BETA


2013/2146(INI) EU comprehensive approach and its implications for the coherence of EU external action

Progress: Procedure completed

RoleCommitteeRapporteurShadows
Lead AFET DANJEAN Arnaud (icon: PPE PPE) MUÑIZ DE URQUIZA María (icon: S&D S&D), JÄÄTTEENMÄKI Anneli (icon: ALDE ALDE), VAN ORDEN Geoffrey (icon: ECR ECR), MEYER Willy (icon: GUE/NGL GUE/NGL)
Committee Opinion DEVE GUERRERO SALOM Enrique (icon: S&D S&D) Cristian Dan PREDA (icon: PPE PPE), Judith SARGENTINI (icon: Verts/ALE Verts/ALE)
Committee Opinion INTA
Committee Opinion FEMM CLIVETI Minodora (icon: S&D S&D) Mariya GABRIEL (icon: PPE PPE), Norica NICOLAI (icon: ALDE ALDE)
Lead committee dossier:
Legal Basis:
RoP 052

Events

2014/04/03
   EP - Debate in Parliament
2014/04/03
   EP - Decision by Parliament, 1st reading/single reading
Details

The European Union adopted by 492 votes to 94, with 28 abstentions, a resolution on the EU comprehensive approach and its implications for the coherence of EU external action.

The EU in a changing world : Parliament recalled that significant geostrategic changes are taking place, owing in particular to the rise of a multipolar international scene with new actors pursuing competitive regional and global ambitions, growing interdependency, the rise of multidimensional asymmetric threats, the refocusing of US security policy towards the Asia-Pacific, the growing struggle over energy and resource security, the increasingly serious effects of climate change and a severe and long-lasting global financial and economic crisis affecting all EU Member States. Members stressed that in such a geopolitical climate, a fresh approach is needed in order to shape a new multipolar world order that is inclusive, credible, just, cooperative, underpinned by respect for human rights, to resolve differences without recourse to armed conflict.

EU comprehensive approach: state of play in implementing the political framework : Parliament stressed the importance of effective coordination and coherence in the European Union’s external action. It underlined the fact that the Lisbon Treaty provides the framework for the Union to achieve a more coherent, joined-up and comprehensive approach for the effective pursuit of the Union’s external relations, including by creating the triple-hatted High Representative (HR) of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy , who is also Vice-President of the Commission and Chair of the Foreign Affairs Council, and by establishing a unifying and effective European External Action Service (EEAS).

In this regard, Parliament regretted that, despite the Lisbon Treaty innovations, lack of progress in the consistency of the Union’s external action persists in areas relating to security, humanitarian matters, development, trade, energy, environment, migration and other global issues. It is concerned that the Commission often takes a restrictive approach, protecting its own competences in these areas and minimising coordination functions with the EEAS .

Priority areas for a comprehensive approach : Parliament considered that as a basis for moving from concept to action in the pursuit of a comprehensive approach, the following four areas must be addressed:

1. Institutional coherence : all relevant institutions (the EEAS and the Commission’s relevant services, including ECHO, DEVCO, TRADE and ELARG, but also Parliament and the Council) should work together to pursue common objectives within an agreed framework designed at EU level, and mobilising its most relevant instruments, including the CSDP .

This general approach should be supported by the EEAS and promote: i) mediation and dialogue; ii) the principles of humanitarian aid. Members welcomed in this regard Joint Communication "A comprehensive approach to the European Union against external crises and conflicts" ( JOIN(2013)0030 ), which represents an opportunity to clarify and operationalise this approach in the new post-Lisbon institutional setting. Plenary insisted that foreign policy objectives should not be placed in opposition to development principles and principled humanitarian action, as all three policies are complementary. Parliament recalled that Article 208 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU) establishes the principle of Policy Coherence for Development (PCD), and emphasised the potential for tension between PCD on the one hand and the comprehensive approach to crisis management outside the EU on the other. It stressed that the main goal of the EU’s development policy is the eradication of poverty and that it is therefore essential that anti-poverty objectives are not marginalised in EU foreign policy and that the comprehensive approach does not erode the civilian character of development cooperation .

Parliament called for the safeguarding of the humanitarian principles of humanity, neutrality, impartiality and independence which are crucial for both the effectiveness of humanitarian action and the safety of its actors .

Parliament also focused on other related aspects of the comprehensive approach:

the importance of conflict prevention; joint analysis, joint assessment and planning as well as the clear division of responsibilities in this context.

2. Financial coherence : Parliament recalled its determination to ensure that the Union’s external financial instruments for the period 2014-2020 are designed so as to facilitate the pursuit of a comprehensive approach to external relations Union.

It regretted that the lack of ambition in the EU budget for external action for the period 2014-2020 and called for better anticipation of the funding needed for the implementation of EU strategies. It recalled the need to review the financing mechanism for military CSDP operations (known as the ATHENA mechanism), so as to allow for a more adequate and fairer burden-sharing of the costs of EU military operations, thus enabling all Member States to contribute through force generation or financing the supporting costs.

3. Coherence in practice : Parliament insisted that such strategies should clearly set out the EU’s objectives and priorities and the specific timeframe for implementation and determine what instruments are best suited for action (ranging from inter alia humanitarian and development aid to diplomatic action and mediation, economic sanctions, and the CSDP). It stressed that the role and contribution from the CSDP should be part of the initial political analysis and definition of policy objectives. It regretted that, even when strategies are defined, the EU often does not manage to implement them, and is instead forced to take contingency and emergency action (as was the case in Sahel region, for which a very comprehensive and well-prepared EU strategy document had been unanimously approved but did not lead to satisfactory implementation until the situation in Mali deteriorated dramatically). There is a need to improve upstream action by operating a policy shift from reactive-centric approaches to a more adequate and efficient prevention-focused approach.

Members are convinced that, in cases where crises cannot be avoided, the EU must be able to plan and deploy the appropriate civilian and military assets , as well as mobilise complementary EU instruments, rapidly and effectively across the whole spectrum of crisis management operations, including in cases of humanitarian crises. They called on the Member States to commit to unified EU action in third countries and to make sure that coordination and articulation of actions on the ground are duly concerted with the EU institutions, namely the Commission and the EEAS. Members regretted in this regard that autonomous action by Member States in third countries, especially post-conflict and democratising societies, without proper articulation between them and the EU local Delegation has proved damaging to the EU’s goals and interests.

