163 Amendments of Tobias PFLÜGER
Amendment 1 #
2008/2324(INI)
Proposal for a recommendation
Citation 1 a (new)
Citation 1 a (new)
– having regard to the advisory opinion of the International Court of Justice of 8 July 1996 on the Legality of the Threat or Use of Nuclear Weapons,
Amendment 13 #
2008/2324(INI)
Proposal for a recommendation
Recital A
Recital A
A. strongly concerned about the lack of progress in achieving concrete objectives (such as the so-called ‘13 steps’) in pursuit of the goals of the NPT Treaty, as agreed at the previous Review Conferences, especially now that threats are arising from a variety of sources, including increasing proliferation going hand in hand with the greater demand for, and availability of, nuclear technology, the potential for such technology and radioactive material to fall into the hands of criminal organisations and terrorists, and the reluctance of nuclear weapons States that are signatories to the NPT to reduce or eliminate their nuclear arsenals and decrease their adherence to a military doctrine of nuclear deterrence, as well as the maintenance by NATO of a nuclear first strike doctrine,
Amendment 20 #
2008/2324(INI)
Proposal for a recommendation
Recital A f (new)
Recital A f (new)
Af. being of the view that the ongoing deployment of nuclear weapons in the European Union is damaging the global efforts to prevent so-called rogue states from developing nuclear weapons,
Amendment 28 #
2008/2324(INI)
Proposal for a recommendation
Recital D a (new)
Recital D a (new)
Da. being of the view that the sharing of nuclear technology infringes the NPT,
Amendment 48 #
2008/2324(INI)
Proposal for a recommendation
Recital L c (new)
Recital L c (new)
Amendment 49 #
2008/2324(INI)
Proposal for a recommendation
Paragraph 1 – point a
Paragraph 1 – point a
(a) review and update Council Common Position 2005/329/PESC of 25 April 2005 relating to the 2005 Review Conference of the Parties to the Treaty on the Non- Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons, in preparation for a successful outcome at the 2010 NPT Review Conference; place emphasis on the legal obligation to pursue in good faith, and bring to a successful conclusion, negotiations leading to nuclear disarmament in all its aspects under strict and effective international control;
Amendment 72 #
2008/2324(INI)
Proposal for a recommendation
Paragraph 1 – point f
Paragraph 1 – point f
(f) establish a constructive dialogue with all countries possessing nuclear weapons on European territory, namely France, the United Kingdom, Germany and all countries taking part in nuclear sharing – as well as with NATO – with a view to making the European continent a nuclear- weapons-free zone, in accordance with Article VII of the NPT, well before the year 2020;
Amendment 73 #
2008/2324(INI)
Proposal for a recommendation
Paragraph 1 – point f
Paragraph 1 – point f
(f) establish a constructive dialogue with all countries possessing nuclear weapons on European territory, namely France and the United Kingdom – as well as with NATO – with a view to making the European continent a nuclear-weapons-free zone, in accordance with Article VII of the NPT, well before the year 2020;
Amendment 77 #
2008/2324(INI)
Proposal for a recommendation
Paragraph 1 – point f b (new)
Paragraph 1 – point f b (new)
(fb) continually reassess compliance with the NPT in the development of the European Security and Defence Policy;
Amendment 78 #
2008/2324(INI)
Proposal for a recommendation
Paragraph 1 – point f c (new)
Paragraph 1 – point f c (new)
(fc) continually reassess compliance with the NPT in the European Union's relations with NATO;
Amendment 82 #
2008/2324(INI)
Proposal for a recommendation
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Instructs its President to forward this recommendation to the Council and, for information, to the Commission, the UN Secretary-General, the President of the 2010 NPT Review Conference, the national parliaments of the EU Member States, the NATO Parliamentary Assembly, the NATO Secretary General, Parliamentarians for Nuclear Non- proliferation and Disarmament and Mayors for Peace.
Amendment 2 #
2008/2202(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
Amendment 13 #
2008/2202(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Notes that this policy has to combine the use of both civil and military assets and capabilities and necessitates close and seamless coopbe based on the principles of non violence, non intervention, the peaceful resolution of conflicts and the strict adherence to internation between all stakeholdersal law;
Amendment 22 #
2008/2202(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Stresses that transparency and cost- efficiency are crucial to ensure public support for European defencethat money is being spent in a rational way;
Amendment 26 #
2008/2202(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Considers that both the European Security Strategy and the NATO Strategic Concept are being reviewed at almost the same time, thus offering an opportunity to arrive at a coherent approach to the future security of EuropIs deeply concerned about the increasing cooperation between EU and NATO that is indicated by the fact that the review of the European Security Strategy and the NATO Strategic Concept are intertwined and do not just coincide;
Amendment 35 #
2008/2202(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Points out that until now, Member States have defined their security interests on a purely national basis while the notion of "European security interest", by contrast, is still politically taboo; considers this approach no longer acceptableStresses that the definition of "security interests" does not imply that military means are necessary in order to safeguard those interests;
Amendment 50 #
2008/2202(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8
Paragraph 8
8. Considers that the European Union has to define more clearly its ambitions concerning its role in the world; iIs of the opinion that the European Union should not try to become a superpower like the United States, but that it should instead guarantee its security and security in its neighbourhood and contribute to a multilateral global system of securityfocus on the peaceful resolution of conflicts based on the principles of non violence, non intervention and the strict adherence to international law; stresses that strengthening these principles will heavily contribute to a more peaceful world;
Amendment 69 #
2008/2202(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12
Paragraph 12
12. Demands the drawing up of a White Paper on European Security and Defence as a tool to ensure that the security strategy is implementedStresses that while military action violates the principles of non violence and non intervention, any effort to define, how security interests can be safeguarded via military means by White Paper on European Security and Defence are contrary to basic peace interests of the people in- an efficient wayd outside of the European Union;
Amendment 80 #
2008/2202(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13
Paragraph 13
13. Regrets that Russia’s disproportionate response to the outbreak of violence in the Caucasus and the recognition of South Ossetia and Abkhazia as independent statboth, Georgia's initial aggression by its attack on South Ossetia in particular and the form of Russia's response, have massively contributed to the violence in the Caucasus; stresses that secessions can only be in accordance with international law if all conflicting parties are endorsing them; stresses thave plunged the West’s relationship with Russia into a crisis; notes with concern that thist this is true for all conflicts no matter whether they are taking place in the Caucasus or anywhere else. Notes that Russia's recognition of South Ossetia and Abkhazia as independent states is a violation of international law, has severely damaged the Euro-Atlantic partnership with Russiawas the recognition of Kosovo by the majority of EU member states;
