7 Amendments of Ana GOMES related to 2008/2202(INI)
Amendment 3 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Points out that the European Union needs to develop its strategic autonomy through a strong and effective foreign, security and defence policy in order to defend its interests in the world, to protect the security of its citizens, to contribute to effective multilateralism, to promote Human Security and to defend human rights;
Amendment 95 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15
Paragraph 15
Amendment 102 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16
Paragraph 16
Amendment 105 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17
Paragraph 17
17. Considers that a dialogue should be re- establishedboth the EU and NATO should pursue a frank and realistic dialogue with Russia on energy, missile defence, non-proliferation of weapons of mass destruction, limitation of armed forces and space policy;
Amendment 132 #
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, namely through specialisation, pooling and sharing of existing capabilities, and joint development of new ones; commends the European Defence Agency (EDA) for the excellent work it has performed so far and calls on EU Member States to take full advantage of the EDA's potential;
Amendment 154 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 26 a (new)
Paragraph 26 a (new)
26a. Calls for an autonomous and permanent EU Operational Headquarters with the capacity to perform strategic planning and conduct ESDP operations and missions;
Amendment 173 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 30
Paragraph 30
30. Considers 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 that NATO 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 and therefore regrets that neither the EU nor NATO have been involved in the purely bilateral decision- making leading up to the deployment of the subsystems; considers that as long as it is unclear how European interests are safeguarded as regards political implications for the EU's neighbourhood, financial implications, technical feasibility, the force structure, command and control and participation in research and development, the EU should refrain from lending its support to this initiative;