4. Partnerships : Parliament stressed that a successful comprehensive approach also requires developing partnerships outside the Union’s institutions and Member States, to include other international and multilateral partners, strategic partners, host countries, regional organisations, civil society actors and the private sector, with due respect for the decision-making autonomy of the EU. It reiterated its view, in keeping with the purposes of the Lisbon Treaty in enhancing EU foreign policy and the role of the EU in global peace, security and regulation, that an EU seat in an enlarged UNSC remains a central, long-term goal of the European Union . Parliament, therefore, invited the VP/HR to take the initiative to develop a common position of the Member States to that end.

Documents
2014/04/03
   EP - End of procedure in Parliament
2014/02/21
   EP - Committee report tabled for plenary, single reading
Details

The Committee on Foreign Affairs adopted the own-initiative report by Arnaud DANJEAN (EPP, FR) on the EU comprehensive approach and its implications for the coherence of EU external action.

The EU in a changing world : Members recalled that significant geostrategic changes are also taking place in other parts of the world, owing in particular to the rise of a multipolar international scene. They considered that the refocusing of US security policy towards the Asia-Pacific, the growing struggle over energy and resource security, the increasingly serious effects of climate change and a severe and long-lasting global financial and economic crisis affecting all EU Member States. They stressed that in such a geopolitical climate, a fresh approach is needed in order to shape a new multipolar world order that is inclusive, credible, just, cooperative, underpinned by respect for human rights, to resolve differences without recourse to armed conflict.

EU comprehensive approach: state of play in implementing the political framework : Members stressed the importance of effective coordination and coherence in the European Union’s external action. They underlined the fact that the Lisbon Treaty provides the framework for the Union to achieve a more coherent, joined-up and comprehensive approach for the effective pursuit of the Union’s external relations, including by creating the triple-hatted High Representative (HR) of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy , who is also Vice-President of the Commission and Chair of the Foreign Affairs Council, and by establishing a unifying and effective European External Action Service (EEAS).

In this regard, Members regretted that, despite the Lisbon Treaty innovations, lack of progress in the consistency of the Union’s external action persists in areas relating to development, trade, energy, environment, migration and other global issues.

Member States are urged to meet their Treaty-based commitments to support the Union’s external relations and security policy actively and in a spirit of mutual solidarity and to comply, in conducting their own policies, with the Union’s action in this area . Members called for active engagement and dialogue with citizens and civil society to ensure legitimacy and a common understanding of the comprehensive and the EU foreign policy in general .

Priority areas for a comprehensive approach : Members considered that as a basis for moving from concept to action in the pursuit of a comprehensive approach, the following four areas must be addressed:

1. Institutional coherence : Members stated that the concept of a comprehensive approach should be understood as the coordinated work of all relevant institutions (the EEAS and the Commission’s relevant services, including ECHO, DEVCO, TRADE and ELARG, but also Parliament and the Council) pursuing common objectives within an agreed framework designed at EU level, and mobilising its most relevant instruments, including the CSDP .

This general approach should be supported by the EEAS and promote: i) mediation and dialogue; ii) the principles of humanitarian aid. Members welcomed in this regard Joint Communication "A comprehensive approach to the European Union against external crises and conflicts" ( JOIN(2013)0030 ), which represents an opportunity to clarify and operationalise this approach in the new post-Lisbon institutional setting. In addition, they stressed that the main goal of the EU’s development policy is the eradication of poverty and that it is therefore essential that antipoverty objectives are not marginalised .

Members also focused on other related aspects of the comprehensive approach:

the importance of conflict prevention; joint analysis, joint assessment and planning as well as the clear division of responsibilities in this context.

2. Financial coherence : Members recalled Parliament's determination to ensure that the Union’s external financial instruments for the period 2014-2020 are designed so as to facilitate the pursuit of a comprehensive approach to external relations Union.

They regretted that the lack of ambition in the EU budget for external action for the period 2014-2020 and called for better anticipation of the funding needed for the implementation of EU strategies. They recalled the need to review the financing mechanism for military CSDP operations (known as the ATHENA mechanism), so as to allow for a more adequate and fairer burden-sharing of the costs of EU military operations, thus enabling all Member States to contribute through force generation or financing the supporting costs.

3. Coherence in practice : Members insisted that such strategies should clearly set out the EU’s objectives and priorities and the specific timeframe for implementation and determine what instruments are best suited for action (ranging from inter alia humanitarian and development aid to diplomatic action and mediation, economic sanctions, and the CSDP). They stressed that the role and contribution from the CSDP should be part of the initial political analysis and definition of policy objectives. They regretted that, even when strategies are defined, the EU often does not manage to implement them, and is instead forced to take contingency and emergency action (as was the case in Sahel region, for which a very comprehensive and well-prepared EU strategy document had been unanimously approved but did not lead to satisfactory implementation until the situation in Mali deteriorated dramatically). There is a need to improve upstream action by operating a policy shift from reactive-centric approaches to a more adequate and efficient prevention-focused approach.

Members are convinced that, in cases where crises cannot be avoided, the EU must be able to plan and deploy the appropriate civilian and military assets , as well as mobilise complementary EU instruments, rapidly and effectively across the whole spectrum of crisis management operations, including in cases of humanitarian crises. They called on the Member States to commit to unified EU action in third countries and to make sure that coordination and articulation of actions on the ground are duly concerted with the EU institutions, namely the Commission and the EEAS. Members regretted in this regard that autonomous action by Member States in third countries, especially post-conflict and democratising societies, without proper articulation between them and the EU local Delegation has proved damaging to the EU’s goals and interests.

4. Partnerships : Members stressed that a successful comprehensive approach also requires developing partnerships outside the Union’s institutions and Member States, to include other international and multilateral partners, strategic partners, host countries, regional organisations, civil society actors and the private sector, with due respect for the decision-making autonomy of the EU. They reiterated their view, in keeping with the purposes of the Lisbon Treaty in enhancing EU foreign policy and the role of the EU in global peace, security and regulation, that an EU seat in an enlarged UNSC remains a central, long-term goal of the European Union . They, therefore, invited the VP/HR to take the initiative to develop a common position of the Member States to that end.

It should be noted that the report was subject to a minority opinion tabled by Sabine LÖSING (GUE/NGL, DE) rejecting the option recommended in the report to merge military/security and humanitarian/development aid. Instead, the minority opinion advocated a European development policy which initially focused on the eradication of poverty and which must not be used for military purposes.

