto in seno al Consiglio di Sicurezza dell'ONU della stessa Cina non fa altro che aumentare questi sospetti. È noto come la Cina stia attuando una strategia di egemonia globale sul piano commerciale, finanziario e militare, e l'accesso al Golfo del Bengala e all'Oceano Indiano via Myanmar rientra perfettamente in questo contesto.

La voluta mancanza di trasparenza sulla gestione del COVID a scapito di tutta l'economia globale, la repressione violenta di Hong Kong, la discutibile gestione dei diritti umani e il continuo atteggiamento aggressivo sul piano commerciale richiedono una risposta forte, coesa e rapida da parte di tutto l'Occidente.

L'Unione europea faccia sentire la propria voce. La democrazia in Myanmar non è solo un valore irrinunciabile per i birmani, ma è necessaria per la stabilità di tutto il continente asiatico e l'argine alle mire cinesi.

  Mazaly Aguilar (ECR). – Señora presidente, yo me uno a la condena unánime del golpe de Estado en Myanmar y le pido a la Unión Europea que no contribuya con su política comercial a apoyar y legitimar la violación sistemática de derechos fundamentales.

La Comisión debe revisar de manera inmediata la aplicación del sistema de preferencias generalizadas y paralizar la importación a la Unión Europea del arroz procedente de Myanmar. A muchos les parecerá anecdótico que yo pida esto y les parecerá también superficial, pero les aseguro que no lo es en absoluto.

Nuestros productores de arroz se arruinan porque la Unión Europea, a pesar de la cláusula de salvaguardia que está en vigor, sigue importando masivamente arroz de Camboya y Myanmar, mirando para otro lado cuando hay problemas con los derechos humanos o con el control aduanero.

Si la Comisión no reacciona en el plano comercial ante estas situaciones, que no se les ocurra pedir a nuestros agricultores confianza ciega en el Pacto Verde y en tanta palabrería hueca.

Si uno de los objetivos es buscar la sostenibilidad, yo pregunto: ¿qué es más sostenible, el arroz importado de Myanmar o el producido en la Unión Europea? Y creo que la respuesta es obvia.

PŘEDSEDNICTVÍ: DITA CHARANZOVÁ
místopředsedkyně

  Pernando Barrena Arza (The Left). – Madam President, we want to express our own concern about the last events in Myanmar, with special attention to the situation of ethnic and religious minorities, as well as ethnic armed groups and ethnic political parties in the sub—states of Myanmar, such as Shan, Karen, Chin, Rakhine, Kachin, Mon, and Karenni.

We condemn and oppose this coup and call on the international community to act in accordance, and not to allow a return of military rule in Myanmar. We call on the Tatmadaw of the Republic of the Union of Myanmar to show restraint, to release all the arrested individuals and facilitate confidence-building measures, as well as to respect the nationwide ceasefire agreement.

Once again, it is time to affirm that the will of the people must be respected and, therefore, we urge the military and the ethnic armed organisations to seek a solution through peaceful and inclusive discussions and negotiations.

  Paulo Rangel (PPE). – Senhora Presidente, Senhor Alto Representante a situação humanitária em Mianmar, na Birmânia, como se diria em português, é uma situação absolutamente deplorável. O golpe militar não é apenas uma rutura com a democracia limitada que existia no país, é de novo voltar ao pesadelo das violações sistemáticas de direitos humanos que os militares ao longo de décadas cometeram em todo o território.

Já não bastava a preocupação, mesmo num ambiente democrático limitado, com os direitos humanos da minoria roinja, que nunca foram totalmente garantidos nem pelos militares nem pelo governo democrático da Senhora Aung San Suu Kyi, a verdade é que agora este perigo e este risco estende-se a todos os habitantes deste país, sem exceção.

É por isso que nós temos que manifestar toda a solidariedade com o povo de Mianmar e temos que unir esforços com os nossos parceiros globais e regionais, designadamente o Japão, a Índia e, naturalmente, o Reino Unido e os Estados Unidos, para eventualmente também com a ASEAN exercer pressão sobre os militares no sentido do retorno à regularidade constitucional.