Amendment 85 #
2008/2202(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14
Paragraph 14
14. Notes that the European Union took concerted action on the Russian challenge; points out that the rapid reaction of the European Union, which led to the signing of a ceasefire agreement, has dem's further actions in the region should be based on strated its capacity for crisis management and common actionict neutrality;
Amendment 97 #
2008/2202(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15
Paragraph 15
15. Notes the concerns expressed by the Baltic states and requestbut stresses that any NATO efforts to draw up specific military plans for their defence region will further aggravate already existing conflicts with Russia;
Amendment 113 #
2008/2202(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19
Paragraph 19
19. Stresses that the European Union needs the means to implement its policies and hence it needs both civil andoes not need military capabilities to strengthen the European Security and Defence Policy and to fulfil its responsibilities in the world;
Amendment 122 #
2008/2202(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20
Paragraph 20
Amendment 127 #
2008/2202(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21
Paragraph 21
21. Points out that the EU Member States together spend more than EUR 200 billion per year on defence, which is more than half the defence expenditure of the United States; remains deeply concerned about the lack of efficiency and coordination in using those funds; urges therefore stronger efforts in eliminating unnecessary duplication between Member States; stresses that this amount should be spend entirely for development aid and capacities for the peaceful resolution of conflicts and advocates to cut all resources from the defence sector;
Amendment 135 #
2008/2202(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 22
Paragraph 22
22. Stresses that although capability needs are often technologically very similar or even identical for armed forces operations, border surveillance, protection of critical infrastructure and disaster management; stresses that this creates new opportunities to exploit synergies and enhanc, this must not lead to the blurring of the linteroperability between armed forces and security forces between civilian and military capabilities;
Amendment 136 #
2008/2202(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 23
Paragraph 23
Amendment 143 #
2008/2202(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 24
Paragraph 24
24. Considers it necessary to allow the use of Galileo and GMES for security and defence purposesStresses that as long as Galileo is paid for by civilian budgets this prohibits any military use of the system according to the Treaty of Nice;
Amendment 149 #
2008/2202(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 25
Paragraph 25
Amendment 152 #
2008/2202(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 26
Paragraph 26
26. Is of the opinion that the capacity of the European Union for autonomous foreign and security policy action should be improved through goal-oriented enhancement of its analysis, planning, leadership and intelligence capacitiesStresses that the European Union should not conduct military operations, no matter whether they are conducted autonomously or together with NATO;
Amendment 156 #
2008/2202(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 27
Paragraph 27
Amendment 161 #
2008/2202(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 28
Paragraph 28
Amendment 167 #
2008/2202(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 29
Paragraph 29
29. Demands an increase in Community funding for security research andfor the creation of joint research programmes involving the Commission and the EDApeaceful resolution of conflicts;
Amendment 170 #
2008/2202(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 30
Paragraph 30
30. ConsiderStresses that the United States' ballistic missile defence system has important implications for Europe, as the subsystems based in the Czech Republic and Poland could also be used to protect parts of Europe; points out thatshould not be built and notes with concern that it could further deepen the crisis between Russia and the West; Notes that although NATO has decided in Bucharest to complement this protection by additional elements; is of the opinion that it is necessary to make sure that European interests are safeguarded as regards the force structure, command and control and participation in research and developmentexplore whether it is possible to complement the US-shield by additional elements; Notes that NATO commissioned a Missile Defence feasibility study which is still classified; Stresses that this study should be made publicly available; Stresses that as this feasibility study was conducted by large armaments firms, an alternative study should be commissioned which should be produced by civilian experts with no direct ties to the military or the armaments industry;
Amendment 180 #
2008/2202(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 31
Paragraph 31
Amendment 188 #
2008/2202(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 32
Paragraph 32
Amendment 6 #
2008/2197(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital A
Recital A
A. whereas the EU and NATO are founded on shared values such as freedom, democracy, human rightsall military alliances such as NATO are by their nature exclusive and therefore create front lines between members and non-members, and twhe rule of law, and throughout their existence have well served the cause of peacereas every effort to strengthen them increases the potential for international conflicts,
Amendment 26 #
2008/2197(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital E
Recital E
E. whereas NATO isalthough NATO is currently the forum for discussion and the expected choice for a military operation involving the European and American Allies, the ultimate responsibility for peace and security lies with the United Nations,
Amendment 32 #
2008/2197(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital F
Recital F
F. whereas NATO as a whole imilitary alliances npot engaged in ESDP operations; whereas the EU, in undertaking such an operation, will choose whether or not to have recourse to NATO assets and capabilities, through the so-called "Berlin plus arrangements"tially increase the potential for international conflict, and every effort to strengthen NATO via improved NATO-EU cooperation or by enlarging the alliance is counterproductive; whereas, instead, the best contribution to peace and security would be to find ways to dissolve NATO as soon as possible,
Amendment 33 #
2008/2197(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital G
Recital G
Amendment 36 #
2008/2197(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital H
Recital H
Amendment 37 #
2008/2197(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital I
Recital I
Amendment 43 #
2008/2197(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital J
Recital J
Amendment 48 #
2008/2197(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital K
Recital K
K. whereas an important element of the EU-NATO relationship is support for national efforts to develop and deliver military capabilities for crisis management in a mutually reinforcing way, which for its part enhances the primary task of safeguarding the territorial defence and security interests of memberthe ongoing operations in Kosovo (by KFOR) and Afghanistan underscore the impossibility of resolving conflicts by means of military intervention, and whereas NATO should refrain from using force in order to intervene in third countries,