Documents
2014/02/17
   EP - Vote in committee, 1st reading/single reading
2014/01/22
   EP - Amendments tabled in committee
Documents
2014/01/21
   EP - Committee opinion
Documents
2013/12/11
   EP - Committee draft report
Documents
2013/11/08
   EP - GUERRERO SALOM Enrique (S&D) appointed as rapporteur in DEVE
2013/10/22
   EP - Committee opinion
Documents
2013/09/12
   EP - Committee referral announced in Parliament, 1st reading/single reading
2013/06/19
   EP - CLIVETI Minodora (S&D) appointed as rapporteur in FEMM
2013/01/16
   EP - DANJEAN Arnaud (PPE) appointed as rapporteur in AFET

Documents

Activities

Votes

A7-0138/2014 - Arnaud Danjean - § 46

2014/04/03 Outcome: +: 476, -: 131, 0: 9
DE ES IT FR RO SE BE BG PL AT HU SK PT LT EL HR IE NL LU DK EE FI SI MT LV CY CZ GB
Total
81
47
55
61
21
18
18
16
43
17
17
13
18
10
10
10
9
22
6
12
6
8
6
4
8
4
16
59
icon: PPE PPE
214

Belgium PPE

2

Ireland PPE

3

Luxembourg PPE

3

Denmark PPE

For (1)

1

Estonia PPE

For (1)

1

Finland PPE

Against (1)

3

Malta PPE

For (1)

1
2

Czechia PPE

2
icon: S&D S&D
162

Hungary S&D

Against (1)

4

Netherlands S&D

2

Luxembourg S&D

For (1)

1

Estonia S&D

For (1)

1

Finland S&D

2

Slovenia S&D

2

Cyprus S&D

1
icon: ALDE ALDE
65

Italy ALDE

2

Slovakia ALDE

For (1)

1

Luxembourg ALDE

For (1)

1

Denmark ALDE

2

Finland ALDE

For (1)

1

Latvia ALDE

For (1)

1
icon: Verts/ALE Verts/ALE
53

Sweden Verts/ALE

Against (1)

4

Austria Verts/ALE

1

Greece Verts/ALE

1

Netherlands Verts/ALE

3

Luxembourg Verts/ALE

For (1)

1

Denmark Verts/ALE

For (1)

1

Estonia Verts/ALE

For (1)

1

Finland Verts/ALE

For (1)

1

Latvia Verts/ALE

Against (1)

1

United Kingdom Verts/ALE

Abstain (2)

5
icon: EFD EFD
24

Belgium EFD

Abstain (1)

1

Bulgaria EFD

Abstain (1)

1

Slovakia EFD

Abstain (1)

1

Lithuania EFD

For (1)

1

Greece EFD

1

Netherlands EFD

Against (1)

1

Denmark EFD

Against (1)

1

Finland EFD

For (1)

1
icon: NI NI
26

Spain NI

1

Italy NI

For (1)

Against (1)

2

Belgium NI

Against (1)

1

Bulgaria NI

Against (1)

1

Hungary NI

Against (1)

1

Ireland NI

For (1)

1
icon: GUE/NGL GUE/NGL
26

Spain GUE/NGL

Against (1)

1

France GUE/NGL

For (1)

3

Sweden GUE/NGL

Against (1)

1

Portugal GUE/NGL

3

Greece GUE/NGL

1

Ireland GUE/NGL

Against (1)

1

Netherlands GUE/NGL

2

Denmark GUE/NGL

Against (1)

1

Latvia GUE/NGL

Against (1)

1

Cyprus GUE/NGL

1

Czechia GUE/NGL

2

United Kingdom GUE/NGL

Against (1)

1
icon: ECR ECR
45

Belgium ECR

Against (1)

1

Lithuania ECR

Against (1)

1

Croatia ECR

Against (1)

1

Denmark ECR

Against (1)

1

Latvia ECR

Against (1)

1

A7-0138/2014 - Arnaud Danjean - Résolution

2014/04/03 Outcome: +: 492, -: 94, 0: 28
DE FR ES IT PL RO HU BE BG SE SK PT EL AT HR IE LT NL DK EE FI SI LU LV MT CY CZ GB
Total
82
59
47
55
44
21
17
19
15
17
13
18
10
17
10
9
9
22
12
6
7
6
5
8
4
4
17
60
icon: PPE PPE
216

Belgium PPE

3

Ireland PPE

3

Denmark PPE

For (1)

1

Estonia PPE

For (1)

1

Finland PPE

Abstain (1)

3

Luxembourg PPE

3

Malta PPE

For (1)

1
2

Czechia PPE

2
icon: S&D S&D
159

Lithuania S&D

1

Netherlands S&D

2

Estonia S&D

For (1)

1

Finland S&D

1

Slovenia S&D

2

Luxembourg S&D

For (1)

1

Cyprus S&D

1
icon: ALDE ALDE
63

Slovakia ALDE

For (1)

1

Denmark ALDE

2

Finland ALDE

For (1)

1

Luxembourg ALDE

For (1)

1

Latvia ALDE

For (1)

1
icon: Verts/ALE Verts/ALE
50

Sweden Verts/ALE

Against (1)

Abstain (1)

3

Greece Verts/ALE

1

Austria Verts/ALE

1

Netherlands Verts/ALE

3

Denmark Verts/ALE

For (1)

1

Estonia Verts/ALE

For (1)

1

Finland Verts/ALE

For (1)

1

Latvia Verts/ALE

Against (1)

1

United Kingdom Verts/ALE

5
icon: EFD EFD
24

Belgium EFD

Abstain (1)

1

Bulgaria EFD

Against (1)

1

Slovakia EFD

Abstain (1)

1

Greece EFD

1

Lithuania EFD

For (1)

1

Netherlands EFD

Abstain (1)

1

Denmark EFD

Against (1)

1

Finland EFD

For (1)

1
icon: NI NI
26

Spain NI

1

Italy NI

For (1)

Against (1)

2

Hungary NI

Against (1)

1

Belgium NI

Against (1)

1

Bulgaria NI

Abstain (1)

1

Ireland NI

For (1)

1
icon: GUE/NGL GUE/NGL
27

France GUE/NGL

For (1)

4

Spain GUE/NGL

Against (1)

1

Sweden GUE/NGL

Against (1)

1

Portugal GUE/NGL

3

Greece GUE/NGL

1

Ireland GUE/NGL

Against (1)

