Activities of Tarja CRONBERG

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph -1 (new)

1. Considers that with the Lisbon Treaty the EU has acquired recently new instruments of external action which enable it to develop a more active, unified and genuinely own foreign policy;

2014/01/22
Committee: AFET

2013/2146(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1

1. Considers that also in other parts of the world 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;

2014/01/22
Committee: AFET

2013/2146(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2

2. Stresses that in such a geopolitical climate, the EU must preserve and promote its values, interests and stability on the global stage, as well as protect the security and prosperity of its citizens; stresses that this demands a fresh approach to shaping a new multipolar world order that is inclusive, credible and cooperative, ~~and~~ underpinned by the rule of law and democracy, as well as universal values, including human rights and aims to achieve the resolution of differences without recourse to armed conflict;

2014/01/22
Committee: AFET

2013/2146(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13

13. Recalls that special attention must be paid to respect~~ing~~ the principles of humanitarian aid (independence, impartiality, neutrality); believes indeed that safe access to affected populations and the security of humanitarian workers ~~depend~~rely above all on how they are perceived by influential actors in the field, and that they should be seen as independent from any partisan political consideration; ~~points out, however,~~yet, reminds that the Commission’'s humanitarian aid and civil protection (ECHO) service is still part of ~~a political organisation –~~ the EU –- and~~, consequently~~ as such, strongly believes that more should be done to enhance cooperation between ECHO and the EEAS~~, both at the level of Commissioners and services and at field level, for instance between ECHO field offices and EU delegations~~;

2014/01/22
Committee: AFET

2013/2146(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14

14. Believes that the CA must be rooted in a vision shared by all EU actors of the evolving strategic context in which EU action takes place; calls, therefore, for more regular and transparent information- sharing, policy co-ordination and teamwork between EU actors through all phases of EU action; calls, further, for the development of formal structures in which those exchanges could take place and where early warning, situation analysis and crisis and post-crisis monitoring could be conducted, potentially integrating existing structures (such as the EU SitRoom, the Emergency Response Coordination Centre and ARGUS); reiterates the need for a ‘Crisis Response Board’ within the EEAS, to be chaired by the HR/VP and bringing together all actors relevant to crisis management; recalls its recommendation and its demand to integrate the UN concept of the 'Responsibility to Protect' into the work of the EEAS and the Member States and for them to engage in an organised reflection on how to further refine its concept and its operationalisation;

2014/01/22
Committee: AFET

2013/2146(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16

16. Stresses that ~~poor~~ coordination and policy planning amongst the relevant institutions is ~~partly responsible for the weak implementation of the EU’s foreign policies on the ground~~improving since the EU delegations have taken over the coordination function between the EU and the Member States, but more progress needs to be made to further enhance implementation of the EU’s foreign policies on the ground, particularly when it comes to crisis regions and in link with CFSP activities;

2014/01/22
Committee: AFET

2013/2146(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17

17. Underlines Parliament’s determination to ensure that the Union’s external financial instruments for the period 2014 to 2020 are designed so as to facilitate the pursuit of a CA to the Union’s external relations, in particular, by creating instruments that work across the nexus of conflict prevention, crisis management, peace-building, development cooperation and the strengthening of strategic partnerships; the new Partnership Instrument provides the EU also with a tool to accompany foreign policy activities with third countries financially; the underlines its determination to exercise in full its democratic control of the implementation of these instruments to ensure that the Union’s important but finite resources are used in an efficient and cost effective way to achieve results; underlines Parliament’s right, as part of the Mid-Term Review of the external financial instruments, to review the implementation of the instruments and make any necessary changes;

2014/01/22
Committee: AFET

2013/2146(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18

18. Calls for a better anticipation of the f~~unding needed to~~inancial needs for the implementation of EU strategies; regrets that, in some cases, the EU’'s actions have been delayed because of financial ~~issue~~matters; calls for such existing structural problems to be remedied in the future, including by making use of the new provisions on strengthening capacities for participation and deployment in civilian stabilisation missions (Article 4c) provided by the Instrument for Stability and Peace (ISP);

2014/01/22
Committee: AFET

2013/2146(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18 a (new)

18a. Underlines that the EEAS cannot be expected to take on its new coordination role and all the additional work related to its enlarged tasks without increasing its resources, starting from personnel over infrastructure to finances;

2014/01/22
Committee: AFET

2013/2146(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20

20. Insists 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 ~~each~~ action (~~e.g. economic sanctions~~ranging from inter alia humanitarian and development aid, diplomatic action and mediation, ~~humanitarian and development aid~~economic sanctions, and the CSDP); insists that the role and contribution ~~of the~~from CSDP should be part of the initial political analysis and definition of policy objectives, thereby facilitating early involvement of CSDP planners ~~when necessary~~and the relevant parliamentary bodies on European and national level; welcomes, in that context, the positive development of a Political Framework for Crisis Approach for CSDP missions and operations and calls for this to be extended tofor all crisis response initiatives;

2014/01/22
Committee: AFET

2013/2146(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21

21. Welcomes, in particular, the EU’'s Strategic Framework for the Horn of Africa, ~~which~~that aims to bring stability to this strategic region, by fighting piracy and its underlying causes, establishing legitimate authorities in Somalia and promoting regional cooperation through the simultaneous use of ~~the~~ EU’'s external instruments, and in cooperation with relevant partners in the field; recalls, however, that EU action in the region has been built up on the basis of pioneering CSDP initiatives (namely, EUNAVFOR Atalanta and EUTM Somalia) that have then been followed by other EU instruments, making the CA in the Horn of Africa more of an ex-post empirical and pragmatic achievement rather than a well- designed and planned strategy; ~~believes strongly~~strongly believes that, in the future, EU strategies must be ~~drawn up before the EU engages in a region, not after;~~ issued before the EU's engagement in a region and not after and that the EU Special Representative for the Horn of Africa should have been appointed much earlier so that he could have contributed more to the development of a strategy for the region; recalls that it is important to give a clear mandate and role to EUSRs so that they are seen by EU commanders and other senior EU representatives on the ground as main EU actor who coordinates activities and ensures coherence and consistency;

2014/01/22
Committee: AFET

2013/2146(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21 a (new)

21a. Deeply regrets that a coherent and comprehensive EU approach was lacking for the Horn of Africa when the pirates off the coast of Somalia were most active and the drought and famine crises led to more than 7 million refugees in Somalia and 12 million in the region; is convinced that a true CA for the Horn of Africa needs to seriously address issues such as drought, famine, refugees, climate change impacts, land grab, illegal fishing, illegal dumping of toxic waste, but also more security and peace related issues such as unilateral interventions by neighbouring Kenya, Ethiopia and illegal arms transfers by Eritrea to Al Shabaab; calls for a stronger focus on mediation, dialogue and reconciliation efforts and a clear and strong role for the EUSR;

2014/01/22
Committee: AFET

2013/2146(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21 b (new)

21b. Is concerned about some actions of the EU's partner's in the region which might undermine the efforts of the EU, the UN and the international community to bring peace, stability and prosperity to the region; deeply regrets the activities of the C.I.A. in Somalia which has, according to media reports, installed secret detention facilities, does illegal abductions and renditions, and uses drones for extrajudicial killings;

2014/01/22
Committee: AFET

2013/2146(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 22 a (new)

22a. Points out that many current national, regional and international conflicts are also climate-driven and that as a consequence the CA needs to incorporate the concept of human security; recalls the analysis published by UNEP in December 2011 on the situation in the Sahel region, where it is stated that rising temperatures have led to water shortages and have specifically put local populations, whose livelihoods are dependent on natural resources such as farming, fishing and herding, under strong pressure, resulting, in some cases, in violence and armed conflict;

2014/01/22
Committee: AFET

2013/2146(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 25

25. Calls on the EU to ~~act~~make further progress on acting as one at country level, with a clear division of responsibilities and under the leadership of a Head of Delegation, responsible for implementing the EU’s external policy in the country, while coordinating locally with Member States as well as the host government, civil society and other international partners;

2014/01/22
Committee: AFET

2013/2146(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 26 a (new)

26a. Stresses the important role of mediation and dialogue in preventing and resolving conflicts peacefully; commends the progress the EEAS has made in strengthening its mediation capacities and reiterates its support for further enhancing Europe's capacities in this field and calls for making mediation an important standard feature of any future CA for a specific crisis region; believes that the European Parliament's successful involvement in mediation processes, inter alia in Ukraine and Macedonia, has demonstrated the important role parliamentarians can play in supporting mediation and dialogue processes and intends to further step up its efforts in this field;

2014/01/22
Committee: AFET

2013/2145(BUD)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 a (new)

1a. Considers, in this regard, of utmost importance to enhance cooperation, step up coordination and develop synergies with programmes and projects of EU Member States in third countries in order to improve the effectiveness of EU external action and cope with current budget restraints;

2013/07/17
Committee: AFET

2013/2145(BUD)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3

3. Notes with particular concern the especially severe reductions applied to the European Neighbourhood Instrument (ENI), which could considerably endanger relations with the Eastern and Southern Neighbourhood, one of the main priorities of the EU's external action; stresses that without adequate funding, the ‘'more for more’' principle as core mechanism in the relevant financial instruments will be fundamentally undermined; strongly urges to restore a substantial amount of the cuts in commitments to the ENI with regard, in particular, to support for CSOs;

2013/07/17
Committee: AFET

2013/2145(BUD)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 a (new)

4a. Stresses that the expectations and the objectives of the EaP Vilnius summit will need an effective follow-up and calls, therefore, for adequate financial support that enables the Union to deliver on its promises;

2013/07/17
Committee: AFET

2013/2105(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6

6. Emphasises in this regard the possibility of establishing permanent structured cooperation (PESCO) among Member States (Article 46.6 TEU), of entrusting CSDP ~~missions and operation~~instruments and military planning and conduct capabilities in particular to that group of Member States (Articles 42.5 and 44.1 TEU), and of establishing a start- up fund for preparatory activities for missions which are not charged to the Union budget (Article 41.3 TEU); ~~highlight~~therefore calls ion this context the importance of leveraging those EU policies which have an impact on security and defence, like industrial research and innovation, market, trade and space policies, in order to support those Member States which are engaged in fure President of the European Council and the High Representative/Vice-President to establish ther st~~rengthening the CSDP~~art-up fund;

2013/09/26
Committee: AFET

2013/2105(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8

8. Points out that, according to the Treaties, the EU's aim is to promote peace, its values and the well-being of its peoples (Article 3 TEU) and that its action on the international scene seeks to consolidate and support democracy, the rule of law and human rights, and to prevent conflicts and strengthen international security, in accordance with the purposes and principles of the United Nations Charter, with the principles of the Helsinki Final Act and with the aims of the Charter of Paris,; i~~ncluding those relating to external borders (Article 21 TEU); is convinced that the CSDP serves these aims and underlines the need to upgrade it~~s convinced that the CSDP serves these aims; recalls that Articles 42.1. and 43.1. TEU describe the spectrum of Common Security and Defence Policy (CSDP) missions as joint disarmament operations, humanitarian and rescue tasks, military advice and assistance tasks, conflict prevention and peace-keeping tasks, tasks of combat forces in crisis management, including peace-making and post-conflict stabilisation;

2013/09/26
Committee: AFET

2013/2105(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8 a (new)

8a. Reminds that according to Article 42.2. a common defence policy of the Union in the sense of collective territorial defence is only possible if the European Council acting unanimously, so decides; states that there is currently no legal base or political mandate for a role of CSDP in the protection and surveillance of the external borders of the European Union;