Amendment 49 #
2008/2197(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital L
Recital L
Amendment 52 #
2008/2197(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital M
Recital M
M. whereas our collective defence is based on a combination of conventional and nuclear forces adapted over the years to correspond to a rapidly changing environment; whereas the ultimate guarantor of military security for the Allies is the strategic nuclear forces of the Allianceas long as nuclear weapons exist, there will always be the danger that conflicts could escalate into atomic war,
Amendment 64 #
2008/2197(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Underlines that the raison d'être of the European Union is to build peace; notes that an ineffective securityIs concerned about the report entitled “Towards a Grand Strategy for an Uncertain World", written by former senior military officials of the Alliance such as Klaus Naumann, which calls for a "first strike" using nuclear weapons, even against non-nuclear strategy or security policy leads to unnecessary human sufferings; is worried that senior European official Robert Cooper has endorsed this idea; proposes that nuclear "first strikes" should not be part of the Alliance’s military strategy;
Amendment 73 #
2008/2197(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Therefore calls on the EU to extend the missions of the European Security and Defence Policy so as to prevent conflicts, promote stability and bring relief to where it is needed, subject to a common consensus between EU Member StaIs concerned about the decision at the NATO summit in Bucharest to accelerate plans to build up a NATO missile defence system; regards the planned missile system as an offensive and not a defensive system, because it would make a counter- strike impossible; understands the reasons why Russia feels threatened by the plans in that regard; proposes the abandonment of plans to build up such a costly and potentially seriously destabilising systesm;
Amendment 80 #
2008/2197(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
Amendment 90 #
2008/2197(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
Amendment 94 #
2008/2197(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
Amendment 101 #
2008/2197(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
Amendment 112 #
2008/2197(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
7. Underlines that this is still more important in the light of recent events in the Caucasus, new developments in the approach to NATO in Europe, the change of leadership in the United States of America and the start of the work on reviewing thee importance of reviewing NATO’s strategic concept; urges all concerned, in light of the problems arising from the recent military interventions, to abstain from operations falling within the ambit of Article 5 of the NATO Treaty; is concerned that the document entitled “Towards a Grand Strategy” proposes the abolition of the consensus principle in nearly all NATO bodies; proposes that this should not form part of the new strategic concept of NATO;
Amendment 114 #
2008/2197(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8
Paragraph 8
8. Is of the view that both NATO and the ESDP should endorse as their long-term and common goal a commitment to building a safer world, for the inhabitants of their member states and in general, and should also actively prevent and react to mass atrocities and regional conflicts which continue to cause much human suffering; stresses that all those reactions must be adopted in strict accordance with international law; is concerned about the proposals, contained in the document entitled “Towards a Grand Strategy”, to use force without a mandate from the UN Security Council; stresses that this is a flagrant violation of international law;
Amendment 120 #
2008/2197(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9
Paragraph 9
Amendment 131 #
2008/2197(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10
Paragraph 10
Amendment 142 #
2008/2197(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11
Paragraph 11
Amendment 146 #
2008/2197(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12
Paragraph 12
Amendment 158 #
2008/2197(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13
Paragraph 13
Amendment 167 #
2008/2197(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14
Paragraph 14
Amendment 172 #
2008/2197(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15
Paragraph 15
Amendment 178 #
2008/2197(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16
Paragraph 16
Amendment 185 #
2008/2197(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17
Paragraph 17
Amendment 190 #
2008/2197(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18
Paragraph 18
Amendment 196 #
2008/2197(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19
Paragraph 19
Amendment 205 #
2008/2197(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20
Paragraph 20
Amendment 209 #
2008/2197(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21
Paragraph 21
21. Is of the view that, in addition to the need for more efficient use of military resources, the need for more investment in defence at Member State level is essential in order to support the efforts to build effective EU-NATO cooperation and action; notes that the United States called on European NATO members during the NATO Bucharest Summit to increase their defence investments so as to support both NATO and EU operations; notes also the significant difference in numbers, as well as in effectiveness of defence spending, between European members of NATO and the U.S.; calls on the EU to commit itself to fairer global burden- sharinglight of the current financial crisis, it is not possible to further increase military spending, and that, instead, funds must be re-allocated and switched from defence to measures to stimulate the economy, in order to cope with this crisis;
Amendment 217 #
2008/2197(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 22
Paragraph 22
Amendment 222 #
2008/2197(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 23
Paragraph 23
Amendment 229 #
2008/2197(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 24
Paragraph 24
Amendment 234 #
2008/2197(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 25
Paragraph 25
Amendment 243 #
2008/2197(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 26
Paragraph 26
26. Welcomes the fact that, at the NATO summit held in Bucharest, the Allies recognised the value that a stronger and more capable European defence brings, and that the Alliance reconfirmed its commitment to continue enlargement; regrets that at the same summit the Allies postponed the NATO Membership Action Plan for Georgia and Ukraine, when instead continued support should be given to the democratisation process of Ukraine in the spirit of the Orange Revolution; notes that for many European Neighbourhood Policy countries, and with a view to their democratic development, the open-door policy which stems from the very founding principles of the EU is of the utmost importanceStresses that, especially in the light of the serious crisis with Russia, any further enlargement of NATO, particularly to include Ukraine and Georgia, is irresponsible; considers that this also applies to plans to enlarge the Partnership for Peace programme, which is a vehicle for NATO membership, and to “Global NATO”, the plan to incorporate non- European democracies into the alliance, thereby creating some sort of anti-NATO;
Amendment 254 #
2008/2197(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 27
Paragraph 27
Amendment 262 #
2008/2197(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 28