1

Netherlands GUE/NGL

2

Denmark GUE/NGL

Against (1)

1

Latvia GUE/NGL

Against (1)

1

Cyprus GUE/NGL

1

Czechia GUE/NGL

2

United Kingdom GUE/NGL

Against (1)

1
icon: ECR ECR
48

Italy ECR

1

Belgium ECR

Against (1)

1

Croatia ECR

Against (1)

1

Lithuania ECR

Against (1)

1

Denmark ECR

Against (1)

1

Latvia ECR

For (1)

1
AmendmentsDossier
106 2013/2146(INI)
2013/09/24 FEMM 19 amendments...
source: PE-519.691
2013/12/20 DEVE 9 amendments...
source: PE-526.194
2014/01/22 AFET 78 amendments...
source: PE-527.844

History

(these mark the time of scraping, not the official date of the change)

committees/0
type
Responsible Committee
body
EP
associated
False
committee_full
Foreign Affairs
committee
AFET
rapporteur
name: DANJEAN Arnaud date: 2013-01-16T00:00:00 group: European People's Party (Christian Democrats) abbr: PPE
shadows
committees/0
type
Responsible Committee
body
EP
associated
False
committee_full
Foreign Affairs
committee
AFET
date
2013-01-16T00:00:00
rapporteur
name: DANJEAN Arnaud group: European People's Party (Christian Democrats) abbr: PPE
shadows
committees/1
type
Committee Opinion
body
EP
associated
False
committee_full
Development
committee
DEVE
rapporteur
name: GUERRERO SALOM Enrique date: 2013-11-08T00:00:00 group: Progressive Alliance of Socialists and Democrats abbr: S&D
committees/1
type
Committee Opinion
body
EP
associated
False
committee_full
Development
committee
DEVE
date
2013-11-08T00:00:00
rapporteur
name: GUERRERO SALOM Enrique group: Progressive Alliance of Socialists and Democrats abbr: S&D
committees/3
type
Committee Opinion
body
EP
associated
False
committee_full
Women's Rights and Gender Equality
committee
FEMM
rapporteur
name: CLIVETI Minodora date: 2013-06-19T00:00:00 group: Progressive Alliance of Socialists and Democrats abbr: S&D
committees/3
type
Committee Opinion
body
EP
associated
False
committee_full
Women's Rights and Gender Equality
committee
FEMM
date
2013-06-19T00:00:00
rapporteur
name: CLIVETI Minodora group: Progressive Alliance of Socialists and Democrats abbr: S&D
events/2/docs/0/url
Old
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=REPORT&mode=XML&reference=A7-2014-0138&language=EN
New
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/A-7-2014-0138_EN.html
events/4/docs/0/url
Old
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=TA&language=EN&reference=P7-TA-2014-0286
New
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/TA-7-2014-0286_EN.html
activities
  • date: 2013-09-12T00:00:00 body: EP type: Committee referral announced in Parliament, 1st reading/single reading committees: body: EP shadows: group: S&D name: MUÑIZ DE URQUIZA María group: ALDE name: JÄÄTTEENMÄKI Anneli group: ECR name: VAN ORDEN Geoffrey group: GUE/NGL name: MEYER Willy responsible: True committee: AFET date: 2013-01-16T00:00:00 committee_full: Foreign Affairs rapporteur: group: PPE name: DANJEAN Arnaud body: EP responsible: False committee: DEVE date: 2013-11-08T00:00:00 committee_full: Development rapporteur: group: S&D name: GUERRERO SALOM Enrique body: EP responsible: False committee: FEMM date: 2013-06-19T00:00:00 committee_full: Women's Rights and Gender Equality rapporteur: group: S&D name: CLIVETI Minodora body: EP responsible: False committee_full: International Trade committee: INTA
  • date: 2014-02-17T00:00:00 body: EP type: Vote in committee, 1st reading/single reading committees: body: EP shadows: group: S&D name: MUÑIZ DE URQUIZA María group: ALDE name: JÄÄTTEENMÄKI Anneli group: ECR name: VAN ORDEN Geoffrey group: GUE/NGL name: MEYER Willy responsible: True committee: AFET date: 2013-01-16T00:00:00 committee_full: Foreign Affairs rapporteur: group: PPE name: DANJEAN Arnaud body: EP responsible: False committee: DEVE date: 2013-11-08T00:00:00 committee_full: Development rapporteur: group: S&D name: GUERRERO SALOM Enrique body: EP responsible: False committee: FEMM date: 2013-06-19T00:00:00 committee_full: Women's Rights and Gender Equality rapporteur: group: S&D name: CLIVETI Minodora body: EP responsible: False committee_full: International Trade committee: INTA
  • date: 2014-02-21T00:00:00 docs: url: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=REPORT&mode=XML&reference=A7-2014-0138&language=EN type: Committee report tabled for plenary, single reading title: A7-0138/2014 body: EP type: Committee report tabled for plenary, single reading
  • date: 2014-04-03T00:00:00 docs: url: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?secondRef=TOC&language=EN&reference=20140403&type=CRE type: Debate in Parliament title: Debate in Parliament url: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=TA&language=EN&reference=P7-TA-2014-0286 type: Decision by Parliament, 1st reading/single reading title: T7-0286/2014 body: EP type: Debate in Parliament
committees/0
type
Responsible Committee
body
EP
associated
False
committee_full
Foreign Affairs
committee
AFET
date
2013-01-16T00:00:00
rapporteur
name: DANJEAN Arnaud group: European People's Party (Christian Democrats) abbr: PPE
shadows
committees/0
body
EP
shadows
responsible
True
committee
AFET
date
2013-01-16T00:00:00
committee_full
Foreign Affairs
rapporteur
group: PPE name: DANJEAN Arnaud
committees/1
type
Committee Opinion
body
EP
associated
False
committee_full
Development
committee
DEVE
date
2013-11-08T00:00:00
rapporteur
name: GUERRERO SALOM Enrique group: Progressive Alliance of Socialists and Democrats abbr: S&D
committees/1
body
EP
responsible
False
committee
DEVE
date
2013-11-08T00:00:00
committee_full
Development
rapporteur
group: S&D name: GUERRERO SALOM Enrique
committees/2
type
Committee Opinion
body
EP
associated
False
committee_full
International Trade
committee
INTA
opinion
False
committees/2
body
EP
responsible
False
committee
FEMM
date
2013-06-19T00:00:00
committee_full
Women's Rights and Gender Equality
rapporteur
group: S&D name: CLIVETI Minodora
committees/3
type
Committee Opinion
body
EP
associated
False
committee_full
Women's Rights and Gender Equality
committee
FEMM
date
2013-06-19T00:00:00
rapporteur
name: CLIVETI Minodora group: Progressive Alliance of Socialists and Democrats abbr: S&D
committees/3
body
EP
responsible
False
committee_full
International Trade
committee
INTA
docs
  • date: 2013-10-22T00:00:00 docs: url: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=COMPARL&mode=XML&language=EN&reference=PE516.859&secondRef=02 title: PE516.859 committee: FEMM type: Committee opinion body: EP
  • date: 2013-12-11T00:00:00 docs: url: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=COMPARL&mode=XML&language=EN&reference=PE524.877 title: PE524.877 type: Committee draft report body: EP
  • date: 2014-01-21T00:00:00 docs: url: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=COMPARL&mode=XML&language=EN&reference=PE523.103&secondRef=03 title: PE523.103 committee: DEVE type: Committee opinion body: EP
