Activities of Bodil VALERO related to 2018/2157(INI)
Plenary speeches (1)
Arms export: implementation of Common Position 2008/944/CFSP (debate) SV
Shadow reports (1)
REPORT on arms exports: implementation of Common Position 2008/944/CFSP PDF (385 KB) DOC (71 KB)
Amendments (40)
Amendment 3 #
Motion for a resolution
Citation 15 a (new)
Citation 15 a (new)
– having regard to its resolution on the humanitarian situation in Yemen of 25 February 2016, 15 June 2017, and 30 November 2017,
Amendment 4 #
Motion for a resolution
Citation 15 b (new)
Citation 15 b (new)
– having regard to its resolution of 27 February 2014 on the use of armed drones,
Amendment 5 #
Motion for a resolution
Citation 15 c (new)
Citation 15 c (new)
– having regard to Human Rights Council Report of 17 August 2018 on the situation of human rights in Yemen, including violations and abuses since September 2014 (A/HRC/39/43),
Amendment 12 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital C
Recital C
C. whereas the latest figures14 allegedly show that arms exports from the EU-28 amounted to over 27 % of the global total in 2013-2017, which would makes them, collectively, the second largest arms supplier in the world after the US (34 %) and followed by Russia (22 %); whereas 2015 and 2016 appear to have been the years in which by far the historically highest numbers offigures for arms exports licences by value have been granted since the beginning of EU data collection, with a total value of EUR 195.95 billion in 2015 and, according to the most recent report by the Working Party on Conventional Arms Exports (COARM), EUR 191.45 billion in 201615 ; whereas unfortunately the 2015 and 2016 figures are misleading and inaccurate as the volume of licences is in parts more an expression of intent as regards France than a precise figure on real exports to be expected to materialise in the near future; _________________ 14 Trends in international arms transfers, 2017 (SIPRI Fact Sheet, March 2018). 15 http://enaat.org/eu-export- browser/licence.de.html
Amendment 15 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital D
Recital D
D. whereas the COARM annual reports are so far the only instrument whose purpose is to cover the implementation of the Common Position, whereas these reports have, in particular prior to the reporting period 2015 and 2016, helped to make Member States’ arms exports more transparent and whereas the volume of guidelines and clarifications in the User’s Guide has grown considerably; whereas, because of the Common Position, the volume of information on the issuing of arms export licences has increased for a certain period of time, but has decreased since 2015, due to French changes of the method to define and count the value of export licences, which undermined the utility of the presented data;
Amendment 16 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital D a (new)
Recital D a (new)
Amendment 19 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital G
Recital G
G. 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; whereas there is no possibility of havingcurrently no mechanism for standardised, independent verification and reporting of compliance with the eight criteria verified independentlyof the Common Position;
Amendment 23 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital I
Recital I
I. whereas the nineteenth annual report reveals that 40.5 % of the licences for arms exports were granted to countries in the MENA region for a value of EUR 77.5 billion, with Saudi-Arabia, Egypt and the United Arab Emirates (UAE) accounting for the bulk of these exports, worth EUR 57.9 billion; whereas the quota of denied licences for the three countries was 2.2 % even though, according to the Bonn International Centre for Conversion (BICC) the supply of military technology to one or more of those countries is a violation of, at least,raises critical concerns under specific criteria 1-616 of the Common Position (Egypt and Saudi- Arabia criteria 1-6 and UAE criteria 1 and 6), which highlights the need for better scrutiny and transparency; _________________ 16 http://ruestungsexport.info/map/
Amendment 24 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital I a (new)
Recital I a (new)
Ia. whereas, in some cases, the arms exported to certain countries, for example to Saudi Arabia, United Arab Emirates and members of the Saudi-led coalition, have been used in conflicts such as in Yemen; whereas such exports clearly violate the Common Position;
Amendment 25 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital I b (new)
Recital I b (new)
Amendment 26 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital I c (new)
Recital I c (new)
Ic. whereas the European Parliament resolution of 25 February 2016 on the humanitarian situation in Yemen called on the Vice-President of the Commission / High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy (VP/HR) to launch an initiative to impose an EU arms embargo on Saudi Arabia;
Amendment 27 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital I d (new)
Recital I d (new)
Id. whereas arms licensed for transfer by EU Member States and subsequently used in the current Yemen conflict have had a catastrophic impact on sustainable development in Yemen;
Amendment 39 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 a (new)
Paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. Stresses the urgent need to enhance the role of EU Delegations in assisting Member States and the EEAS with their export licensing risk assessments and the implementation of end-user controls, post-shipment controls and on-site inspections;