Paragraph 28
Amendment 6 #
2008/2157(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 b (new)
Paragraph 1 b (new)
1b. Stresses that the operations of Frontex have the aim of protecting the EU, conceived as an 'area of security, freedom and justice', against immigration, that a border area is coming into existence which lacks security, freedom and justice and where on the contrary extraterritorial camps exist, a border area where militarised border control units hunt migrants, where a right to asylum only nominally exists and where every day people die who have set out for Europe;
Amendment 10 #
2008/2157(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 a (new)
Paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. Stresses furthermore that the existence of, and the operations carried out to date by, Frontex have done much to further promote the process of deterritorialisation, as a result of which the 'borders' of the European Union are in effect being redefined, and that this process urgently needs to be halted;
Amendment 14 #
2008/2157(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 a (new)
Paragraph 3 a (new)
3a. Considers there to be an urgent need to terminate the operational cooperation which Frontex undertakes with border control forces and the far-reaching cooperation with domestic authorities, transport undertakings, consulates, embassies, etc., which is accompanied by a veritable exchange of data;
Amendment 22 #
2008/2157(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 b (new)
Paragraph 4 b (new)
4b. Considers it proven that Frontex's practices hamper rescue operations at sea, systematically deny rights guaranteed by the Geneva Convention relating to the Status of Refugees and thus condemn people to death;
Amendment 27 #
2008/2157(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 a (new)
Paragraph 5 a (new)
5a. Considers it necessary, for the above reasons, to close Frontex down as soon as possible and proposes that the funding so released be used for programmes of aid to refugees and to legalise the status of 'illegal' immigrants living in the Member States;
Amendment 30 #
2008/2157(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
Amendment 1 #
2008/2120(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 0 a (new)
Paragraph 0 a (new)
0a. Recalls that the Lisbon Treaty cannot enter into force unless it is ratified in all Member States;
Amendment 2 #
2008/2120(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 0 b (new)
Paragraph 0 b (new)
0b. Notes that the drift towards militarisation in the EU was an important reason for the rejection of the Lisbon Treaty in Ireland;
Amendment 14 #
2008/2097(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Considers it vitally important that causes of instability only be tackled by development measures that are in accordance with the Millennium Development Goals and other social and economic measures aimed at eliminating poverty and fostering economic and social development that can create the environment required to prevent the resurgence of conflict; regrets the impossibility of achieving the MDG commitments and the fact that in many of those instances there has been a deterioration, especially as regards those related to education and health (malaria, HIV and infant and maternal mortality);
Amendment 29 #
2008/2097(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Deplores the fact that light arms account for 9 out of 10 deaths in armed conflicts in Africa; considers that EU policy on controlling the export of weapons should be clear, effective and harmonised on the basis of the legally binding Code of Conduct; believes that the adoption of a joint position on arms exports could make a contribution in this direction;
Amendment 49 #
2008/2097(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
7. Points out that there should be no military component to development aiddevelopment aid should not be used for military purposes and that the aid should always be in accordance with international law and in line with the United Nations; notes with interest the experience of the United Nations Peacebuilding Commission; expresses its concern at the current approach adopted by donors who do not take local views into account but work on the basis of Western models; considers that African solutions should be applied to African problems.
Amendment 3 #
2008/2055(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Recalls the Commission's undertaking to present, within the framework of the review, an evaluation of the situation of Heading 4, and urges the Commission to propose, on this basis, short-term solutions within the current MFF as well as options for the new MFF, which would financially reinforce Heading 4 and remove its chronic under-financing, thus enabling the European Union to meet its non-military external action obligations;
Amendment 5 #
2008/2055(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Points in particular – given the character of actions to be financed under Heading 4 – to the need to establish a flexibility mechanism which would enable the EU to react to unforeseen situations without weakening the funding for ongoing policies and programmes in the civilian external affairs area and while fully respecting the rights of the budgetary authority;
Amendment 7 #
2008/2055(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Points to the challenges faced by the EU in the area of energy security and urges the Commission to envisage adequate political means allowing the EU to mitigate its vulnerability in this area;
Amendment 8 #
2008/2055(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 a (new)
Paragraph 6 a (new)
6a. Considers that DCI funds should be used exclusively for development purposes;
Amendment 9 #
2008/2055(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 8
Paragraph 8
8. Underlines, with a view to the preparation of the new MMF, that any sustainable review of expenditure has to be closely linked to the reform of revenue, so as to furnish the European Union with necessary means to fulfil itsexclusively its non-military role and to meet the challenges lying ahead; is of the view that the next financial framework should run concurrently with the Commission's and the Parliament's mandates, so as to strengthen its democratic legitimacy;
Amendment 1 #
2008/2030(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Notes the importancEmphasises that the use of the space dimension to the security of the European Union and the need for a common approach necessary for exerting European sovereignty in spacmust serve exclusively non-military purposes; rejects any direct or indirect military use;
Amendment 12 #
2008/2030(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10
Paragraph 10
10. Underlines the necessity of Galileo for autonomous ESDP operations, for the Common Foreign and Security Policy (CFSP) and for Europe’s own security; notes that, in particular, its public- regulated service will be vital in the field of navigation, positioning and timing, not least in order to avoid unnecessary risks; welcomes the agreement on the public financing of the project from the budget of the European Unionat Galileo is an exclusively non-military project;
Amendment 1 #
2008/2026(BUD)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Reiterates that, in order to enable the European Union to meet its external action obligations and to play an active role in facing global challenges, sufficient funds need to be allocated there should be no further increase of allocations for external action in the EU budget;
Amendment 2 #
2008/2026(BUD)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
Amendment 3 #