2013/09/26
Committee: AFET

2013/2105(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9 a (new)

9a. Stresses the important role of mediation and dialogue in preventing and resolving conflicts peacefully; commends the progress the EEAS has made in strengthening its mediation capacities and reiterates its support for further enhancing Europe's capacities in this field; believes that the European Parliament's successful involvement in mediation processes, inter alia in Ukraine and Macedonia, has demonstrated the important role parliamentarians can play in supporting mediation and dialogue processes and intends to further step up its efforts in this field;

2013/09/26
Committee: AFET

2013/2105(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16

16. Asks that the functional problems of civilian CSDP missions, notably regarding the speed of deployment, be tackled by reviewing their legal and financial framework, which often complicates the decision-making process and leads to delays; calls for an increase in the number of planners, which is too small in comparison to the number of missions; further asks Member States to create a ‘civilian reserve corps’ that could be deployed quickly if needed within a wide range of crisis especially climate-driven humanitarian ones; welcomes in this regard the recently established permanent CSDP warehouse; reminds its 2001 resolution which called for the creation of a European Civil Peace Corps; welcomes recent efforts to create a Voluntary Humanitarian Aid Corps within the Commission and a pool of experts in mediation, dialogue, and reconciliation within the External Action Service; also welcomes the existence and the continuation of the Peacebuilding- Partnership between the External Action Service and relevant civil society stakeholders;

2013/09/26
Committee: AFET

2013/2105(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17

17. Highlights the fact that successful military operations require a clear command and control function; reiterates therefore its call for the establishment of a permanent military ~~operational headquarters~~planning and conduct capability; notes with regret the lack of progress on this issue and the strong resistance by some Member States; stresses further that an effective CSDP requires adequate early warning and intelligence support; considers, therefore, that these headquarters should include cells for intelligence gathering and for early warning/situational awareness;

2013/09/26
Committee: AFET

2013/2105(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18

18. Reiterates its support for a provisional solution and draws attention to its proposal to improve the status of the currently active Operations Centre for the Horn of Africa; asks the HR/VP to develop such an option, within the constraints of its current size and infrastructure, in order to optimise the use of existing resources, and to examine the feasibility of creating a~~n organisational cell~~ permanent military planning and conduct capability to take care of the necessary logistics of an operation from Brussels, thus enabling the military commander to concentrate on his/her tasks in the operational field; considers that this body should have legal capacity and be assigned the role of coordinating procurement between Brussels and individual mission headquarters, using economies of scale to maximise savings;

2013/09/26
Committee: AFET

2013/2105(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19

19. ~~Deplor~~Notes the fact that EU battlegroups have never yet been deployed ~~in EU military operations~~; stresses nonetheless that they constitute an important tool for timely force generation, training and rapid reaction; underlines that they could be deployed for all type of crisis climate-driven humanitarian crisis included; welcomes the decision to address this issue during the December Summit; is convinced that the EU should dispose of high- readiness standing battle forces, with land, air, naval and special forces components and a high level of ambition; favours a more flexible and targeted approach to enhance the response and adaptability to different crisis situations, and to improve modularity in order to close gaps during the initial phases of the launch of CSDP operations without, however, compromising the operational capacity of the battlegroup as a whole;

2013/09/26
Committee: AFET

2013/2105(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 22

22. Invites Member States to exploit the possibilities offered by PESCO and to start implementing this Treaty provision in order to tackle the prevailing ‘military CSDP fatigue’ and deepen military cooperation and integration; calls on the European Council to deliver clear guidelines for its implementation and invites Member States that are not interested to act constructively; stresses that the possibility of joining at a later stage should be left open;

2013/09/26
Committee: AFET

2013/2105(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 23

23. ~~Points out that the European economy depends on th~~Stresses the need to develop an EU maritime foreedom of navigation and on open sea routes; calls therefore on the European Council to consider the strategic maritime interests of the EU and to mandate the HR/VP and the Commission to draw up an EU maritime security strategy, in line with the April 2010 Council conclusions, anign policy which puts an emphasis on peaceful resolution of conflicts within the context of international law and which aims at protecting and preserving critical infrastructure, open sea routes and natural resources; underlines the need to dprevelop a specific implementation plan; points out that the integration of maritime surveillance across sectors and borders is already a cross-sectoral tool of the EU Integrated Maritime Policy (IPM); highlights the importance of swiftly implementing the Common Information Sharing Environment project and building a ‘bridge’ between the IPM and the CSDP to improve information sharing between themnt the militarisation of regions like the Arctic and stresses the need to use peaceful means of conflict resolution including trade instruments;

2013/09/26
Committee: AFET

2013/2105(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 24

24. Requests that the European Council reconfirm the importance of space, which underpins the ~~strategic autonom~~non-dependency of the EU and its Member States and the potential to gain a~~utonomous~~ European access to space by developing launchers and satellites under the condition of cost-effectiveness; reiterates the importance of gathering precise intelligence for both civil and military CSDP missions and operations; emphasises in particular the role of space- based assets in the field of conflict prevention and crisis management before, during and after a crisis; invites the Commission to develop a specific policy to support the development of multiple-use space assets;

2013/09/26
Committee: AFET

2013/2105(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 26

26. Asks the European Council to reaffirm the significance of access to energy resources and the security of Europe's energy supply; notes that operation ATALANTA is already performing an energy security role by combating pirates who have hijacked a number of oil tankers since 2008; believes, therefore, that these aspects need to be part of the necessary strategic approach; emphasises in this context that energy supply is a crucial factor for successful CSDP missions and operations; notes that the protection of critical infrastructure in Europe could activate the mutual defence and/or solidarity clause;deleted

2013/09/26
Committee: AFET

2013/2105(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 31

31. Echoes concerns that further cuts in national defence budgets will make it impossible to maintain critical military capabilities and will result in the irreversible loss of know-how and technologies; nNotes that the shortfalls in Member States' capabilities became apparent during the operations in Libya and Mali and that the economic crisis has exacerbated existing structural problems; reiterates its view, however, that the problem is less of a budgetary nature than of a political one;

2013/09/26
Committee: AFET

2013/2105(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 32

32. Stresses the opportunity for Member States to enjoy the full benefits of working closer together and to decide to spend scarce resources in a better and smarter way, avoiding redundancy, fragmentation, overcapacities, corruption and unnecessary duplication;

2013/09/26
Committee: AFET

2013/2105(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 34

34. Draws attention to the mission of the European Defence Agency (EDA), as provided for in Articles 42(3) and 45 TEU, according to which the Agency is entrusted with important tasks in terms of implementing permanent structured cooperation, formulating a European capabilities and armaments policy, developing the military capabilities of Member States, and strengthening the industrial and technological base of the defence sector~~; calls on the Member States to empower the Agency to fulfil this mission and to consider financing the Agency from~~ but without financial implications for the EU budget;

2013/09/26
Committee: AFET

2013/2105(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 38 – point c

(c) to step up the implementation of existing projects, particularly those regarding strategic enablers, and to provide political support for the EDA's flagship projects, i.e. Air-to-Air Refuelling, Satellite Communication, ~~Remotely Piloted Aircraft Systems, Cyber Defence,~~ and the Single European Sky;

2013/09/26
Committee: AFET

2013/2105(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 39 a (new)

39a. Is concerned by the fact that a number of Member States are preparing to buy used F-16 fighter jets without giving European companies a fair chance to compete; considers that such a practice stands in contrast to the objective of the European Council to strengthen the European Defence Industrial Base; reminds these Member States of the need to implement the principles of non- discrimination and transparency as laid down in the Treaty of Lisbon also to government-to-government sales;

2013/09/26
Committee: AFET

2013/2105(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 39 b (new)

39b. Calls on the Member States, the EDA and the Commission to work together towards the gradual phasing-out of offset requirements, while fostering the integration of smaller Member States' industries into the European defence technological and industrial base by means other than offsets; encourage Member States in particular to make full use of the Directives provisions on subcontracting and General Licences to achieve this objective;

2013/09/26
Committee: AFET

2013/2105(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 41

41. Stresses that the anticipation and management of change and restructuring are an integral part of any industrial policy; considers, therefore, that further market integration, consolidation and downsizing of capacities in the defence sector must go hand in hand with active social dialogue and the mitigation of its negative impacts on regional and local economies, ~~making full use of EU financial instruments, such as the European Social Fund and the European Globalisation Fund;~~

2013/09/26
Committee: AFET

2013/2105(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 42

42. Calls on the European Council to take action in these areas and to reverse the tendency ~~to cut R&D expenditure, including at Union level~~of a decreasing relative volume R&D expenditure; supports the development of effective and cost-efficient cooperation between civilian security and defence research activities of national private and public actors and agencies which seeks pooling of existing financial resources without reference to the EU level; stresses, however, the continued need for an effective dual-use export regime;

2013/09/26
Committee: AFET

2013/2092(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1

1. Welcomes the Communication by the Commission on EU Space Industrial Policy; stresses the need to Europeanise the sector and to overcome the high level of fragmentation especially with regard to the institutional demand side; is convinced that only a more cost- efficient and consolidated European space industry can be internationally competitive;

2013/09/04
Committee: AFET

2013/2092(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2

2. Stresses the need, before deciding on new initiatives and EU budget contributions, to clarify first the EU's level of ambition especially with regard to its strategic and geopolitical objectives; notes the fact that the Communication does not define the relationship between EU space industrial policy and the Common Security and Defence Policy (CSDP); calls on the Commission, the Member States and the HR/VP clearly to define the potential contribution of this sector to CSDP, the nature and degree of civil-military synergies and the relevance for CSDP operations and other EU actions and missions in the field of conflict prevention, arms control, the non-proliferation of WMD technologies, counter-terrorism, migration and border control;

2013/09/04
Committee: AFET

2013/2092(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 a (new)

2a. Welcomes the statement by the Commission that space based telecommunication, navigation and earth observation provides the EU with strategically important knowledge underpinning the EU's external relations in the field of development assistance and humanitarian aid;

2013/09/04
Committee: AFET

2013/2092(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 b (new)

2b. Underpins the security dimension of the Copernicus programme (former GMES), particularly the applications of prevention and response to crisis, humanitarian aid and cooperation, conflict prevention entailing monitoring of compliance with international treaties, and maritime surveillance;

2013/09/04
Committee: AFET

2013/2092(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 c (new)

2c. Urges the Commission to stick to the timetable and the financial framework concerning the Galileo programme; stresses its dual use of radio navigation and positioning function, including relevant applications for both civilian and military activities, in particular the possibility for EU member states to use the Public Regulated Service for military purposes; stresses the need to clarify to which extent PRS and other services will be used for CSDP or national military missions outside the EU framework;

2013/09/04
Committee: AFET

2013/2092(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3

3. Notes the fact mentioned in the Communication that 60 % of electronics on board European satellites are currently imported from the US; calls for an initiative on how to protect sensitive or personal data in this context; also urges the Commission, ESA, EDA and the Member States to identify critical technologies in the context of the joint European non- dependence process and to develop alternatives which are less dependent on third countries; recalls the risk that the US might, in the event of disagreement, close down or block European space infrastructure;

2013/09/04
Committee: AFET

2013/2092(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4

4. Supports the point made by the Commission that many components of space systems are of dual-use or military nature and are hence subject to the Directive on intra-Community transfers, the dual-use export regulation or the Common Position on arms exports; calls on the Commission, the Member States and COARM to clarify which regulatory framework should apply to which category of goods and technology;

2013/09/04
Committee: AFET

2013/2092(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 a (new)

4a. Underlines the urgent need to reduce the risk of collision due to the growing population of satellites and space debris; welcomes the initiative of the Commission to propose the organisational framework for the setting up and the operation of a European space surveillance and tracking system (SST); calls on the Commission and the Member States to make sure that these measures are in accordance with draft Code of Conduct in Outer space activities and of the UN space debris mitigation guidelines; calls on the External Action Service and the EU Member States to continue promoting an international Code of Conduct as it seeks to achieve enhanced safety, security, and sustainability in space by emphasizing that space activities should involve a high degree of care, due diligence, and transparency, with the aim of building confidence among space actors worldwide;

2013/09/04
Committee: AFET

2013/0064(COD)

Proposal for a decision
Recital 7 a (new)

(7a) The SST support programme should contribute to ensuring the peaceful use and exploration of outer space.