  • date: 2014-01-22T00:00:00 docs: url: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=COMPARL&mode=XML&language=EN&reference=PE527.844 title: PE527.844 type: Amendments tabled in committee body: EP
events
  • date: 2013-09-12T00:00:00 type: Committee referral announced in Parliament, 1st reading/single reading body: EP
  • date: 2014-02-17T00:00:00 type: Vote in committee, 1st reading/single reading body: EP
  • date: 2014-02-21T00:00:00 type: Committee report tabled for plenary, single reading body: EP docs: url: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=REPORT&mode=XML&reference=A7-2014-0138&language=EN title: A7-0138/2014 summary: The Committee on Foreign Affairs adopted the own-initiative report by Arnaud DANJEAN (EPP, FR) on the EU comprehensive approach and its implications for the coherence of EU external action. The EU in a changing world : Members recalled that significant geostrategic changes are also taking place in other parts of the world, owing in particular to the rise of a multipolar international scene. They considered that the refocusing of US security policy towards the Asia-Pacific, the growing struggle over energy and resource security, the increasingly serious effects of climate change and a severe and long-lasting global financial and economic crisis affecting all EU Member States. They stressed that in such a geopolitical climate, a fresh approach is needed in order to shape a new multipolar world order that is inclusive, credible, just, cooperative, underpinned by respect for human rights, to resolve differences without recourse to armed conflict. EU comprehensive approach: state of play in implementing the political framework : Members stressed the importance of effective coordination and coherence in the European Union’s external action. They underlined the fact that the Lisbon Treaty provides the framework for the Union to achieve a more coherent, joined-up and comprehensive approach for the effective pursuit of the Union’s external relations, including by creating the triple-hatted High Representative (HR) of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy , who is also Vice-President of the Commission and Chair of the Foreign Affairs Council, and by establishing a unifying and effective European External Action Service (EEAS). In this regard, Members regretted that, despite the Lisbon Treaty innovations, lack of progress in the consistency of the Union’s external action persists in areas relating to development, trade, energy, environment, migration and other global issues. Member States are urged to meet their Treaty-based commitments to support the Union’s external relations and security policy actively and in a spirit of mutual solidarity and to comply, in conducting their own policies, with the Union’s action in this area . Members called for active engagement and dialogue with citizens and civil society to ensure legitimacy and a common understanding of the comprehensive and the EU foreign policy in general . Priority areas for a comprehensive approach : Members considered that as a basis for moving from concept to action in the pursuit of a comprehensive approach, the following four areas must be addressed: 1. Institutional coherence : Members stated that the concept of a comprehensive approach should be understood as the coordinated work of all relevant institutions (the EEAS and the Commission’s relevant services, including ECHO, DEVCO, TRADE and ELARG, but also Parliament and the Council) pursuing common objectives within an agreed framework designed at EU level, and mobilising its most relevant instruments, including the CSDP . This general approach should be supported by the EEAS and promote: i) mediation and dialogue; ii) the principles of humanitarian aid. Members welcomed in this regard Joint Communication "A comprehensive approach to the European Union against external crises and conflicts" ( JOIN(2013)0030 ), which represents an opportunity to clarify and operationalise this approach in the new post-Lisbon institutional setting. In addition, they stressed that the main goal of the EU’s development policy is the eradication of poverty and that it is therefore essential that antipoverty objectives are not marginalised . Members also focused on other related aspects of the comprehensive approach: the importance of conflict prevention; joint analysis, joint assessment and planning as well as the clear division of responsibilities in this context. 2. Financial coherence : Members recalled Parliament's determination to ensure that the Union’s external financial instruments for the period 2014-2020 are designed so as to facilitate the pursuit of a comprehensive approach to external relations Union. They regretted that the lack of ambition in the EU budget for external action for the period 2014-2020 and called for better anticipation of the funding needed for the implementation of EU strategies. They recalled the need to review the financing mechanism for military CSDP operations (known as the ATHENA mechanism), so as to allow for a more adequate and fairer burden-sharing of the costs of EU military operations, thus enabling all Member States to contribute through force generation or financing the supporting costs. 3. Coherence in practice : Members insisted that such strategies should clearly set out the EU’s objectives and priorities and the specific timeframe for implementation and determine what instruments are best suited for action (ranging from inter alia humanitarian and development aid to diplomatic action and mediation, economic sanctions, and the CSDP). They stressed that the role and contribution from the CSDP should be part of the initial political analysis and definition of policy objectives. They regretted that, even when strategies are defined, the EU often does not manage to implement them, and is instead forced to take contingency and emergency action (as was the case in Sahel region, for which a very comprehensive and well-prepared EU strategy document had been unanimously approved but did not lead to satisfactory implementation until the situation in Mali deteriorated dramatically). There is a need to improve upstream action by operating a policy shift from reactive-centric approaches to a more adequate and efficient prevention-focused approach. Members are convinced that, in cases where crises cannot be avoided, the EU must be able to plan and deploy the appropriate civilian and military assets , as well as mobilise complementary EU instruments, rapidly and effectively across the whole spectrum of crisis management operations, including in cases of humanitarian crises. They called on the Member States to commit to unified EU action in third countries and to make sure that coordination and articulation of actions on the ground are duly concerted with the EU institutions, namely the Commission and the EEAS. Members regretted in this regard that autonomous action by Member States in third countries, especially post-conflict and democratising societies, without proper articulation between them and the EU local Delegation has proved damaging to the EU’s goals and interests. 