Há, porém, um ator sobre o qual a União Europeia tem instrumentos para atuar e que até aqui ninguém falou e é o elefante na sala que está ausente, a China. Estamos agora com o acordo de investimentos sobre a China também na nossa mesa de negociações, também na nossa mesa de execução, será talvez a altura de fazer pressão para que a China use de toda a sua influência que é conhecida sobre os militares da Birmânia para que estes cessem a rutura constitucional e devolvam a soberania ao povo birmanês.

  Nacho Sánchez Amor (S&D). – Señora presidenta, señor Borrell, hemos hablado en el debate sobre Rusia de Realpolitik y el lenguaje del poder. Tenemos que ser conscientes de que, por el momento, a la espera de lo que pueda dar de sí el sistema de sanciones por violaciones de los derechos humanos, uno de los instrumentos que tenemos para manejarnos en la política internacional es el comercio. Creo que para poner presión a los golpistas debemos recurrir a toda la panoplia de instrumentos que tenemos en nuestra caja de herramientas.

Yo le pido que también examine con la Comisión la conveniencia de utilizar el sistema de preferencias generalizadas. Y debo decir que comparto su preocupación por que podamos utilizarlo de manera poco sensible o poco equilibrada. Pero esa cláusula se introdujo en la legislación europea precisamente para casos como este. De tal manera que tenemos que encontrar un sistema en el que la Comisión encuentre una fórmula de ejercer presión sobre los militares que se han hecho con el poder y que, al mismo tiempo, de una manera paralela o accidental, también provoque una mejora en el sistema del comercio y de la producción de arroz dentro de la Unión Europea. Porque, como se ha dicho, la entrada masiva de arroz de Myanmar ha provocado una caída del arroz europeo, cuya proporción hace unos años era del 60 % y ahora es del 30 %. Por lo tanto, yo le pido, entendiendo sus reticencias a ese uso, que la Comisión no le cierre el camino, como le va a decir también la Resolución adjunta a este debate de esta tarde.

  Svenja Hahn (Renew). – Frau Präsidentin! Ein Fitnessvideo mit Militärputsch im Hintergrund. Das hat Meme-Potenzial. Das hat aber vor allem Myanmar in die Öffentlichkeit geholt.

Um den Demokratisierungsprozess steht das seit längerem nicht gut, auch an der zivilen Regierung gibt es berechtigte Kritik. Aber die Bevölkerung hat ihrer Meinung in Wahlen klar Ausdruck verliehen und geht jetzt friedlich auf die Straßen, demonstriert, streikt für Demokratie. Das Militär reagierte mit Putsch und Gewalt.

Die EU muss Konsequenzen ziehen: Unterstützung der geflüchteten Rohingya und anderer Minderheiten gemeinsam mit der UN, die Zugang ins Land braucht, Sanktionen gegen verantwortliche Militärs, Aussetzung des bevorzugten Zugangs zum EU-Binnenmarkt. Denn Voraussetzung für die Zusammenarbeit ist die Achtung von Menschenrechten.

Die EU ist noch keine diplomatische Macht. Wir sind aber eine ökonomische Macht. Und als drittgrößter Handelspartner Myanmars müssen wir den wirtschaftlichen Hebel ansetzen, damit eines Tages das zarte Pflänzchen Demokratie in Myanmar wachsen kann und nicht von Panzern überrollt wird.

  Rosanna Conte (ID). – Signora Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, in Myanmar la giunta militare ha imposto le leggi marziali per fermare le proteste in piazza. Si tratta dell'ultimo atto di un golpe che ha riacceso i riflettori internazionali sulla drammatica situazione del paese. Questo dimostra che il Myanmar è ancora lontano da quella transizione democratica che l'Unione europea ha decantato in questi anni.

La Commissione ha chiuso entrambi gli occhi pur di giustificare la sua diplomazia delle agevolazioni tariffarie, che ha fallito suo obiettivo alimentando una concorrenza sleale a danno delle nostre imprese. Lo dimostra l'invasione di riso birmano: solo in Italia l'import della varietà Japonica è schizzato sopra l'80 %, colpendo imprese e lavoratori europei di un comparto che è un'eccellenza mondiale.