2013/10/17
Committee: AFET

2013/0064(COD)

Proposal for a decision
Recital 8

(8) The SST support programme should also be complementary to existing mitigation measures such as the United Nations (UN) guidelines for space debris mitigation or other initiatives, ~~such as~~and be consistent with the Union proposal for an international Code of Conduct on outer space activities.

2013/10/17
Committee: AFET

2013/0064(COD)

Proposal for a decision
Recital 8 a (new)

(8a) Parallel to the need for a long term and comprehensive SSA capacity, the European Union should prioritise, support and benefit from initiatives of active removal and passivation measures of space debris, such as the one developed by ESA, as being the best effective way to reduce risks of collision and risks linked to their uncontrolled re-entry into the Earth atmosphere.

2013/10/17
Committee: AFET

2013/0064(COD)

Proposal for a decision
Recital 9

(9) Civil-military SSA user requirements were defined in the Commission staff working paper ‘European space situational awareness high-level civil-military user requirements’14 endorsed by the Member States in the Political and Security Committee of the Council on 18 November 201115 . The provision of SST services should serve only civilian purposes. Purely military requirements should not be addressed by this Decision. As all European Union structures, institutions and policies which rely on space based assets, the Common Security and Defence Policy (CSDP) European Defence Agency (EDA) will profit from the provision of effective SST services but both have no pro-active role in the implementation of this Directive. __________________ 14 SEC(2011) 1247 final, 12.10.2011. 15 Council document 15715/11, 24.10.2011.

2013/10/17
Committee: AFET

2013/0064(COD)

Proposal for a decision
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point c a (new)

(ca) ensure, in addition, the necessary dialogue and coordination bringing together relevant actors such as ESA in view of ensuring coherence between military and civilian space programmes and initiatives and to pursue, in particular, synergies in the space debris tracking and evasion;

2013/10/17
Committee: AFET

2012/2319(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4

4. Reiterates its grave concern at the continuing cuts in national defence budgets, with too little coordination between the Member States, hampering efforts to close capability gaps and undermining the credibility of the CSDP; urges the Member States to reverse this irresponsible trend, as well as to step up efforts at the EU level to limit its consequences through increased cooperation;deleted

2013/04/16
Committee: AFET

2012/2319(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4 a (new)

4a. Reminds the EU Member States, the VP/HR, the Commission and the European Defence Agency that more than two decades after the Cold War and after having been able to take advantage of relatively high national defence budgets the EU Member States were not able to fulfil the Helsinki Headline Goals and other joint military capability development objectives; therefore questions the argument that current cuts in national defence budgets might automatically lead to capability gaps for CSDP and weaken the CSDP because these capabilities do not yet exist due to past failures; is of the strong opinion that the current defence budgets cuts urgently need to be coordinated between Member States and that these cuts have de facto triggered a few European joint capability development projects as in the context of the recent Pooling and Sharing methodology; reiterates its opinion that the recent cuts shall be understood as a chance to build an effective and truly European CSDP;

2013/04/16
Committee: AFET

2012/2319(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5

5. Recalls its resolution on the impact of the financial crisis on the defence sector in the EU Member States, and reaffirms its recommendations to counter the negative effects of the crisis on military capabilities at EU level through better coordination of defence planning, pooling and sharing of capabilities, supporting defence research and technological development, building a more integrated, sustainable, innovative and competitive European defence technological and industrial base, establishing a European defence equipment market, and finding new forms of EU-level funding;deleted

2013/04/16
Committee: AFET

2012/2319(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5 a (new)

5a. Urges the EU Member States and the Commission to seriously restructure and consolidate defence industrial capacities, in order to reduce existing over capacities which mainly drive expansive national export policies;

2013/04/16
Committee: AFET

2012/2319(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5 b (new)

5b. Recalls that opening the EU budget for procuring military goods and technology represents a strategic mistake, as introducing fresh money would only prolong the current structural deficits such as inefficiency, duplication, corruption and the procurement of useless military goods and technology; stresses that a lack of financial resources is not the reason for persisting CSDP capability weaknesses but the lack of will of Member States to commit seriously and extensively to joint capability development projects; also recalls that the EU Member States intend to considerably reduce the financial volume of the next multiannual financial perspective and as a consequence fewer EU financial resources will be left for non-military and non-security research and innovation, which forms the cornerstone of the European economy and guarantees jobs and prosperity;

2013/04/16
Committee: AFET

2012/2319(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6

6. ~~Welcom~~Notes the work of the European Commission Task Force on Defence Industries and Markets, and calls on the Commission to develop proposals on how, with a flexible approach, wider EU policies and tools could be used in support of defence and security objectives~~, especially in areas of transversal nature such as dual-use technologies~~;

2013/04/16
Committee: AFET

2012/2319(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8

8. Welcomes the renewed impulse given by the European Council in December 2012 to increasing the operational effectiveness and efficiency of CSDP operations, enhancing European cooperation in order to provide future-oriented capabilities and fill critical gaps, as well as to ~~strengthen~~consolidating and rationalising the European defence industry;

2013/04/16
Committee: AFET

2012/2319(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12

12. Calls ~~again for the creation of a fully- fledged EU Operational Headquarters within the European External Action Service (EEAS), if necessary through~~on the VP/HR and the EU Member States to ensure effective and integrated planning, and faster decision- making, for CSDP operations, by combining the relevant planning capacities from the Crisis Management and Planning Directorate (CMPD), EU Military Staff (EUMS) and the Civilian Planning and Conduct Capability (CPCC); in addition, to create a permanent conduct structure~~d cooperation; stresses that it should be a civilian- military structure, responsible for the planning and conduct of both EU civilian missions and military~~ by establishing a permanent military Operational Headquarter, co- located with a Civilian Conduct Capability, in order to allow the effective implementation of military and civilian operations, w~~ith separate civilian and military~~hilst safeguarding their respective chains of command;

2013/04/16
Committee: AFET

2012/2319(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13

13. Points out that the creation of a~~n EU Operational Headquarters~~ permanent military planning and conduct capability would greatly enhance the EU's institutional memory in crisis management, contribute to the development of a common strategic culture through the secondment of national personnel, maximise the benefits of civilian-military coordination, allow for the pooling of certain functions, reduce costs in the longer term, and facilitate political oversight by Parliament and the Council;

2013/04/16
Committee: AFET

2012/2319(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16

16. Takes the view that the reviewed ATHENA mechanism for common costs of military operations still does not take adequately into account the specificities of the battle-group concept~~, and calls for a significant expansion of the common costs for rapid reaction operations, up to a full coverage of costs when battle-groups are used~~; considers that applying the ‘costs lie where they fall’ principle to the battle- groups, put on stand- by on a voluntary and rotational basis, is contrary to the principle of fair burden- sharing;

2013/04/16
Committee: AFET

2012/2319(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19

19. Invites the European Council to explore ways of streamlining the political decision-making process at EU level, and parliamentary procedures at national level, to make rapid reaction a reality; encourages reflection on possible modalities for delegating to the VP/HR certain decision-making powers regarding deployments of battle-groups for limited periods of time, provided that certain, clearly defined pre-conditions are met, such as a specific request from the United Nations;deleted

2013/04/16
Committee: AFET

2012/2319(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21

~~21. Points out that any costs that are not linked to military operations, such as preparation and stand-by costs of battle- groups, could be charged to the EU budget;~~deleted

2013/04/16
Committee: AFET

2012/2319(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 23

23. Recalls the mission and tasks of the EDA as provided for in Articles 42(3) and 45 TEU, in particular its essential role in developing and implementing an EU capabilities and armaments policy, harmonising operational needs, proposing multilateral projects, coordinating Member States' programmes, ~~strengthen~~consolidating and rationalising the European Defence Technological and Industrial Base and improving the effectiveness of military expenditure; urges the Member States, given the EDA's strong cost-effectiveness focus, to provide it with adequate funding in order to exploit its full potential~~, and repeats its call on the VP/HR to present proposals to finance the Agency's staffing and running costs from the Union budget~~;

2013/04/16
Committee: AFET

2012/2319(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 26

26. Calls for a more structured approach to address key capability shortfalls at European level and in particular in the areas of key force enablers and force multipliers – such as intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance (ISR) assets, strategic air lift, helicopters, medical support, air-to-air refuelling and precision-guided munitions – in close cooperation and full complementarity with NATO; ~~welcom~~notes the initial results of pooling and sharing initiatives managed by the EDA but stresses that further progress in these and other areas is a necessity; deplores the fact that, although European armed forces have repeatedly faced the lack of such force enablers and force multipliers in CSDP and other operations, none of the identified capability gaps have yet been filled in a satisfactory way although EU Member States have been upholding relatively high levels of defence spending for the last two decades;

2013/04/16
Committee: AFET

2012/2319(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 28

28. Reiterates its call on the Member States to consider joint ownership of certain expensive capabilities, notably space capabilities, ~~unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs)~~ or strategic lift assets; welcomes the work of the Commission exploring the options for developing EU- owned capabilities, exploiting the potential of synergies between defence and civilian security needs, such as in the areas of civil protection ~~or border surveillance~~;

2013/04/16
Committee: AFET

2012/2319(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 29

29. Underlines the need to create a common approach in Europe towards developing a medium-altitude long- endurance remotely piloted air system (MALE RPAS) and encourages the Commission and the Member States to develop an innovative approach for achieving this ambition;deleted

2013/04/16
Committee: AFET

2012/2319(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 30

30. Emphasises the key importance of satellite assets for modern-day operations, in particular with regard to ISR, communication and navigation capabilities and to the need to maximise the use of scarce resources based on a common approach and on the exploitation of all possible civil-military synergies to avoid unnecessary duplication; in this respect, encourages further cooperation between the European Space Agency, the EDA and the Commission~~, and insists on continued EU funding of the GMES and Galileo programmes~~;

2013/04/16
Committee: AFET

2012/2319(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 32

32. Welcomes the adoption of the code of conduct on pooling and sharing as an important step towards more cooperation in Europe and stresses the need to establish a first strategic assessment of its implementation by the end of the year; expects the European Council in December 2013 to be a significant milestone in terms of giving a political impulse to pooling and sharing and of giving clear guidance about the implementation; deplores the fact that EU Member States were able to only agree on 11 out of 300 Pooling and Sharing proposals made by the national chiefs of defence;

2013/04/16
Committee: AFET

2012/2319(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 33

33. Stresses the importance of ensuring the security of supply of the equipment needed by Member States armed forces in order for them to fulfil their commitments in international crises; is seriously concerned about the increasing dependencies on non- European technologies and sources of supply and its implications for European autonomy; underlines the strategic importance of the defence industry, and calls on the EDA and the Commission to advance their work on identifying key industrial capabilities to be preserved or developed in Europe and on reducing European supply dependency;