Amendment 45 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Notes with concern that the eight criteria are applied and interpreted with varying degrees of rigour in the Member States; calls, therefore, for a standard, uniformly strict interpretation and full implementation of the Common Position with all its obligations;
Amendment 47 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2 a (new)
Paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. Believes that the export licensing risk assessment methodology should incorporate a precautionary principle and that Member States, in addition to assessing whether specific military technology might be used for internal repression or other undesired ends, should also assess risks based on the overall situation in the country of destination such as state of its democracy, rule-of-law and socio-economic development;
Amendment 48 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2 b (new)
Paragraph 2 b (new)
2b. In line with its recommendations of 13 September 2017, calls on the Member States and the EEAS to use the current review process to strengthen mechanisms for exchange of information by making available qualitatively and quantitatively better information for export licensing risk assessments, as follows: (a) providing more information on export licences and actual exports shared systematically and in a timely manner, including on end users of concern, cases of diversion, end-user certificates that are forged or otherwise of concern, and suspect brokers or transport companies, in accordance with domestic laws; (b) maintaining a list of entities and individuals convicted of violating arms export-related legislation, of cases of identified diversion, and of persons who are known or suspected to be involved in illegal arms trading or in activities that pose a threat to international and national security; (c) sharing the best practices adopted for implementing the eight criteria; (d) turning the current User’s Guide into an interactive online resource; (e) turning the EU Annual Report into an open and public online database by the end of 2019, with the new format to be applied to the 2017 data; (f) promoting clear, well-established cooperation procedures between law enforcement agencies and border authorities, based on the exchange of information, in order to strengthen cooperation on security and eradicate illegal arms trading, which poses a risk to the security of the EU and its citizens;
Amendment 49 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2 c (new)
Paragraph 2 c (new)
2c. Calls on the Member States and the EEAS to increase the number of personnel working on export-related issues both at national and EU level; encourages the use of EU funds for capacity-building among licensing and enforcement officials in Member States;
Amendment 54 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Criticises the violations of the eight criteria by Member States and the fact that military technology does sometimes reach destinations and end users that do not Repeats its call for an independent assessmeent the criteria laid down in the Common Position; considers that uniform and consistent application of the eight criteria should be promotedof Member State’s compliance with the eight criteria of the Common Position; regrets the lack of provisions on sanctions to be imposed on Member States that fail to comply with the eight criteria when granting licences and advises the Member States to make provision for arrangements to conduct independent checks;
Amendment 59 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4 a (new)
Paragraph 4 a (new)
4a. Believes that exports to Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates and other members of the Saudi-led coalition in Yemen, are non-compliant with at least criterion 2 because of the countries' involvement in grave breaches of humanitarian law as established by competent UN authorities; re-iterates its call from 13 September 2017 on the urgent need to impose an arms embargo on Saudi Arabia and calls on HR/VP and the Council to extend such an embargo also to all other members of the Saudi-led coalition in Yemen;
Amendment 61 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4 b (new)
Paragraph 4 b (new)
4b. Notes that some Member States have stopped providing arms to Saudi Arabia and other members of the Saudi- led coalition in Yemen because of their actions while others have continued supplying military technology; congratulates those Members States such as Spain, Germany and the Netherlands, which changed their practise as regards the Yemen conflict; deeply regrets, however, the fact that other Member States seem to not take into account the behaviour of the country of destination and the end-use of exported arms and ammunitions; underlines that this disparity of practice is at risk undermining the entire European arms control regime;
Amendment 65 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Is alarmed by the fact that 97.2 % of licence requests for exports to Egypt and Saudi Arabia were granted even though exports into both countries violate at least criteria 1 to 67 of the Common Position, and bearing in mind that failure to meet criteria 1 to 4 must lead to a denial of the licence; regrets that almost all licence applications (95 %) for exports to Saudi Arabia have been granted as regards category ML919 (i.e. vessels of war) exports[1]), which are used to enforce the naval blockade on Yemen, and categories ML10 (aircraft) and ML4 (bombs etc.), which have been fundamental to the air campaign, contributing to the deterioration of the humanitarian situation, the sustainable development of the whole country and to the ongoing suffering of the population of Yemen; _________________ 19 Vessels of war (surface or underwater), special naval equipment, accessories, components and other surface vessels http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal- content/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=CELEX:52016 XG0406(01)&from=EN
