European Union's role worldwide: annual debate 1997, financing the CFSP and the budget

Adopting the report by Mr Thomas SPENCER (PPE, UK) on the implementation of the CFSP in 1997 by 416 votes to 36 with 18 abstentions, the European Parliament considered that, while developments in the CFSP showed some progress in comparison with previous years, the criticisms made last year remained very largely valid. It noted that: - there was a lack of public perception of progress in developing a European foreign policy; - there was no interinstitutional agreement on Parliament's right to be informed and consulted; - the Commission still did not make full use of its right to submit proposals to the Council; - progress in developing a common security policy, coordinating defence policies and developing a genuine common armaments policy and incorporating the WEO into the EU remained slight; - mismatch between the EU's foreign policy and trading activities remained. Regretting the lack in the report submitted of any analysis or indication of what the CFSP should be in the future, it stated that it would deal fully with all the financial implications of the main aspects of the CFSP in the ad hoc consultation procedure set up in accordance with the Interinstitutional Agreement. It called for the establishment of procedures for: - Parliament to be duly consulted on all aspects relating to accession partnerships established with countries applying for admission to the EU and for account to be taken of its point of view; - wider and more flexible application of the conciliation procedure; - consultation of Parliament on basic choices in foreign policy and international agreements and other acts based on the Euratom Treaty; - Parliament's involvement in decisions on the penalties to be imposed in the event of human rights violations in third countries. Recognising that the CFSP as it currently exists limits Europe's ability to have the influence that its political, economic and cultural weight deserves, it called for the creation of a genuine common European diplomacy. It reiterated its call for an early warning unit and for the creation of the office of High European Representative in order to increase the visibility of the CFSP. In particular, it called for Commission representations to be transformed into proper diplomatic representations of the Union in those countries where the majority of Member States are not fully represented. Parliament was also concerned with the respect of human rights in the world and called on the Council and the Commission to maintain human rights as a prominent part of the CFSP of the European Union. It also called for the mobilisation of the political commitment needed to use the instruments offered by the Treaties of Maastricht and Amsterdam in order to create a genuine CFSP. It stressed that human rights and democracy clauses should be included in all agreements with third countries and urged the Union, in consultation with the WEU and NATO, to make arrangements to ensure that speedy and efficient use can be made of the available instruments, especially the combined joint task forces. Parliament deplored the lack of ambition in defining a policy through a common position on the Balkans, the lack of adequate initiative on Kosovo at EU level in 1997 and the fact that neither the EU nor the WEU were able to take the decision to send the EUROFOR and EUROMARFOR to Albania. It also deplored the absence of any common policy on human rights in China and the failing impetus of the peace process and the Barcelona process. Parliament called for the role of the Union to be strengthened in line with its financial co contribution and for the Mediterranean policy to be re-launched. It viewed as most serious the continued presence of nuclear weapons in India, which posed a threat to international stability and regretted that the lack of a CFSP was preventing the Union from playing a political role in the establishment of a dialogue on strategic balance in the region. The European Parliament welcomed the fact that a code of conduct on arms exports had been approved by the Council and called for it to be turned into a joint action. Parliament also welcomed the adoption of a common position on the prevention and resolution of conflicts in Africa and the role played by the Union in the San José Conference and Rio Group and fully supported the summit of European and Latin American heads of state and government to be held in 1999. Finally, it reiterated its desire to establish a global action programme with Latin America.