2013/04/16
Committee: AFET

2012/2319(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 34

34. Deplores the declining national budgets for defence research and the fact that it is mostly fragmented along national lines; points out the potential of the EU to bring substantial added value through the European Framework Cooperation and greater synergies between defence and civilian security research; highlights in particular the need to focus on investments in key enabling technologies such as robotics, nano- and microelectronics, and to make sure that EU funds spent in these areas benefit also the needs of defence;deleted

2013/04/16
Committee: AFET

2012/2319(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 39

39. Reiterates its full support for European structures and projects in the area of education and training and stresses, in particular, the contribution of the European Security and Defence College (ESDC) to the promotion of a common security culture, as well as its potential in identifying and developing cost-saving collaborative projects between national institutions; calls on the Member States to strengthen the College ~~by providing it with funding from the Union budget~~; encourages further development of the European initiative for the exchange of young officers, inspired by Erasmus, as well as the participation of European military officers' education and training institutes in the Erasmus programme;

2013/04/16
Committee: AFET

2012/2319(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 47 – point 1

· the establishment of a permanent ~~EU Operational Headquarters~~military planning and conduct capability,

2013/04/16
Committee: AFET

2012/2319(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 48 – point 1

· structured coordination of defence planning, including financial aspects

2013/04/16
Committee: AFET

2012/2303(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Citation 1 a (new)

- having regard to the conclusions of the Foreign Affairs Council of 19 November 2012 on the review of the Common Position,

2013/03/11
Committee: AFET

2012/2303(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Citation 2 a (new)

- having regard to Action 11 (e) of the Action Plan of the EU Strategic Framework on Human Rights and Democracy, which commits the EEAS and the Member States to ensure that the review of the Council Common Position takes account of human rights and international humanitarian law,

2013/03/11
Committee: AFET

2012/2303(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Citation 4

– having regard to the list of dual-use goods and technology in ~~Annex I to~~the annexes of Regulation (EU) No 1232/2011 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 16 November 2011 amending Council Regulation (EC) No 428/2009 ~~of 5 May 2009~~ setting up a Community regime for the control of exports, transfer, brokering and transit of dual-use items3 ,

2013/03/11
Committee: AFET

2012/2303(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Citation 4 – footnote 3

3. OJ L ~~134, 29.5~~326, 8.12.200911, p. 1.26

2013/03/11
Committee: AFET

2012/2303(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Citation 10 a (new)

- having regard to Regulation 1236/2005 on trade in goods which can be used for capital punishment or torture, and its review foreseen in 2013 under the EU Action Plan on Human Rights and Democracy,

2013/03/11
Committee: AFET

2012/2303(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital A

A. whereas arms ~~export~~transfers can have inter alia a considerable impact not only on security, but also on human rights, democracy, good governance and development, and must therefore be at the very least embedded within a strict arms control system operating with maximum effectiveness;

2013/03/11
Committee: AFET

2012/2303(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital B

B. whereas Common Position 2008/944/CFSP is a legally binding framework laying down eight criteria, and whereas, if they are not met, an export licence should be denied ~~(criteria 1-4) or consideration should at least be given to doing so (criteria 5-8)~~;

2013/03/11
Committee: AFET

2012/2303(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital C

C. whereas the criteria are intended inter alia to prevent arms exports as a result of which conflicts would be aggravated (criteria 3 and 4) or human rights ~~violated (criterion 2)~~and international humanitarian law violated (criterion 2) or to minimise the risk the transferred goods are diverted to third countries and ineligible end-users or a recipient country's development prospects would be adversely affected (criterion 8); whereas the Common Position is unrestricted in scope and, accordingly, the eight criteria apply also to exports within the EU and to arms transfers to countries closely associated with the EU;

2013/03/11
Committee: AFET

2012/2303(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital D

D. whereas the third countries Bosnia and Herzegovina, the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Iceland, Canada, Croatia, Montenegro and Norway have officially aligned themselves with the Common Position's criteria and principles; whereas none of the countries of the European Neighbourhood nor Turkey have officially done so;

2013/03/11
Committee: AFET

2012/2303(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital H

~~H. whereas the Common Position contains no democratically produced and binding list, together with reasons, identifying countries arms exports to which would violate one or more of the eight criteria;~~deleted

2013/03/11
Committee: AFET

2012/2303(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital I

I. whereas there is no standardised verification and reporting system providing information as to whether, and to what extent, individual Member States' exports violate the eight criteria, and whereas there are no sanctions mechanisms, either, should a Member State engage in exports which are clearly not compatible with the eight criteria; whereas there is no possibility of having compliance with the eight criteria independently verified;

2013/03/11
Committee: AFET

2012/2303(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital J

J. whereas ~~little progress has been made on reach~~, despite the existence of the Users Guide, Member States apply and interpret the Common Position's eight criteria ing a~~greement between the Member States with regard to applying and interpreting the Common Position's eight criteria~~ different way when authorizing or denying the same categories of military goods to the same destinations; whereas there is therefore the need to seek a homogenous and ambitious application of the criteria by all Member States;

2013/03/11
Committee: AFET

2012/2303(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital L

L. whereas the COARM annual reports have helped to make Member States' arms exports more transparent and the number of guidelines and clarifications in the User's Guide has multiplied; ~~whereas, because of the Common Position, the volume of information on the issuing of arms export licences has increased;~~

2013/03/11
Committee: AFET

2012/2303(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital M

M. whereas by no means all EU Member States make a full submission to COARM; whereas, because of individual Member States' differing data collection and submission procedures, data sets are incomplete and vary, which considerably reduces transparency in this area, notably as regards the identification of the individual Member State responsible for a denial notification;

2013/03/11
Committee: AFET

2012/2303(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital N

N. whereas measures on trafficking of small arms and light weapons have been adopted in recent years~~, with an updated List of Dual-Use Goods and Technologies under the Wassenaar Arrangement being adopted in February 2012, and~~ such as the UN firearms protocol; whereas areas such as control of arms brokering, licensed production outside the EU and end-user control have been put on the agenda and, to some extent, incorporated into the Common Position itself~~, but many products, in particular in the field of dual- use goods, are still not covered by a legally binding arms exports control system~~;

2013/03/11
Committee: AFET

2012/2303(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital N a (new)

Na. Whereas an updated List of Dual-Use Goods and Technologies under the Wassenaar Arrangement has been adopted in February 2012, but the large majority of dual-use goods products, in particular in the field of surveillance technology, are still not covered by a legally binding exports control system;

2013/03/11
Committee: AFET

2012/2303(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital O

O. whereas many surveillance technologies and surveillance software products and many other goods used in a host of recipient countries for repressive measures against their populations are not included either in the Common Military List of the European Union or in the ~~EU list of dual- use goods~~annexes of EU Regulation 1232/2011;

2013/03/11
Committee: AFET

2012/2303(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital P

P. whereas it has been argued that the events of the Arab Spring in the Middle East and North Africa (MENA) could not be foreseen; whereas nonetheless the human rights situation in those countries and a poor record in democracy and good governance, which, in connection with issuing arms exports licences, should have been (and must be) taken into account, was (and is) known; whereas the events of the Arab Spring have revealed the weaknesses of the Common Position and, to some extent, a number of countries' disregard for it and the criteria it contains;

2013/03/11
Committee: AFET

2012/2303(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital Q

Q. whereas in recent years thsome MENA countries have ranked, and still do, among the key buyers of European arms; whereas, in 2010, EU Member States exported arms to the MENA countries with a total value of EUR 8 324.3 m - in 2011 the total was still as much as EUR 7 975.2 m - on the ground of fostering political stability13 ; whereas between 2006 and 2010, in respect of Libya alone, EU Member States issued export licences with a total value of EUR 1 056 m, while, during the same period, 54 applications for arms exports to Libya were denied in the light of criteria 2, 7 and 5 (most frequently criterion 2)14 ;

2013/03/11
Committee: AFET

2012/2303(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital T

T. whereas the process of actively involving committed Member States, NGOs, national parliaments and the European Parliament, too, in assessing, harmonising, carrying through and monitoring compliance with the Common Position ~~is slow and is not being vigorously pursued~~could be further strengthened; whereas COARM regularly exchanges and consults a consortium of NGOs and Think Tanks;

2013/03/11
Committee: AFET

2012/2303(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2

2. Acknowledges that the EU is the only union of states to have a legally binding framework, unique in the world, through which arms export control is being improved, including in relation to crisis regions and countries with a questionable human rights record and in relations to countries which present a proven risk of diverting the transferred goods in an unauthorised way to other end-users, and welcomes the fact, in this connection, that European and non- European third countries have joined the arms exports control system on the basis of the Common Position; notes with concern, however, that the eight criteria are applied and interpreted with varying degrees of rigour in the EU Member States; calls therefore for a standard, uniformly strict interpretation and full implementation of the Common Position with all its obligations;

2013/03/11
Committee: AFET

2012/2303(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2 a (new)

2a. Takes note of the commitment of the EEAS and Member States under Action 11 (e) of the Action Plan of the EU Strategic Framework on Human Rights and Democracy, to ensure that the review of the Council Common Position takes account of human rights and international humanitarian law; requests the EEAS to report on steps taken to meet this commitment;

2013/03/11
Committee: AFET

2012/2303(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5

5. Considers that a standardised verification and reporting system should be established ~~to provide information~~in order to allow for public assessment as to whether, and to what extent, individual EU Member States' exports ~~violate the eight criteria~~risk assessments and decisions have been guided by the eight criteria of the Common Position in order to allow conclusions about the extent to which the criteria have been applied by national authorities;

2013/03/11
Committee: AFET

2012/2303(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6

6. Insists, in the light of the Common Position review process, that support should be voiced for powerful, clear and unambiguous wording in the Common Position in order to prevent the criteria from being interpreted and applied differently; insists in particular that Article 10 of the Common Position be acted on and that, accordingly, application of the criteria not be ~~neutralised or stopp~~undermined because of political, economic or geostrategic interests; calls for more detailed guidance be provided in the User's Guide under Criterion 2, and Criterion 7, as well as an update of Annexes I to IV, including a reference to the EU human rights country strategies;

2013/03/11
Committee: AFET

2012/2303(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6 a (new)

6a. Calls for the inclusion into the Common Position of the post-embargo toolbox which shall integrate or initiate the following aspects: (a) regular assessments, involving also other relevant EU units and working groups than COARM and national governments and authorities with the aim of clarifying whether the EU should reimpose an embargo, continue to keep it under special measures, or further normalise controls, (b) operate a policy of presumption of denial to the ex-embargo state, (c) apply the equivalent of the existing denial notification/consultation mechanism with regard to all potential transfers to the formerly-embargoed state, (d) states report on individual transfers for inclusion in the Consolidated Report, (e) Member States must reserve the right to undertake post-transfer inspections for end-use verification purposes, and (f) the end-use control on dual-use items to states under embargo should be extended to include these states;

2013/03/11
Committee: AFET

2012/2303(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6 b (new)

6b. Calls for the insertion of an additional Criterion into the EU Common Position on arms exports obliging Member States to assess the risk of bribery and corruption before approving an arms export licence to any country;

2013/03/11
Committee: AFET

2012/2303(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7

7. ~~Regrets the fact that there is no possibility of having compliance with the eight criteria independently verified, that there are no mechanisms for sanc~~Calls on the Member States and the HR/VP to seek for a homogenous and ambitionus ~~for viol~~application of the eight criteria by all Member State~~, and that there are no plans to that effect;~~ s; calls on the Member Staktes ~~the view that ways and means of carrying out independent verification and mechanisms for sanctions for violations of the Common Position should be provided for~~and the HR/VP to also promote much higher levels of transparency by publishing more timely complete sets of data on arms exports of all Member States;