Amendment 67 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5 a (new)
Paragraph 5 a (new)
5a. Is shocked by the amount of EU- made weapons and ammunitions found in the hands of Da’esh in Syria and Iraq; notes the failure of Bulgaria and Romania to effectively apply the Common Position 2008/944/CFSP on arms exports, in relation to retransfers that contravene end-user certificates; calls on all Member States to refuse similar transfers in the future, notably to the US and Saudi Arabia, and calls on the EEAS and the Member States, in particular Bulgaria and Romania, to explain, in the context of COARM but also in public in the Parliament’s Subcommittee on Security and Defence (SEDE), what steps have been taken on this matter; calls on the EEAS to address the many cases revealed by the recent Conflict Armament Research report and to explore more effective methods for diversion risk assessment in COARM and relevant fora, including making it, in the context of the review process, an obligation for Member States to deny an export licence if there is a clear risk that the military technology or equipment to be exported might be diverted; decides to launch an investigation into this matter;
Amendment 73 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Is concerned that the proliferationsupply of weapon systems in wartime and in situations of significant political tension may disproportionately affect civilians; is alarmed at the global arms race and at military approaches to solving political conflict and turmoil; underlines that conflicts should be solved by diplomatic means as a priority;
Amendment 74 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6 a (new)
Paragraph 6 a (new)
Amendment 82 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7 a (new)
Paragraph 7 a (new)
7a. Underlines that with regard to results generated by recipients of the future European Defence Fund, the Commission shall be notified of any grant of a licence to third countries and shall guarantee that such licences do not contravene the defence and security interests of the Union and its Member States, the objectives of this Regulation, the eight criteria of the Common Position 2008/944/CFSP and the criteria of the Dual-Use Regulation; calls for coordination between the Commission and COARM on the matter;
Amendment 84 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7 b (new)
Paragraph 7 b (new)
7b. Praises its position adopted on 28 January 2018 on the regulation establishing the European Defence Industrial Development Programme (EDIDP) with regards to Article 6, paragraph 4 b, which prohibits actions in relation to small arms and light weapons, when they are developed mainly for export purposes; calls for an identical approach in the context of the upcoming regulation establishing the European Defence Fund (EDF);
Amendment 85 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7 c (new)
Paragraph 7 c (new)
7c. Supports that in the context of Brexit, it would be important for the United Kingdom to commit to remain bound by the Common Position and to apply its operative provisions as other European third countries do;
Amendment 89 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8
Paragraph 8
8. Stresses that the ambition to increase the competitiveness of the European defence sector must not undermine the application of the Common Position’s eight criteria as they take precedence over any economic social, commercial, social or industrial interests of Member States;
Amendment 96 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10
Paragraph 10
10. Reiterates the detrimental effect that the uncontrolled export of cyber- surveillance technologies by EU companies can have on the security of the EU’s digital infrastructure and on human rights; stresses, in this connection, the importance of a rapid, effective and comprehensive update of the EU’s Dual- Use Regulation, recalls Parliament’s position regarding the Commission’s proposal as endorsed by an overwhelming majority in January 2018, and calls on the Council to rapidly establish an ambitious position with a view to enabling the co- legislators to reach an agreement before the end of this legislative term; calls on the Member States, with regard to export controls and application of the eight criteria, to pay greater attention to goods which may be used for both civilian and military purposes, such as surveillance technology and, similarly, to spare parts and products that may be used in cyber warfare or to perpetrate non-lethal human rights abuseviolations;
Amendment 98 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11
Paragraph 11
11. Encourages the Member States to undertake a more detailed examination of licensed production by third countries and to ensure stronger safeguards against undesired uses; demands the strict application of the Common Position with regard to licensed production in third countries; calls for limiting licensed production arrangements to countries that are parties or signatories to the ATT, and to oblige these third countries to only export equipment produced under licence with the explicit authority of the original exporting Member State;