Noi della Lega abbiamo più volte chiesto che l'Unione europea sospenda le agevolazioni. Non possiamo accettare che chi vìola i diritti umani e sfrutta i lavoratori addirittura abbia un canale privilegiato per fare affari in Europa. Basta! Il riso birmano è sporco di sangue. Agevolando il suo import, l'Europa diventa così complice di questo golpe.

  Andreas Schieder (S&D). – Frau Präsidentin, Herr Vizepräsident! Seit Jahrzehnten kämpft Myanmar um seine Demokratie mit dem Militär von Myanmar. Seit 2015 ist es endlich auf dem Weg zur Demokratie, und auch deshalb bin ich umso mehr entsetzt von dem Militärputsch, der letztens stattgefunden hat.

Unsere Solidarität gilt den demokratischen Kräften in Myanmar, und unsere Solidarität verlangt die sofortige Freilassung von Aung San Suu Kyi und allen anderen demokratischen Kräften, die jetzt unschuldig im Gefängnis sitzen.

Wir müssen auch wieder fordern, dass die demokratisch gewählten Parlamentarierinnen und Parlamentarier wiedereingesetzt werden und die Regierung, die demokratisch gewählt wurde, auch wiedereingesetzt wird. Die Militärs brechen die Verfassung von Burma. Dieser Putsch ist verfassungswidrig.

Was wir als Europäische Union als erste Maßnahme machen können, ist, die humanitäre Hilfe nicht mehr über die Hauptstadt abzuwickeln, sondern direkt über NGOs.

  Jytte Guteland (S&D). – Fru talman! Höga representanten Borell! Det har varit en mörk vecka för Myanmar som nu återigen styrs av den brutala militärjuntan. För fjärde dagen i rad samlas modiga människor i flera städer för att demonstrera. Demonstranterna har mötts av vattenkanoner med misstänkt förgiftat vatten. Skott ska också ha avlossats med okänt antal skadade eller döda.

Världen har med rätta fördömt juntans illegala maktövertagande. Nu måste EU göra allt som står i vår makt för att Myanmar snabbt ska återgå till ett demokratiskt styre, och samtidigt stödja de folkliga protester som nu äger rum, inklusive att fördöma alla försök att tysta eller skrämma demonstranter.

  Josep Borrell Fontelles, Vice-President of the Commission / High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy. – Madam President, it has been an interesting debate where some points have been put on the table and some issues may require an answer on my part.

Should the European Union not use or trigger the Everything But Arms (EBA) withdrawal procedure? The grave situation and the grave regression in human rights caused by the military coup – if not now, when? Some of you have asked that. But look, the EBA withdrawal is certainly a powerful instrument, which can foster positive change in partner countries. With Myanmar, it was actually delivering some, although limited, positive results, notably on social and labour rights. But the power of this instrument lies in the threat of the withdrawal – not in the withdrawal itself but in the threat, for example, in the process of monitoring before the actual decision is initiated.

But take care because the EBA is a blunt instrument. Inasmuch as it affects the economy or at least the economic sector widely, even if used to cover only some specific tariff lines, it is not the best suited to be applied surgically to target specific individuals, companies or business interests. In the case of Myanmar, the aim is to target military interests as they are responsible for the current situation, not the whole economy.

According to the information available, military interests are focused on sectors that would not be affected by EBA preferences. In fact, most of Myanmar’s exports under the EBA regime are in the clothing sector, which employs more than 500 000 workers, mostly female workers, poor people. If we take this decision, they will suffer, not the military. In sum, withdrawing the EBA preferences would hit Myanmar’s economy hard, putting half a million low skilled workers at risk of poverty and leaving military interests almost untouched. Is that what we want? No. So take care when you ask to use some elements of our toolbox.

Another issue that has been raised by honourable Members is how the European Union should review its policy towards Myanmar if the legitimate government is not restored. It’s a legitimate question but, at present, our policy has two short—term objectives. Let’s concentrate on them: the immediate and unconditional release of those jailed because of the coup and the development of some form of dialogue. That’s what we should be focusing on. The policy options I outlined in my intervention are aimed at driving change in the short term in order to avoid the military government becoming a fait accompli and it becoming impossible to get rid of them.