2008/2026(BUD)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Takes note of the pledge made by the Commission at the Donors' Conference for Kosovo to donate a total ofIs concerned about the EUR 508 million in order to support Kosovo's institution- building and socio-economic development, consisting of EUR 358 million under the Instrument for Pre- Accession Assistance and EUR 150 million in macro-financial assistance over the next three years; is waiting for the amending letter of the Commission on this issue to be presented this autumnunilateral declaration of independence; is especially worried about the EUR 358 million under the Instrument for Pre- Accession Assistance; calls for an end to the EU funding for the EULEX-Kosovo mission which is not in compliance with international law;
Amendment 6 #
2008/2026(BUD)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
7. Reaffirms its support for the implementation of a deepened and differentiated European Neighbourhood Policy; underlines the need to provide the European Neighbourhood and Partnership Instrument (ENPI) with an adequate financial envelope reflecting the EU´s commitment vis-à-vis its east European and southern neighbours; notes the modest increase in appropriations envisaged for 2009, andCriticises the use of the European Neighbourhood Policy in boosting geostrategic and geopolitical interests of the EU and Member States; emphasises that it is important that the ENPI should not be used to encourage further tensions and conflicts in Europe; stresses that the recent initiative entitled “Barcelona Process: Union for the Mediterranean” must neither hinder the efforts to establish a balance between the commitment appropriations for the eastern and southern European neighbours nor in any case increase the budgetary tensions within the ENPI;
Amendment 1 #
2008/2025(BUD)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Underlines that, in order to enable the European Union to meet its civilian external action obligations and to play an active role in facing global challenges, sufficient funds need to be allocated in the EU budget;
Amendment 2 #
2008/2025(BUD)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Is disappointed by the share of appropriations envisaged for Heading 4 under the Commission's Preliminary Draft Budget (PDB) 2009 and by the fact that, while the EU´s civilian international obligations are increasing, the growth in commitment appropriations with regard to the 2008 budget is below the rate of inflation for the same period;
Amendment 4 #
2008/2025(BUD)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Is aware of the limits of the financial framework 2007-2013; therefore urges the Commission and the Council to take the increasing role of the EU as civilian global player duly into account when preparing the review of the EU financial framework;
Amendment 6 #
2008/2025(BUD)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Is concerned byNotes the fact that the appropriations envisaged for Kosovo, particularly under the Common Foreign and Security Policy (CFSP) and the Instrument for Pre- Accession Assistance (IPA), in the PDB 2009, which are lower than the funding provided for in the adopted 2008 budget; asks the Commission and the Council to inform Parliament about funding absorbed out of the 2008 budget, given; is concerned about the current situation on the ground and probable delays inthe deployment of the European Union Rule of Law Mission in Kosovo (EULEX); urges the Commission to re- assess on this basis the requirements in respect of Kosovo's institution-building and socio-economic developmentstop the deployment of the mission in Kosovo which is non-legal according to international law, and ofasks the EU's contribution to the international presence there in 2009Commission not to fund any missions contrary to international law out of the 2009 budget;
Amendment 9 #
2008/2025(BUD)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
7. Welcomes the increase of appropriations envisaged for the Western Balkan countries under the institution-building component of the IPA, and in particular the Commission’s intention to step up the provision of additional scholarships and to increase funding for civil society dialogue; asks the Commission to support the Social Agenda for the Balkans and to include only countries recognised by all EU Member States;
Amendment 12 #
2008/2025(BUD)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 8
Paragraph 8
8. Reaffirms its support for democracy and human rights as key elements of the EU's foreign policy; is concerned, however, about the instrumentalisation of human rights in order to prepare military interventions and regime change; notes with satisfaction the increase, albeit modest, in funding for the European Instrument for Democracy and Human Rights (EIDHR), including that allocated for electoral observation, and stresses that this amount provided for in the PDB 2009 should be preserved as a minimum;
Amendment 15 #
2008/2025(BUD)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 8 a (new)
Paragraph 8 a (new)
8a. Reiterates that Latin America and the Caribbean is a priority region for the European Union, a fact that should be borne in mind when defining the appropriations envisaged in the 2009 PDB; points out that the European Union must take into account that the Association Agreements being discussed as well as all the relations with the region should not increase the vulnerability and dependence of these economies, should promote regional integration based on the right to free determination of the peoples of Latin America and the Caribbean, and should have every regard for the environment, human rights, and for the democratic processes led by their governments;
Amendment 18 #
2008/2025(BUD)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 10
Paragraph 10
10. Notes the increase in funding proposed for the Instrument for Stability; emphasises that the criteria for allocating funds under that instrument need to be further developed, in order to make them more transparent and to ensure that resources are used exclusively for civil purposes and channelled in a consistent way to real priorities; reiterates that Parliament is to be involved in the development and specification of the relevant criteria;
Amendment 20 #
2008/2025(BUD)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 12
Paragraph 12
12. Disapproves of the proposed increase in funding in respect of European Union Special Representatives (EUSRs), particularly since Parliament is yet to be involved in the process of creating new EUSR positions, setting their mandates and appointing the EUSRs; stresses that the Lisbon Treaty will enable the EU institutions to search for synergy between Commission delegations and Council EUSRs (double-hatting), thus avoiding duplication of tasks, improving coordination and increasing the effectiveness of the EU´s external action;
Amendment 22 #
2008/2025(BUD)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 14
Paragraph 14
14. Reiterates in this context its request for the conclusion of an inter-institutional agreement between Parliament and the Council defining, on the basis of the Treaty of Lisbon, their working relations in the field of external action, including the sharing of confidential information;
Amendment 23 #
2008/2025(BUD)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 16
Paragraph 16
16. Notes that the Commission proposes to reinforce the Thematic Programme for the Environment and Sustainable Management of Natural Resources including Energy; reiterates the need to build up a common external energy policy, and asks the Commission to inform Parliament about funding envisaged in the 2009 budget for the realisation of Trans-European Energy Networks (TEN-E) priority projects aimed at strengthening the EU´s energy security.