2013/03/11
Committee: AFET

2012/2303(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7 a (new)

7a. Deplores the decision of the French government to export Mistral battleships to Russia despite its recent invasion of Georgia, violation of the six-point peace plan thereafter and the general Human Rights situation in Russia;

2013/03/11
Committee: AFET

2012/2303(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8

8. Welcomes adoption by the Council of the updated version of the Wassenaar Arrangement Munitions List, in which all the 2011 changes to the munitions list are taken into account; calls on the Council also to adopt the most recent changes made in 2011 to, inter alia, ~~the List of Dual-Use Goods~~by updating the annexes of EU Regulation 1232/2011 and agreed by an experts group in December 2012;

2013/03/11
Committee: AFET

2012/2303(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10 a (new)

10a. Recalls that under the Common Position, Member States are to use their best endeavours to encourage other States which export military technology or equipment to apply the criteria of the Common Position; regrets that none of the countries of the EU's Neighbourhood, nor Turkey, have officially aligned themselves with the Common Position's criteria and principles; calls on the EEAS and Member States to encourage these countries to align themselves with the Common Position;

2013/03/11
Committee: AFET

2012/2303(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13

13. Notes that methods for collecting data on arms exports, as well as practices for publishing data sets recorded, vary in the Member States, as a result of which the COARM annual report does not include important information and therefore is not up to date or reliable; calls accordingly for the introduction of a standardised collection and submission procedure, to be applied uniformly in all Member States, in order to submit and publish up-to-date and exhaustive information; calls for the identification in the Annual Report of Member States responsible for individual denial notifications;

2013/03/11
Committee: AFET

2012/2303(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14

14. Suggests in this connection that additional information be collected from Member States and published both at national level and in the COARM annual report, in particular a list of countries arms ~~export~~transfers to which would violate one or more of the eight criteria, together with a comprehensive list of EU Member States which have exported arms to those countries during the data reporting period;

2013/03/11
Committee: AFET

2012/2303(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19

19. Underscores the important role of civil society, national parliaments and the European Parliament in both implementing and enforcing the Common Position's agreed standards at national and EU level and of establishing a transparent, accountable control system; calls therefore for a transparent and robust control mechanism which bolsters the role of parliaments and of civil society, including through the establishment of an independent group of experts to provide advice to COARM in the application and implementation of the eight export criteria, as well as in the drawing up of a list of third countries requiring special caution and vigilance in issuing licences as referred to under article 2.2 (b) of the Common Position; calls for an in-depth discussion of the COARM annual report in a joint session of the DROI and SEDE subcommittees of the European Parliament;

2013/03/11
Committee: AFET

2012/2303(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21

21. Takes the view that government officials responsible for issuing national export licences and civil society organisations addressing the issue of arms export control should be more regularly consulted at COARM meetings, in cooperation with the Council Working Group on Human Rights (COHOM), since they can make an important contribution to implementing the Common Position and help improve the quality of the information exchanged;

2013/03/11
Committee: AFET

2012/2303(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Subheading 5

~~International arms control agreement on international trade in conventional arms~~Arms Trade Treaty (ATT)

2013/03/11
Committee: AFET

2012/2303(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 22

22. Restates its full backing for the conclusion of a robust and legally binding ~~international arms control agreement~~Arms Trade Treaty (ATT), under United Nations auspices, on international trade and transfers in conventional arms; stresses therefore that that objective must be one of the priorities of EU external policy;

2013/03/11
Committee: AFET

2012/2303(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 22 a (new)

22a. Calls, therefore, for the March 2013 negotiations of a legally binding international arms trade treaty to mark a historic step forward, through greater transparency and accountability, by establishing the highest international standards and criteria for making assessments of decisions on the transfer, import and export of conventional arms;

2013/03/11
Committee: AFET

2012/2303(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 23

23. Is of the opinion that an effective ~~control agreement~~ATT should cover a wide range of activities relating to the conventional-arms trade, encompassing import, export and transfer (including transit and transshipment and temporary import and export and re- export), manufacture under foreign license, stockpile management and all related services, including brokering, transport and finance;

2013/03/11
Committee: AFET

2012/2303(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 24

24. Is of the opinion that an effective ~~international arms control agreement~~ATT should cover state-to-state transfers, state- to-private-end-user transfers and leases, as well as loans, gifts, aid or any other form of transfer;

2013/03/11
Committee: AFET

2012/2303(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 24 a (new)

24a. Believes that an effective ATT should also cover the widest spectrum of conventional weapons, including small arms and light weapons and munitions, intangible transfers, dual-use goods, the components and technologies associated with their use, manufacture or maintenance, whether for use in military or other security and law-enforcement purposes; believes that proper attention should be given to the marking and traceability of conventional weapons and ammunition in order to strengthen accountability and prevent diversion of arms transfers to illicit recipients;

2013/03/11
Committee: AFET

2012/2303(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 24 b (new)

24b. Takes the view that States Parties should not transfer arms to countries where Human Rights are violated according to competent bodies of the United Nations, the European Union or the Council of Europe and there is a substantial risk that they would be used to commit or facilitate serious violations of international human rights law and international humanitarian law, including genocide, ethnic cleansing, crimes against humanity and war crimes;

2013/03/11
Committee: AFET

2012/2303(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 25 a (new)

25a. Calls for the ATT, therefore, to include strong and clear provisions for regular reporting by the States Parties on an annual basis on all arms transfer decisions, including information on types, amounts and recipients of equipment authorised for transfer, and on the implementation of the full scope and provisions of the treaty; calls for the ATT also to require State Parties to establish a system of detailed record-keeping, for at least 20 years, for all international trade and transactions processed through their national control systems;

2013/03/11
Committee: AFET

2012/2303(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 25 b (new)

25b. Calls for the establishment of a dedicated ATT Implementation and Support Unit, the responsibilities of which would include compilation and analysis of States Parties' reports, and for the UN Secretary-General to publish an annual report with further proposals for the strengthening of the operational provisions of the treaty; calls for the ATT Implementation and Support Unit to be granted the right also to analyse data on arms transfers and to identify discrepancies and potential breaches of the treaty and report back to the assembly of State Parties;

2013/03/11
Committee: AFET

2012/2303(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 27 a (new)

27a. Welcomes the ratification by Finland and Poland of the Ottawa Treaty on anti- personnel mines, and thus the full ratification by Member States of this important international instrument; calls on the Commission to put forward a proposal for banning investment in companies, which produce, trade in or have any other form of commercial dealing in relation to landmines;

2013/03/11
Committee: AFET

2012/2303(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 27 b (new)

27b. Recalls the most severe humanitarian consequences and unacceptable harm to civilians caused by cluster munitions; calls on Cyprus, Estonia, Finland, Greece, Latvia, Romania and Slovakia to ratify the Convention on Cluster Munitions as a matter of priority;

2013/03/11
Committee: AFET

2012/2303(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 27 c (new)

27c. Urges the Commission and the Member States to support a global ban on the use of white phosphorus and depleted uranium ammunition, notably through the conclusion of a new protocol to the Convention on Certain Conventional Weapons banning the use of such weapons;

2013/03/11
Committee: AFET

2012/2303(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 27 d (new)

27d. Welcomes the work of the ICRC on the use of incapacitation chemical agents in law enforcement and calls on the Commission to carry out a study into the issues raised by the use of these agents, including with regards international law;

2013/03/11
Committee: AFET

2012/2303(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 27 e (new)

27e. Calls on the HR/VP, the Commission and the Member States to implement EU commitments regarding the combat illicit accumulation and trafficking of small and light weapons (SALW) and its ammunition; recalls that these commitments are to assist non-EU member states in stockpile management, marking and similar endeavours to control SALW and are complementary to EU arrangements that regulate transfer of military goods so as to avoid EU member states supply countries where arms are prone to misuse;

2013/03/11
Committee: AFET

2012/2303(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 28

28. Instructs its President to forward this resolution to the High Representative / Vice-President of the Commission, the EU Special Representative on Human Rights, the Council, the Commission, the parliaments and governments of the Member States, and the Secretary-General of the United Nations.

2013/03/11
Committee: AFET

2012/2223(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital A

A. whereas the security of EU Member States is indivisible and all European citizens should have the same security guarantees and an equal level of protection against both traditional and non- conventional threats; whereas the defence of peace, security, democracy, human rights, rule of law and freedom in Europe, which are indispensable for the well-being of our peoples, must remain a core goal and responsibility of European countries;

2012/09/24
Committee: AFET

2012/2223(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital B

B. whereas ~~a stronger and more capable European defence is~~effective and efficient European crisis management instruments are essential for consolidating the transatlantic link, in the context of structural geostrategic changes, accelerated by the global economic crisis, and in particular at a time of ongoing US strategic repositioning towards Asia- Pacific;

2012/09/24
Committee: AFET

2012/2223(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1

1. Urges the Member States, the Commission and the Vice-President/High Representative to ~~make full use of~~start an open consultation on future the potential of all relevant Treaty provisions, and in particular the mutual defence clause and the solidarity clause, in order to provide ~~Europeans with a strong insurance policy against serious security risks, based on increased cost-efficiency and a fair burden sharing and division of cost~~concrete proposals and options;

2012/09/24
Committee: AFET

2012/2223(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4

4. Points out the wide array of instruments available to the Union and the Member States to face exceptional occurrences in a spirit of solidarity, such as the Civil Protection Mechanism, the Solidarity Fund, and the possibility to grant economic and financial support in cases of severe difficulties, as provided for in Article 122 TFEU; also recalls the commitment to develop mutual political solidarity in foreign and security policy in accordance with Article 24 TEU; stresses that the purpose of the mutual defence and solidarity clauses is not to replace any of these instruments, but to ~~complement~~activate them in view of situations of extraordinary threat or damage, and in particular when response will require high-level political coordination ~~and the involvement of the military~~;

2012/09/24
Committee: AFET

2012/2223(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6

6. Reminds the Member States of their unequivocal obligation of aid and assistance by all the means in their power if a Member State is the victim of armed aggression on its territory; stresses that, while large-scale aggression against a Member State appears improbable in the foreseeable future, both traditional territorial defence and defence against new threats need to remain high on the agenda; recalls also that the Treaty stipulates that, for the EU countries that are members of the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation, NATO remains the foundation of their collective defence and the forum for its implementation, and that commitments and cooperation in the area of mutual defence must be consistent with commitments under NATO; calls on the Vice- President/High Representative and the Council to clarify the relationship between the EU mutual defence clause and Article 5 of the North Atlantic Treaty;

2012/09/24
Committee: AFET

2012/2223(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7

7. Points out at the same time the equally important need to prepare for situations involving non-NATO EU Member States or EU Member State territories outside the North Atlantic area, and therefore not covered by the Washington Treaty, or situations where no agreement on collective action is reached within NATO; stresses that under no circumstances assistance to non-NATO EU Member States should lead to linking the Union with the nuclear weapons of two of its Member States; reminds that under no circumstances the implementation of the mutual defence clause should rely on the use of any weapons of mass destruction;

