Activities of Krzysztof LISEK

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7

7. Welcomes the democratisation package presented by the Government on 30 September 2013 and calls on the Government to duly consult the opposition and relevant civil society organisations in the preparation of the implementing legislation and to continue with its reform efforts towards revision of the electoral system, including the lowering of the 10% electoral threshold, and the adequate inclusion of all components of Turkish society; calls on the Government to ensure that the legislation on hate crimes offers protection for all citizens, including minorities and LGBTI;

2014/01/13
Committee: AFET

2013/2170(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital A

A. whereas the issue of anti-missile defence (AMD) was already raised in the past but has become more topical in recent years in view of the multiplication of threats stemming from nuclear proliferation and other weapons of mass destruction, such as chemical, biological and radiological weapons, as well as the potential threat posed by conventional weapons, such as short-range ballistic missiles, to which the EU and its allies must be able to respond effectively;

2014/01/08
Committee: AFET

2013/2170(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital B

B. whereas AMD is not only a leading symbol of the USA’s commitment to ~~the EU and to its Eastern European Member States~~NATO, but also of allied solidarity~~, even if~~: the system is ~~not~~ specifically intended to ~~shield the particular country in which it is based~~protect countries in which facilities for the interception and destruction of ballistic missiles are located (e.g. Romania and Poland), although such facilities are also capable of protecting neighbouring countries;

2014/01/08
Committee: AFET

2013/2170(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1

1. Stresses that nuclear proliferation poses a grave danger to the survival of humankind. Even a nuclear strike confined to a to specific area would be constitute a global catastrophe, resulting in a major system shock at global level. The cost of such an event, both human and financial, would be extremely high; stresses, at the same time, that threats of a different nature should not be ignored, such as those posed by arming warheads with other types of weapons of mass destruction, for instance, radiological materials or conventional loads, especially in the case of short-range ballistic missiles;

2014/01/08
Committee: AFET

2013/2170(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 a (new)

1a. Stresses that the NATO ballistic missile defence system (NATO BMD), in accordance with the decisions taken at NATO's Lisbon and Chicago summits concerning ensuring that all NATO territory in Europe has anti-missile protection, is currently being established on the basis of American anti-missile defence installations in Europe (EPAA) and on national resources of NATO member states allocated to the ALTBMD programme and to the NATO BMD joint command system; notes that the announcement of interim NATO BMD capability at the May 2012 NATO summit in Chicago is the first meaningful step taken by NATO towards building this system in Europe and towards achieving complementarity between US and NATO anti-missile defence systems; stresses that the NATO BMD is defensive, forms part of the deterrence mechanism, and supplements the strategic offensive arsenal;

2014/01/08
Committee: AFET

2013/2170(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2

2. Highlights the latest phase in the deployment of NATO’s anti-missile shield (~~AMS~~NATO BMD), which aims to annihilate ballistic missiles before they reach their targets in the final stage of their trajectory upon re- entry into the atmosphere, will face greater restrictions than was previously anticipated. It will provide protection to key NATO assets~~, but contrary to previous plans, it will not~~ and should, in its current form, provide ~~sufficient coverage~~partial protection for the whole European population from ~~the limited number of intercontinental ballistic missiles (ICBMs) in existence. This unforeseen development has raised support for a European AMS which would supplement NATO’s system~~attacks using short-, medium- and intermediate-range missiles and intercontinental ballistic missiles;

2014/01/08
Committee: AFET

2013/2170(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4

4. Argues that the legitimate grounds for ~~an anti-missile shield originate in~~the NATO BMD are to prevent attacks using short-range ballistic missiles (SRBMs), medium-range ballistic missiles (MRBMs), intermediate-range ballistic missiles (IRBMs) and intercontinental ballistic missiles (ICBM), which may also encompass the threat of a nuclear attack potentially orchestrated by actors who do not subscribe to traditional understandings of rationality. In real terms, certain ‘rogue’ states or state-like actors could be prepared to attack, even in cases where doing so would ultimately result in their inevitable self-destruction;

2014/01/08
Committee: AFET

2013/2170(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6

6. Highlights that it is extremely difficult to evaluate the current and future risks of such developments, and that even if some of these countries have the capacity to develop a nuclear bomb, this does not necessarily mean that they are capable of developing ICBMs in the near future; stresses the need, however, to consider the possibility of these countries using short-, medium- and intermediate-range missiles;

