Sumario: May 14, 2003: European Parliament - Situation in Iraq
Council and Commission statement on the situation in Iraq
Debate : 14.05.2003
Opening the debate on Iraq, Commissioner Poul NIELSON responsible for humanitarian aid outlined the humanitarian situation following his recent visit to Iraq. Since 1992, and prior to the latest conflict in Iraq, he said the EU had spent €157m on humanitarian aid in the country. This amount, he pointed out, was in addition to the "oil for food programme". The EU had now secured €100m for humanitarian aid post-war, €22.5m of that amount was now being spent on improving the water
and sanitation systems. The remaining €77.5m would be allocated according to needs.
The Commissioner said that a new ECHO office was being set up in Baghdad to manage some of the reconstruction projects and humanitarian aid. The office, he said, should be opened by the end of the month. The situation on the ground was not as bad as some experts had feared, he stated, but this did not mean that the situation could not deteriorate into a humanitarian disaster. He said it was the responsibility of the occupying powers to maintain law and order, but the EU's role on the ground was
the key due to its experience and financial clout. Turning to the debate in the UN over a draft resolution, he welcomed the return of the Iraqi question to the UN forum, but pointed out that the US/UK draft only gave the UN a consultative role on humanitarian aid and the future of Iraq. Overall, he said, the EU was well placed to deliver humanitarian aid successfully following its work in other areas of the world, such as the Ivory Coast, Afghanistan, East Timor and Kosovo.
After expressing his condemnation of the recent terrorist attacks in Saudi Arabia and Chechnya, Tassos GIANNITSIS, speaking on behalf of Council, acknowledged that there were still considerable difficulties to overcome in Iraq with regards to the reconstruction of the country. He emphasized the importance of putting together an alliance between the international community to deliver humanitarian aid and establish stability. In this sense, he drew attention to the $1.7bn allocated via the
UN to the reconstruction process, although he recognized that at the moment there was not a clear picture regarding Iraq's needs. He emphasized the EU's willingness to help the process and indeed said the "oil for food programme" had been extended to the end of June 2003. He then emphasized the importance of establishing political will between the EU states and the need for all sides to pull together. The EU, he said, will continue to play an important role and it was vital to ensure
that available funds will be used to the benefit of all Iraqi people.
Turning to the situation in the Middle East, he expressed optimism for the future in view of the new US initiative and indeed felt that there would be widespread repercussion throughout the Arab world in establishing a new climate of confidence.
He then drew conclusions from the recent events in Iraq and emphasized the importance of not only re-establishing a role for the UN but also for repairing relations between EU Member States so that the EU could play a positive role in any future international crisis.
For the EPP-ED group, Hans-Gert POETTERING (D) condemned the recent terrorist attacks in Saudi Arabia and Chechnya, stating that it was not terrorism against the US, but terrorism against all civilized people. He said the recent crisis in the international community should be considered as an opportunity for the EU to rebuild its foreign policy, not as an "antagonistic" opposition to the US, but as an equal partner. The key was to avoid the "old Europe new Europe" debate,
and after a recent trip to Warsaw he felt strongly that Poland would be joining its European friends on accession to the Union. He underlined the importance of avoiding a clash of religion and civilization. However, Mr. Pottering was critical of the US with regard to the lack of success in finding weapons of mass destruction.
Enrique BARÓN CRESPO (E), for the PES group, also condemned the attacks in Saudi Arabia and Chechnya. He also paid tribute to the 14 journalists who lost their lives during the Iraq conflict. He said it was "a shame" that the House had refused to agree a motion for a resolution, since he shared many of the views of the EPP-ED group. He agreed with Commissioner Nielson that there should be a clear distinction made between immediate humanitarian aid and the long-term reconstruction
of Iraq. He said the American inspectors searching for weapons of mass destruction in Iraq were acting outside international law. He also stressed that Iraqi oil belonged to the Iraqi people, and the revenue should be returned to the Iraqis.
For the Liberals, Graham WATSON (South West) emphasized the importance of the EU adopting a united position in its contribution to the rebuilding of Iraq. It was, he said, essential to put aside recent divisions so that the EU could contribute positively to establishing peace in the region along with the UN. Here he underlined the need to build on the present draft resolution before the UN to ensure that the UN would indeed play a key role and not just endorse the authority of the
occupying powers. This was also important in providing the basis for the removal of sanctions. He warned that Iraq was facing numerous crises with regard to the provision of water and electricity and that there was a need to establish law and order through a proper police force and restore the capacity of hospitals. At the same time, he welcomed the new US commitment to establishing peace in Israel and Palestine with the visit of Colin Powell.
Francis WURTZ (F), speaking for the EUL/NGL, on the other hand felt there was a need for the European Parliament to look seriously at the whole future of international relations in the wake of the new Bush doctrine. He expressed concern about recent developments in Iraq where, he said, joy after liberation had now been replaced by anger. It was also vital to establish peace in the Middle East with the EU developing its own policy here.