2012/09/24
Committee: AFET

2012/2223(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9

9. Emphasises the importance of ~~deterrence~~prevention, resilience and protection, and therefore the need for European countries to ~~possess credible military capabilitie~~invest in these fields; encourages Member States to step up their efforts on collaborative military capability development, notably through the complementary ‘'Pooling and Sharing’' and ‘'Smart Defence’' initiatives of the EU and NATO, which represent a critically important way ahead in times of restrained defence budgets; recalls that those national military capabilities at the disposal of CSDP are first and foremost designed for specific missions abroad such as outlined in the Petersberg tasks and which might not be of great value for traditional operations in the field of territorial defence;

2012/09/24
Committee: AFET

2012/2223(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10

10. Reiterates its call for proposals regarding systematic harmonisation of military requirements and a harmonised EU defence planning and acquisition process, matching up to the EU's level of ambition and coordinated with the NATO Defence Planning Process; taking into account the ~~increased level of security guarantees provided by~~specific requirements which still need to be clarified and which list precise capabilities needed in order to implement the mutual defence clause,; encourages the Member States to consider multinational cooperation on capability development and, where appropriate, specialisation as core principles of their defence planning;

2012/09/24
Committee: AFET

2012/2223(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11

11. Invites the Vice-President/High Representative to propose practical arrangements for ensuring an effective response in the event that a Member State triggers the mutual defence clause, as well as an analysis of the role of the EU institutions and how to avoid the use of French or British nuclear weapons, should the clause be triggered; takes the view that the obligation to provide aid and assistance, expressing political solidarity among Member States, should ensure a rapid decision in the Council in support of the Member State under attack;

2012/09/24
Committee: AFET

2012/2223(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12

12. Takes the view that, where collective action is taken to defend a Member State under attack, it should be possible to make use of existing EU crisis management structures where appropriate, and in particular that the possibility of activating an EU Operational Headquarters should be envisaged; ~~stresses that a fully-fledged permanent EU Operational Headquarters is needed to ens~~reminds that until now there is no Common European Defence Policy which defines principles, structures, procedures an ~~adequate level of preparedness and rapidity of response, and reiterates its call on the Member States to establish such a permanent capacity, building on the recently activated EU Operations Centr~~d capabilities for organising a military response to an armed attack against one or more EU Member States; also recalls that CSDP structures and capabilities are designed for very specific stabilization missions abroad and are not to be able to contribute to territorial defence;

2012/09/24
Committee: AFET

2012/2223(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 24

24. Recalls that under the provisions of Article 122(1) TEU the Council may decide on measures to address a difficult economic situation in a spirit of solidarity, in particular if severe difficulties arise in the supply of certain products~~, notably in the area of energy~~; stresses the importance of seeing this provision as part of a comprehensive Union solidarity toolbox to address some new major security challenges, such as challenges in the area of climate security, energy security and the security of supply of other critical products;

2012/09/24
Committee: AFET

2012/2138(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1

1. Stresses that the EU should be a global political player on the international scene in order to promote international peace and security, ~~to protect its interests in the world~~but also its principles such as democracy, the rule of law, the universality and indivisibility of human rights and fundamental freedoms as laid down in Article 21 TEU and to ensure the security of its citizens; believes that the European Union should be able to assume its responsibilities when confronted with international threats, crises and conflicts, especially in its neighbourhood;

2012/10/02
Committee: AFET

2012/2138(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2

2. Emphasizes in this regard the need for the EU to assert ~~its strategic autonomy through a strong~~a credible and effective foreign, security and defence policy enabling it to act alone if necessary; emphasizes ~~that this strategic autonomy~~CSDP as a useful foreign policy tool will remain illusory without ~~credibl~~effective military capabilities; recalls that ~~this strategic autonomy~~CSDP is being built with due respect for existing alliances, while maintaining a strong transatlantic link, as stressed in Article 42 of the Treaty on European Union;

2012/10/02
Committee: AFET

2012/2138(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3

3. Is concerned about the prospect of strategic decline facing the EU~~, not only through the downward trend in defence budget~~ because of a lack of joint initiatives among Member States in order to strengthen, pool and share their respective civilian and military capabilities, but also because of the relative and progressive marginalisation of its crisis management instruments, in particular the military ones; believes that the Union must seek to not delegate its security to others;

2012/10/02
Committee: AFET

2012/2138(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4

4. Notes that, despite the continuing validity of its assertions and analyses, the European Security Strategy, which was drawn up in 2003 and finalised in 2008, is beginning to look outdated, since a strategic vision formed in 2003 is no longer sufficient to understand today's world; calls therefore on the High Representative / Vice-President of the Commission and the Council rapidly to present a White Paper on the Security and Defence of the EU, which precisely defines the EU's strategic interests and takes account of changing threats and the development of relations with our allies and partners, but also with emerging countries; stresses the importance of such a strategic framework to guide the external action of the Union European, channel the foreign policies of Member States towards common goals and also guide the medium and long-term strategic planning of both, the civilian and military capabilities ~~to be developed and acquired within the context of the CSDP~~, by reviewing existing and planned national capabilities under a CSDP perspective;

2012/10/02
Committee: AFET

2012/2138(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9 – point 4

· the European Defence Agency is entrusted with important tasks in ~~developing~~assisting the development of the military capabilities of Member States, including ~~strengthening the industrial and technological base of the defence sector, formulating a European capabilities and arms policy~~initiating joint programs such as Pooling and Sharing and implementing permanent structured cooperation;

2012/10/02
Committee: AFET

2012/2138(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12

12. Emphasizes that the CSDP is intended to intervene in crises, including in context of high-intensity conflicts, with high political visibility and be ambitious enough to have a real impact on the ground; recalls the fact that among the past and current 27 CSDP operations only two missions, ATALANTA and ARTEMIS, are to be considered to be combat operations which include the use of force which means that altogether the EU has very little experience when in comes to dealing with high intensity conflicts;

2012/10/02
Committee: AFET

2012/2138(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14

14. ~~Regrets, however, that with the exception of EUTM Somalia, no new military operations have been launched since 2008, even though a number of c~~Stresses the need to consider assistance in the field of Security Sector Reform to countrises ~~could have warranted EU intervention, including in Libya and Mali; encourag~~of the Arab Spring, especially in North Africa, but also to other countries, in th~~is context, the intensification of ongoing planning for possible military operations~~e Sahel region such as Mali;

2012/10/02
Committee: AFET

2012/2138(INI)

Tarja CRONBERG, Ulrike LUNACEK

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17

17. Notes that the EUFOR Althea operation in Bosnia and Herzegovina, which was launched in 2004, has seen a steady decline in its staff complement and supports therefore the ~~reorientation of its mandate towards the~~closure of this mission and a new type of EU assistance in the field of capacity-building and training of the armed forces of Bosnia and Herzegovina;

2012/10/02
Committee: AFET

2012/2138(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18

18. Welcomes the positive role played by the EULEX Kosovo mission, which is operating in a difficult political environment, to help this country to combat organized crime at all levels and to establish the rule of law and a judicial, police and customs apparatus free from all political interference, in line with internationally recognized, as well as European, best practices; recognizes, however, that much remains to be done if EULEX is to fully accomplish the missions assigned to it and enjoy the full confidence of the population, especially the Kosovo Serb community; calls on the mission ~~to answer~~EULEX Special Investigative Task Force on the alleged inhuman treatment of people and illicit trafficking in human organs to continue to investigate with the greatest care and rigour the questions raised by the Council of Europe report on the veracity of allegations of organ trafficking and to implement, with the States concerned, a witness protection programme so that rigorous judicial proceedings can establish the facts; calls on EULEX contributing states to fully support EULEX and Kosovo authorities with for example witness relocation;

2012/10/02
Committee: AFET

2012/2138(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21

21. Note that currently three operations (EUNAVFOR Atalanta, EUTM Somalia and EUCAP Nestor) are deployed for the benefit of the region and stresses the need to continue the coordination of the EU's intervention with efforts by the international community, first and foremost the African Union, to ensure that Somalia ~~once again~~ has a functioning and democratic State;

2012/10/02
Committee: AFET

2012/2138(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 24

24. ~~Pays tribute to the vital~~Notes the contribution made by the EUNAVFOR Atalanta operation in combating piracy in the Gulf of Aden and the western Indian Ocean and approves the extension of its mandate until December 2014; ~~approves also the extension of the scope of this mission to include Somalia's coastal zone and territorial and inland waters;~~ calls on Member States to provide adequate air and sea resources for this operation and encourages commercial vessels to continue to apply best navigational practices so as to reduce the risk of attack; welcomes the contribution by the Netherlands to operation Atalanta in the form of an on- board protection team intended to ensure the safety of humanitarian convoys and encourages other Member States to make this type of contribution; calls on the HR/VP, the Operation Commander and the Member States to implement EUNAVFOR Atalanta's mandate also with regard to illegal fishing;

2012/10/02
Committee: AFET

2012/2138(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 26

26. ~~Highlights the positive role played by EUTM mission in Somalia, in close cooperation with Uganda, the African Union a~~Rejects the deployment of the EU Military Training Mission (EUTM) to Uganda; notes that more than 3 000 Somali security forces have been trained so far by EU military trainers; reminds the ~~United States, to train more than 3 000~~fact that by training the Somali rsec~~ruits, some 2 500 of whom have already been reintegrated in the~~urity forces the EU becomes a party to the conflict and loses its role as a potential future mediator or peace broker; notes with concern the fact that Somalia security forces~~; estimates that the mission has contributed in particular to improving the situation in and around Mogadishu by strengthening the security forces of Somalia and AMISOM~~ not only lack command and control structures, but also a financial framework which allows regular payments of salaries; notes with concern reports of government forces trained by EUTM looting food aid delivered by international donors to refugee camps in Mogadishu; is equally concerned by high unofficial defection rates amongst security forces trained by EUTM which might in the end strengthen Al Shabab or other militias;

2012/10/02
Committee: AFET

2012/2138(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 27

27. Approves the extension of the mandate of the EUTM Somalia mission until December 2012 and the focus placed on the command and control capabilities, specialized capabilities and self-training capabilities of the Somali national security forces with a view to the transfer responsibility for training to local players; notes that the European Union will be obliged to pursue its training efforts beyond 2012 and, in this context, calls on the EEAS to explore the possibility of transferring all or part of this training to parts of Somalia that are under the control of the authorities in the light of the improvement in the security situation;deleted

2012/10/02
Committee: AFET

2012/2138(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 28

28. Emphasizes that the model of the EUTM operation, which, for a relatively modest outlay in terms of funding, material and human resources, has given the EU a major regional role in East Africa, could be replicated in other areas, particularly the Sahel;deleted

2012/10/02
Committee: AFET

2012/2138(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 35

35. Believes that the EU has an important role to play in the process of institutional transition in Libya, in particular in the demobilisation and integration of members of revolutionary brigades, in the reorganisation of the armed forces and ~~assistance in controlling land and sea border~~police forces; regrets that the EU contribution in the security sector is slow to materialise, and that difficulties in planning and implementing this contribution are leaving the field open to bilateral initiatives of doubtful visibility and consistency; ~~supports the acceleration of planning for a civilian mission to assist border controls;~~

2012/10/02
Committee: AFET

2012/2138(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 36

36. Notes the launch of the EUAVSEC South Sudan mission to strengthen the security of the Juba airport; wonders, however, about the wisdom of having recourse to a CSDP mission to secure that airport, given that such a mission could have been carried out by the Commission through its Instrument for Stability;

2012/10/02
Committee: AFET

2012/2138(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 46

46. Notes that the crisis management structures within the EEAS remain under- staffed~~, both~~ on the civilian ~~and military~~ side, which affects ~~their~~its ability to respond and contributes to a degree of marginalisation of the CSDP; calls on the High Representative / Vice- President Commission to address this situation as soon as possible; emphasizes the direct link that must exist between the High Representative / Vice-President of the Commission and the CSDP crisis management structures;