2014/01/08
Committee: AFET

2013/2170(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7

7. Notes that there is some evidence that Pakistan might be transferring technological expertise to Iran and North Korea; highlights, furthermore, the worrying fact t-{}-hat thousands of unemployed ex-Soviet nuclear scientists provide a continuing threat as regards the transfer of dangerous information; welcomes, at the same time, the signing in Geneva of the P5+1 agreement with Iran concerning the Iranian nuclear programme, which is a step towards increasing stability in the Middle East and improving relations between Iran and the Euro-Atlantic Community; notes, however, that this interim agreement does not deal with methods for delivering weapons of mass destruction – particularly missile technology – and therefore may not constitute a basis for any limitations on the development of the NATO BMD, including the EPAA, especially since the threats posed to Europe by missiles and WMDs is much more complex and is not restricted to Iran;

2014/01/08
Committee: AFET

2013/2170(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10

10. Calls therefore for a thorough and transparent cost-benefit analysis to be carried out regarding AMS – investigations should be carried out into which EU mechanisms can be used to deepen political, military and industrial cooperation between Member States in the field of BMD, for example as regards capabilities in terms of carrying out BMD-related EU research and development projects, and as regards identifying EU Member States’ missile defence capabilities against the backdrop of their defence priorities and the continued discussions over the future development of the Common Security and Defence Policy; points out that this analysis should be conducted by an independent panel and should evaluate the cost of the AMS in relation to the potential risk of a ‘rogue’ state orchestrating an attack using short-, medium- and intermediate-range missiles or ICBMs;

2014/01/08
Committee: AFET

2013/2170(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11

11. Stresses that ICBMs are by no means the only delivery system used in nuclear devices; points out ~~that the AMS might provide a false sense of security~~, nonetheless, that the AMS is one of Europe’s key defence and deterrence capabilities and an important factor ensuring peace in Europe; points out that having an effective missile defence system on the European continent has strengthened the EU’s international position and reduced the risk associated with the use or threat of use of missile technology against the EU; points out that the main BMD-related task should be to ensure that the European continent is capable of defending itself from a wide spectrum of missile threats and to provide protection to armed forces deployed outside Europe;

2014/01/08
Committee: AFET

2013/2170(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12

12. Proposes that should the AMS turn out to be a feasible and cost-effective means of reducing the risk of a nuclear attack, the European Union should consider its development and construction, preferably at European level;Deleted

2014/01/08
Committee: AFET

2013/2170(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12 a (new)

12a. Stresses that efforts at EU level in the field of missile defence should be complementary to the actions of NATO, which is and should remain the main forum for the integration of national BMD systems in Europe;

2014/01/08
Committee: AFET

2013/2170(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12 b (new)

12b. Stresses that EU initiatives, such as Pooling & Sharing, may prove helpful in strengthening cooperation between Member States in the areas of BMD and carrying out joint research and development work; notes that, in the long term, such cooperation could also lead to the further consolidation of the European defence industry;

2014/01/08
Committee: AFET

2013/2170(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14

14. Points out that anti-missile technology is developing rapidly; believes that ~~prospective countermeasures, if developed,~~the AMS would provide partial, but credible defence against short-, medium- and intermediate-range missiles, as well as a limited number of ICBMs;

2014/01/08
Committee: AFET

2013/2170(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17

17. ~~Argues that Russia’s involvement in the AMS is desirable~~Stresses that NATO is prepared to cooperate with Russia based on the assumption of cooperation between two independent missile defence systems – NATO’s and Russia’s; points out that NATO made an offer to Russia at the Chicago summit to develop a transparency regime that preserves reciprocity, and therefore urges Russia to adopt a constructive approach; accepts, at the same time, Russia’s involvement in the AMS, given that potential interceptions would most likely take place in Russian airspace; argues, furthermore, that Russia’s involvement in the development of the AMS wcould be beneficial in economic terms, if the system-related costs were to be shared by the actors involved; stresses, once more, that although effective cooperation with Russia could bring measurable benefits, it must be pursued in accordance with political realities and on the basis of full reciprocity and transparency, as increasing mutual trust is vital for the gradual development of such cooperation; notes, therefore, that moving Russian missiles closer to NATO and EU borders is incomprehensible and poses a threat;

2014/01/08
Committee: AFET

2013/2149(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12 a (new)

12a. Deplores the continuous pressure exerted by the Russian Federation on the EaP countries through economic, political and military tools; in case of Georgia, underlines the unacceptability of the installation of barbwire fences and other artificial obstacles along the occupation line with the Abkhazia and Tskhinvali regions that significantly impacts the livelihoods of the local population, fetters people-to-people contacts and seriously undermines the security situation on the ground;

2014/01/09
Committee: AFET

2013/2149(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital F

F. whereas the recent developments in the EaP countries and their relations with the EU are a warning ~~that the EU is still not considered as the only political alternative~~for both sides that do not make enough efforts to promote and increase awareness of the mutual benefits of the Association Agreements;