4. Partnerships : Members stressed that a successful comprehensive approach also requires developing partnerships outside the Union’s institutions and Member States, to include other international and multilateral partners, strategic partners, host countries, regional organisations, civil society actors and the private sector, with due respect for the decision-making autonomy of the EU. They reiterated their view, in keeping with the purposes of the Lisbon Treaty in enhancing EU foreign policy and the role of the EU in global peace, security and regulation, that an EU seat in an enlarged UNSC remains a central, long-term goal of the European Union . They, therefore, invited the VP/HR to take the initiative to develop a common position of the Member States to that end. It should be noted that the report was subject to a minority opinion tabled by Sabine LÖSING (GUE/NGL, DE) rejecting the option recommended in the report to merge military/security and humanitarian/development aid. Instead, the minority opinion advocated a European development policy which initially focused on the eradication of poverty and which must not be used for military purposes.
  • date: 2014-04-03T00:00:00 type: Debate in Parliament body: EP docs: url: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?secondRef=TOC&language=EN&reference=20140403&type=CRE title: Debate in Parliament
  • date: 2014-04-03T00:00:00 type: Decision by Parliament, 1st reading/single reading body: EP docs: url: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=TA&language=EN&reference=P7-TA-2014-0286 title: T7-0286/2014 summary: The European Union adopted by 492 votes to 94, with 28 abstentions, a resolution on the EU comprehensive approach and its implications for the coherence of EU external action. The EU in a changing world : Parliament recalled that significant geostrategic changes are taking place, owing in particular to the rise of a multipolar international scene with new actors pursuing competitive regional and global ambitions, growing interdependency, the rise of multidimensional asymmetric threats, the refocusing of US security policy towards the Asia-Pacific, the growing struggle over energy and resource security, the increasingly serious effects of climate change and a severe and long-lasting global financial and economic crisis affecting all EU Member States. Members stressed that in such a geopolitical climate, a fresh approach is needed in order to shape a new multipolar world order that is inclusive, credible, just, cooperative, underpinned by respect for human rights, to resolve differences without recourse to armed conflict. EU comprehensive approach: state of play in implementing the political framework : Parliament stressed the importance of effective coordination and coherence in the European Union’s external action. It underlined the fact that the Lisbon Treaty provides the framework for the Union to achieve a more coherent, joined-up and comprehensive approach for the effective pursuit of the Union’s external relations, including by creating the triple-hatted High Representative (HR) of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy , who is also Vice-President of the Commission and Chair of the Foreign Affairs Council, and by establishing a unifying and effective European External Action Service (EEAS). In this regard, Parliament regretted that, despite the Lisbon Treaty innovations, lack of progress in the consistency of the Union’s external action persists in areas relating to security, humanitarian matters, development, trade, energy, environment, migration and other global issues. It is concerned that the Commission often takes a restrictive approach, protecting its own competences in these areas and minimising coordination functions with the EEAS . Priority areas for a comprehensive approach : Parliament considered that as a basis for moving from concept to action in the pursuit of a comprehensive approach, the following four areas must be addressed: 1. Institutional coherence : all relevant institutions (the EEAS and the Commission’s relevant services, including ECHO, DEVCO, TRADE and ELARG, but also Parliament and the Council) should work together to pursue common objectives within an agreed framework designed at EU level, and mobilising its most relevant instruments, including the CSDP . This general approach should be supported by the EEAS and promote: i) mediation and dialogue; ii) the principles of humanitarian aid. Members welcomed in this regard Joint Communication "A comprehensive approach to the European Union against external crises and conflicts" ( JOIN(2013)0030 ), which represents an opportunity to clarify and operationalise this approach in the new post-Lisbon institutional setting. Plenary insisted that foreign policy objectives should not be placed in opposition to development principles and principled humanitarian action, as all three policies are complementary. Parliament recalled that Article 208 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU) establishes the principle of Policy Coherence for Development (PCD), and emphasised the potential for tension between PCD on the one hand and the comprehensive approach to crisis management outside the EU on the other. It stressed that the main goal of the EU’s development policy is the eradication of poverty and that it is therefore essential that anti-poverty objectives are not marginalised in EU foreign policy and that the comprehensive approach does not erode the civilian character of development cooperation . Parliament called for the safeguarding of the humanitarian principles of humanity, neutrality, impartiality and independence which are crucial for both the effectiveness of humanitarian action and the safety of its actors . Parliament also focused on other related aspects of the comprehensive approach: the importance of conflict prevention; joint analysis, joint assessment and planning as well as the clear division of responsibilities in this context. 2. Financial coherence : Parliament recalled its determination to ensure that the Union’s external financial instruments for the period 2014-2020 are designed so as to facilitate the pursuit of a comprehensive approach to external relations Union. It regretted that the lack of ambition in the EU budget for external action for the period 2014-2020 and called for better anticipation of the funding needed for the implementation of EU strategies. It recalled the need to review the financing mechanism for military CSDP operations (known as the ATHENA mechanism), so as to allow for a more adequate and fairer burden-sharing of the costs of EU military operations, thus enabling all Member States to contribute through force generation or financing the supporting costs. 