2012/10/02
Committee: AFET

2012/2138(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 47

47. Highlights the difficulties faced by Member States in providing a sufficient number of qualified and trained staff for civilian CSDP missions; calls on the Commission and the EEAS to explore ways of assisting Member States with regard to increasing the numbers of police, judges and highly specialised personnel in the field of public administration to be deployed with civilian CSDP missions;

2012/10/02
Committee: AFET

2012/2138(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 48 a (new)

48a. Underlines the need to develop, complementary to those capacities mentioned in the context of the Civilian Headline Goal which refer to police, judges, highly specialised personnel in the field of administration, more effective mediation guidelines and capacities in order to provide adequate resources for mediation in a timely and coordinated manner;

2012/10/02
Committee: AFET

2012/2138(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 52

52. Stresses that, in terms of absolute value, spending in the combined European defence budgets of all Member States compares favourably with that of the major emerging powers and that the problem is thus less a budgetary than political one, ranging from the definition of a ~~European industrial and technological base to the pooling of certain operational capabilities~~very precise definition of the capabilities needed for effective CSDP missions to the pooling of certain operational capabilities; also reminds the fact that procurement in the field of armaments in Europe is still characterised by a high degree of duplication and thus a waste of tax payers money;

2012/10/02
Committee: AFET

2012/2138(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 55

55. Welcomes the initial progress made by the European Union's ‘'pooling and sharing’' initiative and ~~pays tribute to~~notes the work of the European Defence Agency (EDA) which has only identified 11 priority areas for action out of 300 proposals made by the national Chiefs of defence (CHODs) in May 2011; stresses in particular the progress achieved in four areas: air-to-air refuelling, maritime surveillance, medical support and training; calls, however, for this initiative to be provided with a strategic framework and calls for a much more ambitious approach both in quantitative and qualitative terms;

2012/10/02
Committee: AFET

2012/2138(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 58

58. Recalls that the war in Libya has also highlighted the lack of reconnaissance drones in European armed forces and notes that in Europe there are currently two rival MALE (Medium Altitude Long Endurance) drone projects; notes also Franco-British cooperation over UCAVs (Unmanned Combat Air Vehicles), which would benefit from not being exclusive, but open to other European partners;deleted

2012/10/02
Committee: AFET

2012/2138(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 61

61. Insists that the building-up of European capabilities should also result in the consolidation of the industrial and technological base of Europe's defence industry; ~~recalls in this connection the importance of the principle of European preference and the relevance of a European Buying Act;~~

2012/10/02
Committee: AFET

2012/2138(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 63

63. Notes ~~with concern~~ the reduction in the appropriations allocated to research and technology, which in the long term will affect the ability of Europeans to ~~maintain a credible defence capability~~produce the whole range of armaments and military equipment;

2012/10/02
Committee: AFET

2012/2138(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 64

64. ~~Welcomes the efforts of the European Defence Agency~~Notes recent initiatives to maintain a European industrial and technological defence base and the Barnier / Tajani initiative to create within the European Commission a Task Force charged with preserving and developing this strategic tool whose function is to ensure the autonomy of the EU and its Member States in the field of defence; stresses that the creation of an European security and defence market should have a special focus on producing military and security goods which are needed for CSDP missions and that the creation of such an internal market must go hand in hand with a communitarisation of the EU Code of Conduct on Arms Exports laid down in Common Position 2008/944/CFSP, adopted on 8 December 2008;

2012/10/02
Committee: AFET

2012/2138(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 68

68. Urges the Council and Member States to provide the European Defence Agency with adequate funds and qualified staff so that it is able to perform all the tasks assigned to it by the Treaty of Lisbon; ~~believes that this must be taken into account in the context of the next multiannual financial framework;~~

2012/10/02
Committee: AFET

2012/2138(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 73

73. ~~Believes that this undermines the credibility of the battlegroups as an instrument and of the CSDP in general, since they could already have been deployed; e~~Encourages Member States to remain mobilised and to meet their commitments in respect of thie Battle Groups instrument;

2012/10/02
Committee: AFET

2012/2138(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 76

76. Reiterates its call for the creation of an EU Operational Headquarters (OHQ) for operational planning and the conduct of military CSDP operations in the European External Action Service, if necessary through enhanced cooperation; believes that under no circumstances the well functioning body for operational planning and conduct of civilian CSDP operations, CPCC, should be merged with the future OHQ; stresses the need to keep civilian and military chains of command strictly separated;

2012/10/02
Committee: AFET

2012/2138(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 87

87. Welcomes also the cooperation between the European Union and the United States in respect of crisis management operations, including EUTM Somalia, EUNAVFOR Atalanta, EULEX Kosovo and EUPOL Afghanistan; also welcomes the good cooperation between EUNAVFOR Atalanta and third countries such as Russia, China and India;

2012/10/02
Committee: AFET

2012/2138(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 87 a (new)

87a. Calls on the HR/VP to send an CSDP expert as an observer to the Five Power Defence Arrangements (FPDA) which since 1971 involves Britain, Australia, New Zealand, Malaysia and Singapore;

2012/10/02
Committee: AFET

2012/2103(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1

1. Reminds the Commission that the EU's energy policy must be in line with other priority policies of the Union, including its security, foreign and neighbourhood, trade, human rights, democracy and development policies, to ensure the effectiveness of its energy policy as well as the coherence and credibility of its foreign policy;

2012/10/18
Committee: AFET

2012/2103(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4

4. Re~~call~~quires that ~~the Union's strategic partnerships with producer and transit countries, in particular countries covered by the European Neighbourhood Policy (ENP), require adequate tools, predictabil~~EU's infrastructure- related projects oriented at diversifying supply routes and increasing Union's energy security, stability and long-term investment; emphasises, to that end, that the Union's climate objectives must be in accord with EU infrastructure investment projects oriented at diversifying supply routes and increasing the Union's energy security;hould be in line with Union's climate objectives and international climate commitments.

2012/10/18
Committee: AFET

2012/2103(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 b (new)

4b. Stresses that the EU energy policy must in no way contradict the basic principles upon which the EU was founded with regard, in particular, to democracy and human rights; calls on the Commission, in this regard, to privilege in its energy relations producers and transit countries that share and support the same values;

2012/10/18
Committee: AFET

2012/2050(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8

8. Underlines the role of political leadership expected of the HR/VP in ensuring the unity, consistency, credibility and effectiveness of action by the Union; calls on the HR/VP to use to the full her powers to initiate, conduct and ensure compliance with the CFSP, involving Parliament's relevant bodies fully in that endeavour; ~~welcomes the~~invites the HR/VP in her important lead role, on behalf of the international community, ~~played~~ under difficult circumstances byin the ~~HR/VP in the~~ negotiations with Iran to take account of the important historical relationship between Europe and Iran and its role as one of Europe's neighbours; calls for such leadership in enhancing the European Union's role in support of the Middle East Peace Process and in the Neighbourhood;

2012/06/26
Committee: AFET

2012/2050(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 62 a (new)

62 a. Calls on the EU HR/VP and the Council with regard to the UN negotiations on the Arms Trade Treaty (ATT) to work for the highest possible standards of protection of international human rights law and international humanitarian law by setting standards that go beyond those already agreed upon at the EU level and enshrined in the EU Common Position on Arms Exports; stresses thus that EU states parties positions must refrain from accepting lower standards which would undoubtedly be detrimental to success and effectiveness of the ATT;

2012/06/26
Committee: AFET

2012/2050(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 63 a (new)

63 a. Notes the results of the May NATO Summit in Chicago; questions NATO's decision to develop a civilian crisis management capability which will duplicate the EU's already existing capabilities and instruments and which might put EU Member State's national capabilities under additional pressure; regrets NATO's decision to develop a NATO Ballistic Missile Defence (BMD) capability which might technically not be reliable but nevertheless trigger an arms race with countries such as Russia, China and India and will consume considerable financial investments in times of austerity, economic and financial crisis; urges the US to remove all tactical nuclear weapons from European territory and Russia to do the same with regard to the Western part of the country;

2012/06/26
Committee: AFET

2012/2050(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 69 a (new)

69 a. Is concerned about past arms exports by EU Member States to authoritarian regimes in particular in North Africa and the Arab World; deplores the fact that EU Member States continue to export arms to countries such as Saudi Arabia, but also Armenia and Azerbaijan thus contributing and facilitating armed conflict, regional instability and serious violations of international human rights law (IHRL) and international humanitarian law (IHL); urges EU Member States such as Germany and Cyprus to fully respect and implement the EU arms embargo against Syria; reminds that EU Member States are responsible for more than one third of global arms exports; urges the EU Member States to comply not only with the eight criteria of Common Position 2008/944/CFSP (the EU Code of Conduct on Arms Exports) but also with EU development policy principles; reminds EU Member States that developing countries should first and foremost invest financial resources in sustainable social and economic development, democracy and the rule of law; urges HR/VP and the EU Member States to use the ongoing review of EU Common Position 2008/944/CFSP in order to strengthen the implementation and monitoring of the EU criteria for arms exports; calls on the HR/VP and the EU Member States to speak with one voice in the context of the UN negotiations on a global Arms Trade Treaty (ATT) and to promote a strong and robust ATT which requires State Parties to deny any arms export in case there is a serious risk that the arms would be used to commit or facilitate serious violations of IHRL and IHR, including genocide, crimes against humanity and war crimes;

2012/06/26
Committee: AFET

2012/2029(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph -1 g (new)

-1 g. Stresses that the Union's high dependence on energy imports risks to undermine the coherence, the credibility and the effectiveness of the EU foreign policy;

2012/03/30
Committee: AFET

2012/2029(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 a (new)

2 a. Stresses the importance of further development of the Africa-EU Energy partnership launched in 2010;

2012/03/30
Committee: AFET

2012/2029(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 a (new)

3 a. Stresses that the Energy Dialogue with Russia should be focused on concrete measures to strengthen investment friendly and secure legal environment both in EU and Russia, including the issues of the Third Energy Package;

2012/03/30
Committee: AFET

2012/2029(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4

4. Is in favour of a political dialogue with Norway and Russia over the exploration of new energy sources in the Barents Sea~~, while ensuring~~ based on the prerequisite of protection of the vulnerable environment of the Arctic region; calls for a swifter formulation of EU's strategy towards the Arctic region;

2012/03/30
Committee: AFET

2012/2029(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 c (new)

5 c. Takes the view that the EU should privilege the development and deepening of its energy policy cooperation with third countries who share the same values and are willing to engage in democratic reforms and the promotion of the values upon which the EU is founded;

2012/03/30
Committee: AFET

2012/2005(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 7

7. Insists that, despite these major investments, there are a number of important and tangible benefits stemming from harmonisation, including flight optimisation, fuel efficiency, reduction of noise, air pollution and climate change and the flexible and safe use of a less fragmented sky; highlights the efficiency that greater civil-military coordination would achieve, as using joint infrastructure would result in cost-cutting; emphasises that enhanced interoperability between Member States and the realisation of the Functional Airspace Blocks (FABs) would also produce benefits in terms of cross-border operations;

2012/05/25
Committee: AFET

2011/0461(COD)

Proposal for a decision
Recital 19

(19) Where the use of military capacities is considered in support of civil protection operations to be appropriate, cooperation with the military should follow the modalities, procedures and criteria established by the Council or its competent bodies for making available to the Mechanism military capacities relevant to the protection of civilian populations, in particular since there is in some specific cases the need for coordination and cooperation between civilian and military actors when it comes to civil protection and disaster response. Civilian and military chains of command should be kept separate.