Jan Joost LAGENDIJK (NL), for the Greens, drew attention to the failure to discover weapons of mass destruction in Iraq and felt that the UN should be charged with this task. It was also important to look at the environmental consequences of, for example, the use of cluster bombs. He was another speaker to emphasize the importance of the EU playing a full part in the reconstruction of Iraq.
For the UEN, Gerard COLLINS (Munster) drew attention to the US commitment to establish a transitional civilian government in Iraq by the 3 June 2003 and indeed welcomed the draft resolution at present before the UN. It was vital for the UN to play a key role in the reconstruction of Iraq, he said, and indeed for the EU to make its own contribution. Sanctions should be lifted immediately and the International Atomic Energy Agency should be re-established in Iraq. It was important for the
oil revenues to be used for the reconstruction of the country. Indeed he felt without a key role for the UN, there would be an absence of international legitimacy for the future of the country.
Jens-Peter BONDE (DK), for the EDD group, stated that the EU had failed in international diplomacy during the Iraq conflict. He questioned the relevance of the EU's Rapid Reaction Force and said that it should be put under the control of the UN.
Jonathan EVANS (Wales), for the British Conservatives, paid tribute to the 172 soldiers who lost their lives during the conflict as well as all the military forces. He said for his group war had always been the last resort, but now rightly attention had turned to the stabilization of Iraq but this process was only possible due to Saddam's removal. He welcomed the so-called "road-map" to peace for the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. He said that the Iraqi conflict had proved that it
was impossible for the EU to speak with one voice, and he regretted those Member States who had tried to undermine the EU-US relationship, citing the recent summit of four Member States on defence policy. He said the transatlantic relationship should remain the "bedrock" of Western security.
Baroness Emma NICHOLSON (ELDR, South East) stated that she had recently spent 12 days in Iraq where she had the opportunity to listen to the Iraqi people. She said Iraqis were generally relishing their newfound freedom. She said the WHO and the UN were fully engaged in Iraq's reconstruction and she said that troops would have to remain on the ground to maintain law and order.
Gary TITLEY (North West), leader of the UK Labour group, stated that the debate had focussed too much on the past and on who was to blame, rather than looking to the future. He also said the debate had not recognized that the Iraqi people had been liberated and now there was a degree of religious tolerance in the country. He welcomed the draft UN resolution on post-war Iraq, which would lift sanctions against the country. He said that reconstruction could not be worked out completely in
Washington DC, but rather should be a "bottom-up" process involving the Iraqi people.
Patricia McKENNA (Greens/EFA, Dublin) said the Iraqi war had no justification and it contravened international law. She called for the UN weapons inspectors to return immediately to the country and condemned the fact that the US had been unable to uncover any weapons of mass destruction. She also said that, prior to the conflict, Iraq had a good education system open to boys and girls, and called for urgent assistance in re-establishing the education system in Iraq.
Proinsias DE ROSSA (PES, Dublin) stated that he had always opposed the war, and now he opposed the direction the US was taking post-conflict. He said that the world had to return to the rule of international law. He also said the EU would have to try to reconcile those who believe in a "multi-polar" world and those who believe in a "uni-polar" world.
John CUSHNAHAN (EPP-ED, Munster) also condemned the recent terrorist attack in Riyadh and offered his sympathies to the families of the victims. Rebuilding, he said was the key, "rebuilding Iraq, rebuilding the transatlantic relations and rebuilding partnerships within the EU." He welcomed a strong transatlantic relationship with the EU playing an equal role. He condemned those who wanted to see the EU as a junior partner and criticised some parts of the US administration for its
"anti-French hysteria. "
Jim NICHOLSON (EPP-ED, Northern Ireland) focused on Europe's relations with the USA, which he said were at an "all time low". He felt that both sides had tended to drift apart, concentrating on their own priorities, with the US preoccupied with terrorism post-9/11 and the EU concerned with the introduction of the euro and enlargement. Now was the time to put aside differences and concentrate on rebuilding a strong relationship "that would not crumble".
In his reply to the debate, Tassos Giannitsis felt the lessons to be drawn were the need for a strong Common Foreign and Security Policy. In the last few weeks, the Greek Presidency, he said, had been actively trying to find common ground between the Member States rather than focusing on differences.
In his response to the debate, Commissioner Nielson stated that the Parliament was in broad consensus over the reconstruction of Iraq agreeing that the UN should play a central role. He called on the EU's Member States to offer the Commission support and for qualified majority voting to be used for foreign policy decisions in the future.
| Arriba |
Estados Miembros de la Union Europea
Alertas por e-mail
Enviar por e-mail
Imprimir esta página