Amendment 1 #
2008/2003(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
Amendment 4 #
2008/2003(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Welcomes the signature of the Lisbon Treaty, which will introduce major innovations in the field of ESDP, in particular by strengthening the office of High Representative, establishing a European External Action Service, introducing an article on mutual defence assistance, a solidarity clause and permanent structured cooperation in the field of defence; urges all Member States to ratify the Lisbon Treaty as quickly as possible; is of the opinion that the European Parliament and national parliaments should jointly debate these innovations; points out that Parliament will uphold its responsibilities under the current Treaty and will closely monitor the implementation of any new innovations;
Amendment 5 #
2008/2003(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. WelcomesTakes note of the signature of the Lisbon Treaty, which will introduce major innovations in the field of ESDP, in particular by strengthening the office of High Representative, establishing a European External Action Service, introducing an article on mutual defence assistance, a solidarity clause and permanent structured cooperation in the field of defence; urges all Member States to ratify the Lisbon Treaty as quickly as possible; is of the opinion that the European Parliament and national parliaments should jointly debate these innovations; points out that Parliament will uphold its responsibilities under the current Treaty and will closely monitor the implementation of any new innovations;
Amendment 7 #
2008/2003(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
Amendment 14 #
2008/2003(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Invites the High Representative to assess in a White Paper the progress made, and any shortcomings, in the implementation of the ESS since 2003, including lessons learned from ESDP operations; the link between external and internal aspects of security (the fight against terrorism); the protection of borders and critical infrastructure including protection against cyber-attacks; the security of energy supply as a challenge facing civilian, economic, technical and diplomatic efforts; unsolved regional disputes in the EU's neighbourhood, e.g. in Transnistria, Abkhazia, South Ossetia and Nagorno- Karabakh; humanitarian and security challenges on the African continent; and the consequences of climate change and natural disasters for civil protection and human security;
Amendment 16 #
2008/2003(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Invites the High Representative to include in that White Paper proposals for improving and complementing the ESS, such as the definition of common European security interests and criteria for the launching of ESDP missions; invites him further to define new targets for civilian and military capabilities (including structures for command and control, and transportation for all European actors in crisis management for both ESDP and disaster relief purposes) and to reflect on the implications of the Lisbon Treaty with regard to ESDP and proposals for a new EU-NATO partnership;
Amendment 21 #
2008/2003(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Is of the opinion that such a White Paper should be the basis for a wider public political debatea wider public political debate on the future plans for the military component of EU policy is urgently needed; underlines that a future assessment of the ESS should be made in close consultation with all EU institutions including the European Parliament and national parliaments;
Amendment 30 #
2008/2003(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9 a (new)
Paragraph 9 a (new)
9a. Calls for a clear definition of the military, civil and policing missions of the EU;
Amendment 31 #
2008/2003(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9 b (new)
Paragraph 9 b (new)
9b. Recognises 3 kinds of ESDP missions in the way the ESDP operates: civil, policing and military;
Amendment 32 #
2008/2003(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9 c (new)
Paragraph 9 c (new)
9c. Urges that a clear distinction be made between the three different ESDP missions; combined civil and military missions lead to a lack of clarity, particularly regarding financing;
Amendment 33 #
Amendment 36 #
2008/2003(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10
Paragraph 10
10. AcknowledgNotes Member States' efforts to make personnel available for civilian ESDP missions in the areas of civil protection, monitoring, EUSR support and mission support; notes, however, continued shortfalls in the areas of police, the rule of law and civilian administration;
Amendment 43 #
2008/2003(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14
Paragraph 14
Amendment 52 #
2008/2003(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16
Paragraph 16
16. Recalls the importance of human rights and gender mainstreaming, and calls for the nomination of more female candidates for CFSP/ESDP senior management positions, including for EU Special Representatives as well as for ESDP operations in general;
Amendment 59 #
2008/2003(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19
Paragraph 19
Amendment 67 #
2008/2003(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20
Paragraph 20
20. Notes the revelations of the U.S. intelligence services about the Iranian military and civilian nuclear programmes; regards these findings as a confirmation of the two-track approach, strongly advocated by the EU, designed to persuade Iran diplomatically to comply fully with the IAEA and abandon the potential military use of the civilian programme in a credible and controllable way; concludes that the lack of cooperation with the IAEA in the past justifies suspicion about Iran’s potential to build nuclear weapons within the space of a few years; is of the view that the combination of incentives and UN sanctions in the case of non-compliance are the only way forward, thus excluding any military option;
Amendment 73 #
2008/2003(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 22
Paragraph 22
Amendment 75 #
2008/2003(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 23
Paragraph 23
Amendment 78 #
2008/2003(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 24
Paragraph 24
Amendment 81 #
2008/2003(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 25
Paragraph 25
Amendment 82 #
2008/2003(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 26
Paragraph 26
Amendment 85 #
2008/2003(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 28
Paragraph 28
Amendment 87 #
2008/2003(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 29
Paragraph 29
Amendment 89 #
2008/2003(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 30
Paragraph 30
Amendment 90 #
2008/2003(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 31
Paragraph 31
Amendment 91 #
2008/2003(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 32
Paragraph 32
Amendment 94 #
2008/2003(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 33