2012/10/15
Committee: AFET

2011/0461(COD)

Proposal for a decision
Article 9 – paragraph 4

4. Member States may, subject to appropriate security safeguards, provide information about relevant military capacities that could be used as a last resort as part of the assistance through the Mechanism, such as transport and logistical or medical support. Member States, the Council, the External Action Service and the Commission shall in this case respect both the Oslo Guidelines and the Guidelines on the use of Military and Civil Defence Assets to support United Nations humanitarian activities in complex emergencies (MCDA Guidelines) and guarantee that civilian and military chains of command are being kept separate.

2012/10/15
Committee: AFET

2011/0405(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 9

(9) Furthermore, it is important to foster and facilitate cooperation for the common benefit of Union and its partners, notably through pooling of contributions from internal and external instruments of the Union budget, in particular for Cross- Border Cooperation, regional cooperation projects, infrastructure projects of Union interest that will pass through Neighbourhood countries and other areas of cooperation.

2012/06/15
Committee: AFET

2011/0405(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 12

(12) Cross-Border Co-operation ~~will~~should contribute as appropriate to the implementation of existing and future regional cooperation, for example in the Northern Dimension and Black Sea regions, as well as and of macro-regional strategies.

2012/06/15
Committee: AFET

2011/0405(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 14 a (new)

(14a) The European Neighbourhood Instrument funding supports also the implementation of regional cooperation i.a. in the framework of the Northern Dimension and the Black Sea Synergy as well as the external aspects of macro- regional strategies.

2012/06/15
Committee: AFET

2011/0405(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 2

2. Union support under this Regulation shall be used for the benefit of partner countries and the regions involved in the Cross-Border Cooperation. It can also be used for the common benefit of EUthe Union and partner countries.

2012/06/15
Committee: AFET

2011/0405(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 3

3. Union funding may also be used for the purpose of enabling the Russian Federation to participate in Cross-Border Cooperation , for the common benefit of border regions, and in relevant multi-country programmes, to reflect the specific status of the Russian Federation as both a Union neighbour and a strategic partner in the region.

2012/06/15
Committee: AFET

2011/0405(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 3 a (new)

3a. Cooperation with Russian Federation is based on its status as the Union neighbour and strategic partnership. The Northern Dimension policy documents and other relevant documents provide the political framework for regional and Cross-border cooperation with Russia. Black Sea Synergy is based on the Joint Statement of the Ministers of Foreign Affairs of the countries of the European Union and of the wider Black Sea area.

2012/06/15
Committee: AFET

2011/0405(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 3

3. Union support under this Regulation shall in principle be co-financed by the partner and other participating countries through public funds, contributions from the beneficiaries or other sources. The same principle shall be applicable to the cooperation with the Russian Federation, particularly with regard to programmes referred to in points (b) and (c) of Article 6(1) ~~(c)~~. Co-financing requirements may be waived in duly justified cases and when this is necessary to support the development of civil society and non-state actors, without prejudice to compliance with the other conditions set out in the Financial Regulation.

2012/06/15
Committee: AFET

2011/0405(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point b

(b) multi-country programmes which address challenges common to all or a number of partner countries, ~~and regional and sub-regional cooperation between two or more partner countries, and~~based on priorities of the European Neighbourhood Policy, or regional and sub-regional cooperation which may include cooperation with the Russian Federation;

2012/06/15
Committee: AFET

2011/0405(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 1 – point a

(a) for land borders, covering the territorial units corresponding to NUTS level 3 or equivalent along the land borders between Member States and partner countries, and/or the Russian Federation; , without prejudice to potential adjustments needed to ensure the coherence and continuity of cooperation action;

2012/06/15
Committee: AFET

2011/0405(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 2

2. In order to ensure the continuation of existing cooperation schemes and in other justified cases, territorial units adjoining to those referred to in paragraph 1 may be allowed to participate in Cross-Border Cooperation. The conditions under which adjacent regions may participate will be laid down in the Joint Operational Programmes. Border regions that belong to countries of the European Economic Area (EEA) and the relevant regions in countries covered by the Instrument for Pre-accession Assistance can also participate in the programmes mentioned in points (a), (b) and (c) of paragraph 1. Participation of the European Economic Area countries in the Cross-Border Cooperation programmes will continue to be based on their own resources.

2012/06/15
Committee: AFET

2011/0405(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 10 – paragraph 12

12. Following the principle of partnership, participating countries and regions shall jointly select actions for Union support that are consistent with the priorities and measures of the joint operational programme.

2012/06/15
Committee: AFET

2011/0405(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 11 – paragraph 4

4. Where eligibility is restricted in accordance with Article 8(7) of the Common Implementing Regulation, the entity referred to in paragraph 1, which may launch calls for proposals and tenders, is entitled in such case to accept as eligible tenderers, applicants and candidates from non eligible countries, or goods from non eligible origin, in accordance with Article 9(3) of the Common Implementing Regulation.deleted

2012/06/15
Committee: AFET

2011/0392(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 25 a (new)

(25a) It is of utmost importance to review Joint Action 2004/552/CFSP1 as it does not take into account the entry into force of the Lisbon Treaty and specifically the appointment of the High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy and the establishment of the European External Action Service (EEAS). Joint Action 2004/552/CFSP describes the exceptional and urgent cases of threats to the European Union or a Member State arising from the operation or use of the system, or in the event of a threat to the operation of the system, in particular as a result of an international crisis. There is an urgent need to clarify and strengthen the role of the High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy pursuant to the urgency procedure according to Articles 3 and 4 of Joint Action 2004/552/CFSP on the rules, procedures and measures to be taken in the event of a threat to the security of the European Union or a Member State, notably where PRS receivers are lost, misused or compromised. An amendment of Joint Action 2004/552/CFSP should also take into account the expertise of the EEAS in the field of early warning, situational awareness, security and defence. ____________ OJ L 246, 20.7.2004, p. 30.

2012/06/14
Committee: AFET

2011/0392(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 28

(28) As the programmes will be, in principle, financed by the Union, public procurement under the programmes should comply with Union rules on public contracts and should aim, first and foremost, to obtain best value for money, control costs, mitigate risks, improve efficiency and reduce reliance on a single supplier. Open access and fair competition throughout the supply chain and the balanced offering of participation opportunities to industry at all levels, including, in particular, new entrants and small and medium-sized enterprises (hereinafter ‘SMEs’), should be ensured. Possible abuse of dominance and of long- term reliance on single suppliers should be avoided. In order to mitigate programme risks, to avoid reliance on a single source of supply and to ensure better overall control of the programmes and their costs and schedules, multiple sourcing should be pursued, wherever appropriate. Union industries should be permitted to rely on non-Union sources for certain components and services where substantial advantages in terms of quality and costs are demonstrated, taking account, however, of the strategic nature of the programmes ~~and of Union security and export control requirements~~. Advantage should be taken of public sector investment and industrial experience and competence, including that acquired during the definition and development and validation phases of the programmes, while ensuring that the rules on competitive tendering are not contravened.

2012/06/14
Committee: AFET

2011/0392(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 30 a (new)

(30a) The services offered by Public Regulated Service (PRS) might play an important role for different weapon systems, especially concerning navigation and guidance. It is therefore important that the Commission, the Council, the European External Action Service (EEAS) and Member States act in accordance with the 1967 Outer Space Treaty and that Member States and the EEAS increase their efforts regarding the possible revision of the international legal framework or, alternatively, regarding a new treaty or code which takes into account the technological progress since the 1960s and effectively prevents an arms race in outer space. The Union should furthermore strengthen the legal framework created by the Outer Space Treaty to safeguard a peaceful and secure functioning of space infrastructure. The Union should therefore strengthen its capabilities to achieve space situational awareness together with its partners in the framework of a multilateral space surveillance system.

2012/06/14
Committee: AFET

2011/0392(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 31

(31) In view of the global nature of the systems, it is essential that the Union can enter into agreements with third countries and international organisations in the context of programmes under Article 218 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, in particular to ensure their smooth implementation, optimise services provided to citizens of the Union and meet the needs of third countries and international organisations. It is also useful~~, where necessary,~~ to adapt existing agreements to changes in the programmes. When preparing ~~or implemen~~and negotiating these agreements, the ~~Commission~~EEAS may have recourse to the assistance of the ~~European External Action Service~~Commission, the European Space Agency and the European GNSS Agency~~, within the limits of the tasks allocated to them under this Regulation.~~ . Due to the sensitive, strategic and global nature of the systems, the EEAS, when negotiating agreements with third countries, should duly take into account the rights of the European Parliament under Article 218. It should equally take into account the sensitive and strategic nature of some of the system's services such as PRS, thus ensuring full compliance with the criteria and guidelines laid down in Council common position 2008/944/CFSP defining common rules governing the control of exports of military technology and equipment1 and Council Regulation (EC) No 428/2009 of 5 May 2009 setting up a Community regime for the control of exports, transfer, brokering and transit of dual-use items2. ____________ 1 OJ L 335, 13.12.2008, p. 99. 2 OJ L 134, 29.5.2009, p. 1.

2012/06/14
Committee: AFET

2011/0392(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 15 – paragraph 1 – point a – point ii

(ii) the operation of the Galileo security centre, in accordance with the standards and requirements referred to in Article 14 and the instructions provided under Joint Action 2004/552/CFSP referred to in Article 17, as amended;

2012/06/14
Committee: AFET

2011/0392(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 17

Joint Action Governance structures in case of exceptional situations 1. Whenever the security of the Union or its Member States may be affected by the operation of the systems, the procedures set out in ~~Council Joint Action 2004/552/CFSP shall apply.~~ Regulation (EU) .../... of the European Parliament and of the Council shall apply. 2. In situations where the operation of the system may affect the security of the Union or its Member States, the Council, in close coordination and cooperation with the High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy and with the EEAS, shall decide on the necessary measures to be taken. 3. The High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy shall be empowered to take the necessary measures in cases of urgency and shall ensure permanent surveillance of the operation of the system. 4. In the event of a threat to the security of the Union or of a Member State arising from the operation or use of the system, or in the event of a threat to the operation of the system, in particular as a result of an international crisis, the Council, in close coordination and cooperation with the High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy and the EEAS, acting unanimously, shall decide on the necessary instructions to the European GNSS Supervisory Authority (SA) and the concession holder of the system. Any Member of the Council, the High Representative or the Commission may request a Council discussion to agree on such instructions. 5. In exceptional cases, where the urgency of the situation is such that it requires immediate action, the High Representative is authorised to issue the necessary instructions. The High Representative shall immediately inform the Council and the Commission of any instructions issued pursuant to this paragraph. 6. The Council shall, in close coordination and cooperation with the High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy and the EEAS, specify in particular the measures to be taken in the event of a threat to the security of the European Union or a Member State, notably where PRS receivers are lost, misused or compromised; it shall also specify the necessary instructions that may be issued to the SA for all matters that could have an impact on the security of the Union or its Member States.

2012/06/14
Committee: AFET

2011/0392(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 27 – paragraph 2 a (new)

2 a. The Member States shall take all necessary measures to ensure the protection of the Union's space infrastructure. In particular, Member States shall foster the legal framework in outer space and adhere to the principals of the EU Code of Conduct in Outer Space activities, including the prohibition of harmful interference with space objects, the prohibition of action that creates harmful space debris, the adherence to the UN space debris mitigation guidelines and the creation of transparency and security building measures in outer space.

2012/06/14
Committee: AFET

2011/0392(COD)