There have been other military rules in Myanmar and these previous military rules lasted over five decades – five decades, 50 years, half a century – despite strong sanctions from almost the entire world. This shows that sometimes sanctions don’t work. We have to avoid repeating this situation. Our key objective remains to restore dialogue.

Incidentally, the need for dialogue was also the key message given by the respected Cardinal Bo, and it’s clear that the current crisis emerged from the military’s reluctance to cede power to the civilian side, but also from the breakdown of all channels of dialogue between the civilian and the military.

Dialogue has to be restored. There are many people who believe that dialogue is bad and you should not talk with the bad people. Well, sometimes you have to talk with the bad people precisely because they are bad people.

If the situation does not change, we will reassess the situation and re—examine our toolbox, having in mind the same principles I outlined before: be strong to affect change, and be careful to avoid undue impact on the general population and the most vulnerable.

On the third issue, Ms Rookmaker asked me if I believe it’s good to coordinate with the US. Yes, for sure. In Myanmar we, the European Union, cannot seriously pretend to create the dynamics of change without coordination with the big powers, and the big powers there are the US, China and ASEAN.

From the outset, we, the European Union and our External Action Service and I, have been striving to coordinate this action and consult with as many relevant parties as possible. Naturally, we were closely involved in working with our G7 partners, but not only the traditional ones: the US, the UK, Canada, Norway and Australia. We also wanted to engage with other relevant stakeholders – India, China, ASEAN – and, in the case of the Rohingya crisis, the military coup in Myanmar is, first and foremost, a regional security issue. In addition to the humanitarian crisis, it’s a regional security issue and regional countries have the right and the duty to be first in line to respond.

But this response has not been overwhelming. China, as you could have expected, did not even qualify the event as a coup, but a major government reshuffle. A reshuffle – you know, they change the government and it’s just a reshuffle. ASEAN was not able to reach consensus on any statement and resorted to a statement of the Chair. I know that sometimes it is difficult to get an agreement and it is the Chair who has to take responsibility, but is not the same thing. Brunei, for example, with very toned down language, was in in fact agreeing with Myanmar. In ASEAN the principle of non—interference in the internal affairs of other countries prevails.

There were many other issues. I would be delighted to continue answering them, going deeply into the subject. For example, should we, the European Union and the Member States, recall our ambassadors from Myanmar? Yes, it would send a strong signal, but I do not favour recalling our ambassadors. It would cut our channels of communication at a moment where we should facilitate dialogue. Once again, don’t lose the possibility of keeping dialogue open, even with the evil. It would also reduce our capacity to appraise the situation on the ground and our ability to gather information, but this is something that has to be checked permanently in order to fine-tune our tools to the situation.

There are many issues. Why do we, the European Union, only deploy a small electoral mission instead of a fully-fledged observation mission? You know how important our electoral observation missions are and how much I praise the work that we are doing there. The civil servants of this House and the Members of this House engage in these kinds of activities. However, the COVID—19 pandemic and the strict lockdown in Myanmar prevented the deployment of a fully—fledged exploratory mission, which, as you know, is a prerequisite for the observation mission.

But we were nevertheless able to engage with all relevant stakeholders and they are finalising their report. Our reporter will very much take into account what is happening in Rakhine State. The elections where they are open to the participation of the Rohingya and to the Rakhine people, but the actual result would have most likely further eroded the share of the military—backed party, if they could participate fully.

In a nutshell, we have been a strong supporter of Myanmar’s democratic transition in the last 10 years. Yes, we had strong disagreements with the civilian government, notably after the 2017 events against the Rohingya, but we will not stop advocating for the return of the government and for holding the perpetrators of the worst human rights violations accountable. We are calling for national democracy to be upheld by Myanmar. With all its shortcomings, Myanmar remains a positive experiment in the region and we have to help them by acting strongly, quickly and in coordination with all our partners.

Thank you very much for your attention and thank you for holding this debate on something which is far away from us geographically but, once again, close to our minds and principles if we really want to be considered an institution that has human rights as the basis of its behaviour.

  President. – I have received six motions for resolutions* tabled in accordance with Rule 132(2) of the Rules of Procedure.

____________________

* See Minutes.

The debate is closed.

The vote will take place on Thursday, 11 February 2021.