2014/02/12
Committee: AFET

2013/2149(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1

1. Recalls the achievements and ambitions of the EaP, which is the political framework for strengthening relations between the EU and the Eastern Partners, founded on mutual interests, commitments, shared ownership and joint responsibility, as well as ~~the institutional basis for political cooperation, and~~ a forum for dialogue between the partner countries; welcomes, in this ~~connection~~regard, the establishment of the Euronest Parliamentary Assembly and other cooperation platforms, such as the EaP Civil Society Forum and the Eastern Europe Initiatives Congress; notes however that the recent developments in some EaP countries have drawn attention to the fragility of the political process;

2014/02/12
Committee: AFET

2013/2149(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3

3. Highlights that more progress can be made on the establishment of the visa-free regime; notes, in this ~~connection~~regard, that visa liberalisation is only one of a number of processes aimed at bringing the societies closer together, and that more efforts are required in this area, particularly with regard to advancing cooperation in the field of education and culture; considers that greater emphasis should be placed on the fact that the EaP project is directed at societies rather than authorities;

2014/02/12
Committee: AFET

2013/2149(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3 a (new)

3 a. Highlights that Proposal for a Directive of the European Parliament and of the Council on the conditions of entry and residence of third-country nationals for the purposes of research, studies, pupil exchange, remunerated and unremunerated training, voluntary service and au pairing is a tool which will have a great impact in the field of education and culture; calls for a prompt adoption of this directive offering the long-term visas and residence permits for the third-country nationals for the above mentioned purposes;

2014/02/12
Committee: AFET

2013/2149(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7

7. Underlines the importance of focusing more on the consolidation of the energy sector, which is one of the main conditions for modernisation of the economy, and developing energy strategies in line with European Energy Community obligations; calls for the continuation of gas and electricity market reforms and an adequate share of energy from renewable resources; calls on the Commission and Council to make solidarity a fundamental principle of the Energy community that is expected to be fully respected by all the players active in the EU market especially in the face of politically motivated South Stream project pushed forward by Russia;

2014/02/12
Committee: AFET

2013/2149(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8

8. Notes that difficulties have emerged in promoting and implementing the EaP, and stresses that the EU’s engagement should go beyond political dialogue to tackle and develop social, economic and cultural dialogue; calls on the Commission to prepare a clear communication strategy for the societies in the EaP countries to explain to them the benefits of the Association Agreements including Deep and Comprehensive Trade Areas (DCFTAs) as tools of modernising their political systems and economies;

2014/02/12
Committee: AFET

2013/2149(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11

11. Finds it regrettable that there is uneven interest among the Member States in relations with, and developments in, EaP countries; notes with concern the lack of understanding among the Member States about the geopolitical importance of cooperation and of a ~~uniform stance~~common position on some issues;

2014/02/12
Committee: AFET

2013/2149(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19

19. Highlights the importance of fostering economic cooperation in order to bring the EaP project forward, inter alia by raising awareness of the complexity of economic problems, promoting good governance in the financial sector, adopting a sectoral approach, encouraging legislation conducive to the development of SME sector and promoting business partnerships between the EU and the EaP; highlights the need for concluding and provisional application of DCFTAs as the main tools of modernising the economies of the EaP countries and recovery from the financial crisis;

2014/02/12
Committee: AFET

2013/2149(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 24 a (new)

24 a. Calls for understanding that the EaP is an ambitious program, the results of which may become evident in the long- term perspective; stresses that, while the EaP is being widely criticized, the success of the initiative is dependent on the engagement and political will of both the EU and its Eastern Neighbours; furthermore notes that it is essential that any criticism of the EaP should have a constructive character and be targeted at its improvement rather than discrediting;

2014/02/12
Committee: AFET

2013/2125(INI)

Janusz ZEMKE, Krzysztof LISEK

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5

5. Recalls the need to make progress in consolidating the EDTIB in a manner which is sustainable and which takes account of the interests of SMEs, given that – in the face of the increasing sophistication and costs of technologies, growing international competition and decreasing defence budgets and production volumes – it is no longer possible in any of the Member States for the defence industry to be sustainable on a strictly national basis; regrets the fact that, while a certain level of concentration has been achieved in the European aerospace industries, the land and naval equipment sectors are still overwhelmingly fragmented along national lines;

2013/09/25
Committee: AFET

2013/2125(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5 a (new)

5a. Maintains that the construction of a European defence industry should be carried out in a sustainable manner, in all Member States, on the basis of existing industrial infrastructure, and not solely according to the principle of free competition;

2013/09/25
Committee: AFET

2013/2125(INI)