Paragraph 33
33. Regrets that the establishment of the EDA came too late to prevent the emergence of three different national programmes on the unmanned air vehicle instead of a single European one, thus enabling some companies to engage in more than one project and thereby to pocket taxpayers’ money several times over, leaving the EDA with no option but to work on the insertion of unmanned aerial vehicles into the regulated airspace; expresses its preference for single European satellite projects, whether in the fields of intelligence or communication;
Amendment 96 #
2008/2003(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 34
Paragraph 34
Amendment 99 #
2008/2003(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 35
Paragraph 35
Amendment 100 #
2008/2003(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 36
Paragraph 36
36. Points out that the growing role of the EU, in particular through ESDP civilian missions, is creating a demand for an ever-increasing CFSP budgetCFSP budget is steadily increasing, and hence demands a greater and more timely flow of information from the Council, so as to enable Parliament to prepare its decisions on the annual budget;
Amendment 103 #
2008/2003(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 38
Paragraph 38
38. Calls on the Council to initiate a dialogue with Parliament on the possibility of transferring the Athena mechanism to the CFSP budget while retaining the flexibility provided by Athenaput an end to the Athena mechanism;
Amendment 105 #
2008/2003(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 40
Paragraph 40
40. Points out that the European Parliament, through its contacts with the national parliaments (Conference of Foreign Affairs Committee Chairs, Conference of Defence Committee Chairs, NATO Parliamentary Assembly) and through the future implementation of the Protocol to the Lisbon Treaty on the role of national parliaments, is the legitimate body at European level in which scrutiny, monitoring and control of ESDP should take place in the first instance;
Amendment 108 #
2008/2003(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 41
Paragraph 41
41. Stresses that Parliament should continue to adopt a recommendation or resolution prior to the launch of any ESDP operation (including the launch of a Battle Group), in close consultation with national parliaments, in order to impart democratic legitimacy to the operation in queshave a European Parliament position available before an ESDP operation; is of the opinion that, in order to ensure flexibility when Parliament is not in plenary session, its Rules should be adapted with a view to authorising its responsible committee to adopt that recommendation or resolution on its behalf;
Amendment 111 #
2008/2003(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 42
Paragraph 42
42. Asks the Council to include a reference to the recommendation or resolution adopted by Parliament in the Joint Action authorising an ESDP operation, thus demonstrating that the Council is seeking additional democratic legitimacy for its external actions through parliamentary decisions;
Amendment 112 #
2008/2003(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 43
Paragraph 43
Amendment 117 #
2008/2003(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 43 a (new)
Paragraph 43 a (new)
43a. Calls for an end to any military component of the European Union; only a genuinely civilian European Union is a credible player;
Amendment 119 #
2008/2003(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital B
Recital B
B. whereas in 2007 and early 2008 further developments in the field of ESDP capabilities and the implementation of the ESS were achievsteps towards developing a military component of the European Union were completed, including:
Amendment 120 #
2008/2003(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital C b
Recital C b
C.b. delivery delays and rising costs concerning the much needed long-range airlift capacity in the form of the Airbus A400M military transport aircraft;
Amendment 123 #
2008/2003(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital C – point f
Recital C – point f
Amendment 128 #
2008/2003(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Citation 7
Citation 7
Amendment 59 #
2008/0224(CNS)
Proposal for a regulation – amending act
Annex – point 3
Annex – point 3
Regulation No 31 (EEC), 11 (EAEC)
Chapter 3 – Article 128 – paragraph 2 – point c
Chapter 3 – Article 128 – paragraph 2 – point c
Amendment 66 #
2008/0224(CNS)
Proposal for a regulation – amending act
Annex – point 3
Annex – point 3
Regulation No 31 (EEC), 11 (EAEC)
Chapter 3 – Article 130 – paragraph 1
Chapter 3 – Article 130 – paragraph 1
1. Before being engaged, a parliamentary assistant shall provide evidence of physical fitness toundertake a medical test at the European Parliament’´s medical service in order that the European Parliament may be satisfied that he fulfils the requirements of Article 128 (2)(d). A negative outcome of the medical test shall not automatically result in that person not being engaged by the European Parliament as a parliamentary assistant.
Amendment 69 #
2008/0224(CNS)
Proposal for a regulation – amending act
Annex – point 3
Annex – point 3
Regulation No 31 (EEC), 11 (EAEC)
Chapter 3 – Article 131 – paragraph 1
Chapter 3 – Article 131 – paragraph 1
1. The contracts of parliamentary assistants shall be concluded for a fixed periodn unlimited period, expiring at the end of the mandate of the Member or Members concerned. On an exceptional basis contracts can be concluded for a fixed period of no less than 12 months. Without prejudice to Article 140, the contracts shall expire at the latest by the end of the parliamentary term during which they were concluded.
Amendment 77 #
2008/0224(CNS)
Proposal for a regulation – amending act
Annex – point 3
Annex – point 3
Regulation No 31 (EEC), 11 (EAEC)
Chapter 4 – Article 132 – paragraph 2
Chapter 4 – Article 132 – paragraph 2
2. Assistants may not be required to work overtime except in the event of an emergency or in exceptional workloadcircumstances.
Amendment 79 #
2008/0224(CNS)
Proposal for a regulation – amending act
Annex – point 3
Annex – point 3
Regulation No 31 (EEC), 11 (EAEC)
Chapter 4 – Article 132 – paragraph 3
Chapter 4 – Article 132 – paragraph 3
3. However, oOvertime worked by parliamentary assistants classified as grade 4 or lower on the salary scale shall carry nothe right to compensation or remuneration.
Amendment 85 #
2008/0224(CNS)
Proposal for a regulation – amending act
Annex – point 3
Annex – point 3
Regulation No 31 (EEC), 11 (EAEC)
Chapter 5 – Article 133
Chapter 5 – Article 133
Save as otherwise provided in Articles 134 and 135, Article 19, Article 20(1) to (3) and Article 21 of these Conditions of Employment and Article 16 of Annex VII to the Staff Regulations (remuneration and expenses) shall apply by analogy. Expenses for missions undertaken on request of the Member carry the right to reimbursement. The arrangements for reimbursement of mission expenses shall be laid down in the provisions referred in Article 125 (2).