Amendment 102 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11 a (new)
Paragraph 11 a (new)
11a. Asks the Member States and the EEAS to develop a dedicated strategy to provide formal protection for whistle- blowers reporting practices by organisations and companies in the weapons industry that breach the criteria and principles set out in the Common Position;
Amendment 105 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11 b (new)
Paragraph 11 b (new)
11b. Calls on the Member States and the EEAS to add a new criterion to the Common Position in order to ensure that, when granting authorisations, due account is taken of the risk of corruption concerning the relevant exports;
Amendment 115 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15
Paragraph 15
15. Criticises the fact that a number of Member States did not make full submissions to the nineteenth annual report on the basis of detailed, country-specific data; notes that Cyprus submitted a ‘nil’ report; criticises the fact that Greece did not submit a report at all, Italy and France only reported total data on the value of actual exports and Belgium, Germany, Ireland, Malta and the United Kingdom did not report values of actual exports; criticises the fact that France, over the past years, appears to have adopted a diverging method to define and count the value of export licences, and as a consequence, has unrealistically inflated the total value of EU arms export licences and seriously undermined the comparative value of the data, both temporally and across jurisdictions; is concerned that, as a result, important information is missing from the COARM annual report, which is therefore not up to date or able to present a complete picture of Member States’ export activities; considers that a standardised verification and reporting system should be established to provide more detailed and exhaustive information; reiterates its request that all Member States, especially the main arms- exporting ones which have not made full submissions, provide a full set of data regarding their past exports with a view to the next annual report;
Amendment 118 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16
Paragraph 16
16. Notes that according to the nineteenth annual report, the criteria invoked for denials differed in their application, with criterion 1 being invoked 82 times, criterion 2 119 times, criterion 3 103 times, criterion 4 85 times, criterion 5 8 times, criterion 6 12 times, criterion 7 139 times, and criterion 8 once; notes with concern that the number of denied licences fell in total and also in relative terms (only 0.76% of licence applications were denied in 2016 compared to almost 1% in 2015); notes with disappointment the continued failure of the report to include figures on the outcome of consultations regarding denial notifications and calls on the Member States to include this data in future annual reports;
Amendment 123 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18
Paragraph 18
18. Notes that not all EU national parliaments scrutinise governmental licensing decisions by, inter alia, producing annual arms export reports; calls, therefore, for a general increase in parliamentary and public oversight; points to Parliament’s Rules of Procedure, which provide for the possibility of regular responses to the EU Annual Reports on Arms Exports and calls in this respect for an improvement of the current situation and to guarantee that the European Parliament responds to the annual COARM report with its own annual report which should be out of quota;
Amendment 132 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19
Paragraph 19
19. Underscores the important role of civil society, national parliaments and the European Parliament in both implemensupporting and enforccouraging the Common Position’s agreed standards at national and EU level and in 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; encourages national parliaments, civil society and academia to exercise independent scrutiny of the arms trade, and calls on the Member States and the EEAS to support such activities, including by financial means;
Amendment 143 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21
Paragraph 21
21. Takes the view that the EU should meet its increased responsibility for peace and security in Europe and in the world by means of further arms limitationimproved export control mechanisms and disarmament initiatives and that, as a responsible global player, it should lead the way, i.e. that it should play an active role in the areas of non- proliferation of arms, global disarmament and arms transfer controls;
Amendment 148 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 22
Paragraph 22
22. Recognises that all the Member States are signatorState Parties to the ATT; calls for universalisation of the ATT and for more focus to be placed onincreased efforts to be made with those countries that are not signatoryet State Parties; also commends the outreach efforts regarding the ATT and supports its effective implementation;
Amendment 150 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 23
Paragraph 23
23. Is of the opinion that an effective international arms control agreement should cover all transfers including also state-to-state transfers, state- to-private-end- user transfers and leases, as well as loans, gifts, aid or any other form of transfer;
Amendment 153 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 23 a (new)
Paragraph 23 a (new)
23a. Underlines the need to ban the development, production and use of lethal autonomous weapon systems (LAWS) and their export to third countries;