3. Coherence in practice : Parliament insisted that such strategies should clearly set out the EU’s objectives and priorities and the specific timeframe for implementation and determine what instruments are best suited for action (ranging from inter alia humanitarian and development aid to diplomatic action and mediation, economic sanctions, and the CSDP). It stressed that the role and contribution from the CSDP should be part of the initial political analysis and definition of policy objectives. It regretted that, even when strategies are defined, the EU often does not manage to implement them, and is instead forced to take contingency and emergency action (as was the case in Sahel region, for which a very comprehensive and well-prepared EU strategy document had been unanimously approved but did not lead to satisfactory implementation until the situation in Mali deteriorated dramatically). There is a need to improve upstream action by operating a policy shift from reactive-centric approaches to a more adequate and efficient prevention-focused approach. Members are convinced that, in cases where crises cannot be avoided, the EU must be able to plan and deploy the appropriate civilian and military assets , as well as mobilise complementary EU instruments, rapidly and effectively across the whole spectrum of crisis management operations, including in cases of humanitarian crises. They called on the Member States to commit to unified EU action in third countries and to make sure that coordination and articulation of actions on the ground are duly concerted with the EU institutions, namely the Commission and the EEAS. Members regretted in this regard that autonomous action by Member States in third countries, especially post-conflict and democratising societies, without proper articulation between them and the EU local Delegation has proved damaging to the EU’s goals and interests. 4. Partnerships : Parliament stressed that a successful comprehensive approach also requires developing partnerships outside the Union’s institutions and Member States, to include other international and multilateral partners, strategic partners, host countries, regional organisations, civil society actors and the private sector, with due respect for the decision-making autonomy of the EU. It reiterated its view, in keeping with the purposes of the Lisbon Treaty in enhancing EU foreign policy and the role of the EU in global peace, security and regulation, that an EU seat in an enlarged UNSC remains a central, long-term goal of the European Union . Parliament, therefore, invited the VP/HR to take the initiative to develop a common position of the Member States to that end.
  • date: 2014-04-03T00:00:00 type: End of procedure in Parliament body: EP
links
other
    procedure/Modified legal basis
    Old
    Rules of Procedure of the European Parliament EP 150
    New
    Rules of Procedure EP 150
    procedure/dossier_of_the_committee
    Old
    AFET/7/13289
    New
    • AFET/7/13289
    procedure/legal_basis/0
    Rules of Procedure EP 052
    procedure/legal_basis/0
    Rules of Procedure of the European Parliament EP 052
    procedure/subject
    Old
    • 6.10.05 Peace preservation, humanitarian and rescue tasks, crisis management
    New
    6.10.05
    Peace preservation, humanitarian and rescue tasks, crisis management
    activities/0/committees
    • body: EP shadows: group: S&D name: MUÑIZ DE URQUIZA María group: ALDE name: JÄÄTTEENMÄKI Anneli group: ECR name: VAN ORDEN Geoffrey group: GUE/NGL name: MEYER Willy responsible: True committee: AFET date: 2013-01-16T00:00:00 committee_full: Foreign Affairs rapporteur: group: PPE name: DANJEAN Arnaud
    • body: EP responsible: False committee: DEVE date: 2013-11-08T00:00:00 committee_full: Development rapporteur: group: S&D name: GUERRERO SALOM Enrique
    • body: EP responsible: False committee: FEMM date: 2013-06-19T00:00:00 committee_full: Women's Rights and Gender Equality rapporteur: group: S&D name: CLIVETI Minodora
    • body: EP responsible: False committee_full: International Trade committee: INTA
    activities/0/date
    Old
    2014-02-21T00:00:00
    New
    2013-09-12T00:00:00
    activities/0/docs
    • url: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=REPORT&mode=XML&reference=A7-2014-0138&language=EN type: Committee report tabled for plenary, single reading title: A7-0138/2014
    activities/0/type
    Old
    Committee report tabled for plenary, single reading
    New
    Committee referral announced in Parliament, 1st reading/single reading
    activities/1/committees
    • body: EP shadows: group: S&D name: MUÑIZ DE URQUIZA María group: ALDE name: JÄÄTTEENMÄKI Anneli group: ECR name: VAN ORDEN Geoffrey group: GUE/NGL name: MEYER Willy responsible: True committee: AFET date: 2013-01-16T00:00:00 committee_full: Foreign Affairs rapporteur: group: PPE name: DANJEAN Arnaud
    • body: EP responsible: False committee: DEVE date: 2013-11-08T00:00:00 committee_full: Development rapporteur: group: S&D name: GUERRERO SALOM Enrique
    • body: EP responsible: False committee: FEMM date: 2013-06-19T00:00:00 committee_full: Women's Rights and Gender Equality rapporteur: group: S&D name: CLIVETI Minodora
    • body: EP responsible: False committee_full: International Trade committee: INTA
    activities/1/date
    Old
    2014-04-03T00:00:00
    New
    2014-02-17T00:00:00
    activities/1/docs
    • type: Decision by Parliament, 1st reading/single reading title: T7-0286/2014
    activities/1/type
    Old
    Debate in Parliament
    New
    Vote in committee, 1st reading/single reading
    activities/2/committees
    • body: EP shadows: group: S&D name: MUÑIZ DE URQUIZA María group: ALDE name: JÄÄTTEENMÄKI Anneli group: ECR name: VAN ORDEN Geoffrey group: GUE/NGL name: MEYER Willy responsible: True committee: AFET date: 2013-01-16T00:00:00 committee_full: Foreign Affairs rapporteur: group: EPP name: DANJEAN Arnaud
    • body: EP responsible: False committee: DEVE date: 2013-11-08T00:00:00 committee_full: Development rapporteur: group: S&D name: GUERRERO SALOM Enrique
    • body: EP responsible: False committee: FEMM date: 2013-06-19T00:00:00 committee_full: Women's Rights and Gender Equality rapporteur: group: S&D name: CLIVETI Minodora
    • body: EP responsible: False committee_full: International Trade committee: INTA
    activities/2/date
    Old
    2014-02-17T00:00:00
    New
    2014-02-21T00:00:00
    activities/2/docs
    • url: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=REPORT&mode=XML&reference=A7-2014-0138&language=EN type: Committee report tabled for plenary, single reading title: A7-0138/2014
    activities/2/type
    Old
    Vote in committee, 1st reading/single reading
    New
    Committee report tabled for plenary, single reading
    activities/3/committees