Amendment 90 #
2008/0224(CNS)
Proposal for a regulation – amending act
Annex – point 3
Annex – point 3
Regulation No 31 (EEC), 11 (EAEC)
Chapter 5 – Article 134 – table
Chapter 5 – Article 134 – table
Grade 1 deleted 2 deleted 3 4 5 6 7 Full-time basic salary 1 193,00 1 389,85deleted deleted 1 619,17 1 886,33 2 197,58 2 560,18 2 982,61 Grade 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 Full-time basic salary 3 474,74 4 048,07 4 716,00 5 494,14 6 400,67 7 456,78 8 687,15
Amendment 1 #
2007/2208(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph - 1 a (new)
Paragraph - 1 a (new)
-1a. Stresses that, since the attack on Afghanistan six years ago and the subsequent military interventions, the situation of the people of Afghanistan has not improved;
Amendment 26 #
2007/2208(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Stresses the urgent need for the international community to analyse what strategic and conceptual misjudgements have contributed to the current situation in Afghanistan, including an honest assessment of both the current military strategy and the strategy for civil reconstruction; insists that one of the first steps towards a possible lasting peace must be the withdrawal of all occupying troops; concludes that a major shift of strategy is necessary as peace, security and development will only prevail if the spiral of violence is brought to an end, if the prevailing military solution is replaced by reinforced civil reconstruction efforts, and if, as a result, the confidence of the Afghan population is restored; considers in particular that "Operation Enduring Freedom" is politically counterproductive because reconciliation and consolidation of peace cannot be imposed militarily from the outside but have to be developed inside Afghanistan;
Amendment 31 #
2007/2208(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2 a (new)
Paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. insists that one of the first steps towards a possible lasting peace must be the withdrawal of all occupying troops;
Amendment 48 #
2007/2208(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Points out that the main problem facing the country is restoring security; notes that Afghanistan's security problems are more complexsomething other than just a war on terror and therefore they do not require more than a military solution; points out that security is a prerequisite for the rule of law, which in turn creates an atmosphere conducive to human development, and that strengthening the rule of law can serve as an important means to advance the freedom of people to exercise choices and enhance their capacity to live meaningful and healthy lives;
Amendment 58 #
2007/2208(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Draws attention to the fact that despite some achievements to date, the overall outcome of police reform efforts during the past five years has been disappointing, demonstrating the serious inadequacies of the international community when it comes to institution building; urges the international community to move away from the multitude of individual police reform projects towards a more coordinated, comprehensivepoints out that the practice of civilian-military cooperation based on the EU-Afghanistan Joint Declaration entails immense risks and is at odds with any development aimed at a lasting peace; takes the view, accordingly, that the work and objectives of NGOs on the ground, which operate on the basis of the principles of neutrality, independence and impartiality, are incompatible with those of the military, and that civilian structures such as the police, border police and justice system should therefore be built up under Afghan leadership and outside the framework of military structures; calls, therefore, for EU financial anid longer- term approachto be earmarked solely for civilian development purposes;
Amendment 62 #
2007/2208(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
7. Draws attention to the fact that the EUPOL mandate foresees the coordination of activities in reforms of the police and justice sectors , and therefore calls on the Council and the Commission to better co- ordinate their respective activities in order to make the EU's policies more coherent and efficient; considers it equally important for the EU to considerably increase the resources foreseen for EUPOL both in terms of personnel and financingtakes the view that there should in future be no cooperation whatsoever between the military missions and the EUPOL mission; calls for the existing practice of cooperation with NATO and ISAF structures to cease; notes, moreover, that the current situation militates against the planned expansion of the EUPOL mission and that the mission’s structures must be reviewed;
Amendment 67 #
2007/2208(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8
Paragraph 8
8. Stresses the need to redefine the role of the provincial reconstruction teams (PRTs) as a result of the wider role of the military, which is increasingly overlapping with the mandates of civilian aid agencies, causing significant friction; is convinced that the goals of humanitarian organisations, which operate on the basis of neutrality, independence and impartiality, and those of the military are not compatible; strongly believestakes the view that the PRTs should concentrate on specific objectives related to security, training and working with the Afghan police and military, undergo a review aimed at a strict separation of military and civilian structures, and that an effort should be made to replace the latter with strictly civiliand supporting the reach of the central government into insecure areastructures involving the participation of the Afghan people, so as to rule out any overlap between civilian development work and military activity;
Amendment 88 #
2007/2208(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11
Paragraph 11
11. Welcomes Afghanistan'sStresses that the progress in improvncreasing women’s political representation; remains concerned about the huge income disparities between men and women, very low literacy rate of women, the injustices to women and girls, both in the denial of basic services like healthcare and education and the lack of employment opportunities as well as high levels of domestic violence and discrimination; stresses the urgent need for meas cannot hide the fact that the situation of women in Afghanistan remains extremely wretched, that life expectancy for Afghan women is around 44 years, that girls are traded like currency, that forced marriages are commonplace, that massive income differences exist between men and women, and that there is a high female illiteracy rate; condemns the refusal of medical care and education, the omnipresent discrimination and the lack of jobs for women; urges aimed at protecting the rights of women to be builtthat measures for the protection of women’s rights be included into legal and political reforms; calls on the Council and the Commission to lendtake active support to such an initiative and to earmark funds for measures which will help build the country's capacityon and to set aside appropriations to assist the rapid and sustainable implementation of measures to protect the rights of women and girlsin Afghanistan;
Amendment 92 #
2007/2208(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11 a (new)
Paragraph 11 a (new)
11a. Is concerned at the influence still wielded by the warlords and the role of the Taliban in the eastern parts of Afghanistan, where there is no control by state structures and public executions take place; views with growing concern the fact that the commitment set out in the Afghanistan Compact ‘to work toward a stable and prosperous Afghanistan, with good governance and human rights protection for all under the rule of law’ is completely meaningless in the absence of an implementation strategy binding on all sides; notes, too, that no positive change in the situation of women will take place until the warlords are disarmed and a fundamental political transformation of the country can be brought about;
Amendment 113 #
2007/2208(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital B
Recital B
B. whereas the United States – with support from the United Kingdom – began Operation Enduring Freedom on 7 October 2001; whereas four other EU Member States - the Czech Republic, France, Poland and Romania - are among the coalition forces participating in the operation; whereas apart from Cyprus and Malta all EU Member States contribute troops to the NATO-led ISAF mission, amounting to more than 21,500 troops; whereas the presence of foreign troops constitutes an occupation; whereas the first provincial reconstruction teams (PRTs) started in late 2001 and currently there are approximately 34 PRTs operating in the entire country,