    • body: EP shadows: group: S&D name: MUÑIZ DE URQUIZA María group: ALDE name: JÄÄTTEENMÄKI Anneli group: ECR name: VAN ORDEN Geoffrey group: GUE/NGL name: MEYER Willy responsible: True committee: AFET date: 2013-01-16T00:00:00 committee_full: Foreign Affairs rapporteur: group: EPP name: DANJEAN Arnaud
    • body: EP responsible: False committee: DEVE date: 2013-11-08T00:00:00 committee_full: Development rapporteur: group: S&D name: GUERRERO SALOM Enrique
    • body: EP responsible: False committee: FEMM date: 2013-06-19T00:00:00 committee_full: Women's Rights and Gender Equality rapporteur: group: S&D name: CLIVETI Minodora
    • body: EP responsible: False committee_full: International Trade committee: INTA
    activities/3/date
    Old
    2013-09-12T00:00:00
    New
    2014-04-03T00:00:00
    activities/3/docs
    • url: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?secondRef=TOC&language=EN&reference=20140403&type=CRE type: Debate in Parliament title: Debate in Parliament
    • url: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=TA&language=EN&reference=P7-TA-2014-0286 type: Decision by Parliament, 1st reading/single reading title: T7-0286/2014
    activities/3/type
    Old
    Committee referral announced in Parliament, 1st reading/single reading
    New
    Debate in Parliament
    committees/0/rapporteur/0/group
    Old
    EPP
    New
    PPE
    committees/0/rapporteur/0/mepref
    Old
    4de1845a0fb8127435bdbd6e
    New
    4f1ac767b819f25efd000086
    committees/0/shadows/0/mepref
    Old
    4de187060fb8127435bdc135
    New
    4f1ad9ddb819f207b300003e
    committees/0/shadows/1/mepref
    Old
    4de185a50fb8127435bdbf3d
    New
    4f1ac940b819f25efd000122
    committees/0/shadows/2/mepref
    Old
    4de189260fb8127435bdc437
    New
    4f1adc4bb819f207b300010f
    committees/0/shadows/3/mepref
    Old
    4de186e10fb8127435bdc108
    New
    4f1ad9b2b819f207b300002e
    committees/1/rapporteur/0/mepref
    Old
    4de1852d0fb8127435bdbe9e
    New
    4f1ac8c7b819f25efd0000f1
    procedure/Modified legal basis
    Rules of Procedure of the European Parliament EP 150
    procedure/legal_basis/0
    Old
    Rules of Procedure of the European Parliament EP 048
    New
    Rules of Procedure of the European Parliament EP 052
    activities/3/docs
    • type: Decision by Parliament, 1st reading/single reading title: T7-0286/2014
    procedure/stage_reached
    Old
    Awaiting Parliament 1st reading / single reading / budget 1st stage
    New
    Procedure completed
    activities/3/type
    Old
    Vote scheduled
    New
    Debate in Parliament
    activities/3/type
    Old
    Debate in plenary scheduled
    New
    Vote scheduled
    activities/3/date
    Old
    2014-04-02T00:00:00
    New
    2014-04-03T00:00:00
    activities/2/docs
    • url: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=REPORT&mode=XML&reference=A7-2014-0138&language=EN type: Committee report tabled for plenary, single reading title: A7-0138/2014
    activities/3/type
    Old
    Indicative plenary sitting date, 1st reading/single reading
    New
    Debate in plenary scheduled
    activities/2
    date
    2014-02-21T00:00:00
    body
    EP
    type
    Committee report tabled for plenary, single reading
    procedure/stage_reached
    Old
    Awaiting committee decision
    New
    Awaiting Parliament 1st reading / single reading / budget 1st stage
    activities/1
    date
    2014-02-17T00:00:00
    body
    EP
    type
    Vote in committee, 1st reading/single reading
    committees
    activities/1
    date
    2013-12-11T00:00:00
    docs
    url: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=COMPARL&mode=XML&language=EN&reference=PE524.877 type: Committee draft report title: PE524.877
    body
    EP
    type
    Committee draft report
    activities/2/date
    Old
    2014-03-12T00:00:00
    New
    2014-04-02T00:00:00
    activities/1/docs/0/url
    http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=COMPARL&mode=XML&language=EN&reference=PE524.877
    activities/1
    date
    2013-12-11T00:00:00
    docs
    type: Committee draft report title: PE524.877
    body
    EP
    type
    Committee draft report
    activities/0/committees/1/date
    2013-11-08T00:00:00
    activities/0/committees/1/rapporteur
    • group: S&D name: GUERRERO SALOM Enrique
    committees/1/date
    2013-11-08T00:00:00
    committees/1/rapporteur
    • group: S&D name: GUERRERO SALOM Enrique
    activities/1/date
    Old
    2013-12-09T00:00:00
    New
    2014-03-12T00:00:00
    activities/0/committees/0/shadows/1
    group
    ALDE
    name
    JÄÄTTEENMÄKI Anneli
    committees/0/shadows/1
    group
    ALDE
    name
    JÄÄTTEENMÄKI Anneli
    activities/0/committees/0/shadows/1
    group
    ALDE
    name
    JÄÄTTEENMÄKI Anneli
    committees/0/shadows/1
    group
    ALDE
    name
    JÄÄTTEENMÄKI Anneli
    activities/0/committees/0/shadows/1
    group
    ALDE
    name
    JÄÄTTEENMÄKI Anneli
    committees/0/shadows/1
    group
    ALDE
    name
    JÄÄTTEENMÄKI Anneli
    activities
    • date: 2013-09-12T00:00:00 body: EP type: Committee referral announced in Parliament, 1st reading/single reading committees: body: EP shadows: group: S&D name: MUÑIZ DE URQUIZA María group: ECR name: VAN ORDEN Geoffrey group: GUE/NGL name: MEYER Willy responsible: True committee: AFET date: 2013-01-16T00:00:00 committee_full: Foreign Affairs rapporteur: group: EPP name: DANJEAN Arnaud body: EP responsible: False committee_full: Development committee: DEVE body: EP responsible: False committee: FEMM date: 2013-06-19T00:00:00 committee_full: Women's Rights and Gender Equality rapporteur: group: S&D name: CLIVETI Minodora body: EP responsible: False committee_full: International Trade committee: INTA
    • date: 2013-12-09T00:00:00 body: EP type: Indicative plenary sitting date, 1st reading/single reading
    committees
    • body: EP shadows: group: S&D name: MUÑIZ DE URQUIZA María group: ECR name: VAN ORDEN Geoffrey group: GUE/NGL name: MEYER Willy responsible: True committee: AFET date: 2013-01-16T00:00:00 committee_full: Foreign Affairs rapporteur: group: EPP name: DANJEAN Arnaud
    • body: EP responsible: False committee_full: Development committee: DEVE
    • body: EP responsible: False committee: FEMM date: 2013-06-19T00:00:00 committee_full: Women's Rights and Gender Equality rapporteur: group: S&D name: CLIVETI Minodora
    • body: EP responsible: False committee_full: International Trade committee: INTA
    links
    other
      procedure
      dossier_of_the_committee
      AFET/7/13289
      reference
      2013/2146(INI)
      title
      EU comprehensive approach and its implications for the coherence of EU external action
      legal_basis
      Rules of Procedure of the European Parliament EP 048
      stage_reached
      Awaiting committee decision
      subtype
      Initiative
      type
      INI - Own-initiative procedure
      subject
      6.10.05 Peace preservation, humanitarian and rescue tasks, crisis management