Janusz ZEMKE, Krzysztof LISEK

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6

6. Notes the Commission Communication of 24 July 2013 and the EEAS draft report; considers it regrettable that the Commission Communication did not specify the mechanisms that would ensure the equitable development of the defence industry in all parts of the European Union; considers it similarly regrettable that the Commission and the EEAS did not issue a joint European declaration in preparation for the European Council’s defence summit in December of this year;

2013/09/25
Committee: AFET

2013/2105(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11

11. Repeats its call for a European White Paper on security and defence and suggests that the European Council consider this option; urges the EU Member States, furthermore, to give serious consideration to the European dimension in their national security strategies and White Papers;

2013/09/26
Committee: AFET

2013/2105(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13

13. Notes with concern that the number and timeliness of CSDP missions and operations, and the development of civilian and especially military means for the CSDP, fall short of what is required, given the EU’s increasingly insecure neighbourhood; deplores, in particular, the limited overall scope of the CSDP missions related to the crises in Libya and Mali; calls for the situation to be monitored and for the operational engagement in Eastern Europe and the Southern Caucasus, which has yielded positive results, to be maintained; calls for greater ambition and serious efforts to improve the design of future CSDP missions and operations under a ‘lessons learned process’ and to develop appropriate exit strategies;

2013/09/26
Committee: AFET

2013/2105(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19

19. Deplores 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 and rapid reaction; 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; calls for consideration to be given to the completion of battlegroups with a civilian component;

2013/09/26
Committee: AFET

2013/2105(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 27

27. Underlines the importance for the EU to further develop partnerships and deepen its security dialogue with the UN, regional organisations and relevant players, including with Eastern Partnership countries;

2013/09/26
Committee: AFET

2013/2105(INI)

Krzysztof LISEK, Paweł ZALEWSKI

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 40

40. Reiterates the need for a strong and less fragmented European defence industry that is capable of sustaining the CSDP and enhancing the EU’s strategic autonomy; highlights the need for regionally balanced development of the European defence industry; highlights the importance of certification and standardisation for improving the interoperability of the armed forces; calls on the European Council to mandate the EDA to prepare a roadmap for the development of defence industrial standards, and on the Member States to streamline European certification procedures with the mutual recognition of certificates and to harmonise their certification procedures;

2013/09/26
Committee: AFET

2013/2081(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 45 a (new)

45 a. Supports the EU - Georgia Association Agreement, however, it believes that a tangible progress by Georgian authorities in the area of rule of law is necessary; in particular all the political prisoners including former Prime Minister Vano Merabishvili shall be released and the European standards in the upcoming presidential elections shall be met;

2013/09/26
Committee: AFET

2013/2052(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Citation 14 a (new)

- having regard to the Malaysia-European Community Strategy Paper for the period 2007-2013,

2013/05/07
Committee: AFET

2013/2052(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital A

A. whereas Malaysia is a founding member of ASEAN and will chair the organisation in 2015; whereas Malaysia is the EU's second most important trading partner in ASEAN;

2013/05/07
Committee: AFET

2013/2052(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital B

B. whereas Malaysia is an active member of the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC) forum, the Organisation of Islamic Cooperation (OIC), the Non-Aligned Movement (NAM), the Asian Development Bank (ADB), the UN Economic and Social Commission for Asia and the Pacific (UNESCAP), the Colombo Plan promoting economic and social development in the Asia-Pacific region, the UN Food and Agriculture Organisation (FAO) ~~and~~, the Asia-Europe Meeting (ASEM), and the Brunei Darussalam-Indonesia- Malaysia-Philippines East Asian Growth Area (BIMP-EAGA) ; whereas Malaysia has also been a member of the World Trade Organisation (WTO) since its establishment in 1995, and is a member of the Group of 77 (G77) developing countries and the Developing Eight (D-8);

2013/05/07
Committee: AFET

2013/2052(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital E

E. whereas Malaysia, an emerging economy, has established successive socioeconomic restructuring programmes, starting with the New Economic Policy (NEP) in 1971, which was replaced by the National Development Policy in 1991 and subsequently by the National Vision Policy in 2001;

2013/05/07
Committee: AFET

2013/2052(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital F a (new)

Fa. whereas cooperation between the EU and Malaysia on women's rights, children's rights, indigenous peoples' rights, migration, freedom of the press and human rights defenders has been strengthened by regular contacts with the civil society and the Malaysian Human Rights Commission (SUHAKAM); whereas the EU is also gradually establishing cooperation with Malaysia in areas falling under the Common Foreign and Security Policy (CFSP) such as maritime security and non-proliferation of weapons of mass destruction;

2013/05/07
Committee: AFET

2013/2052(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital F b (new)

Fb. whereas to foster further relations the Malaysian Parliament set up the Interparliamentary Union (IPU) Malaysia-EU Caucus in November 2010, and its members are representing both the government coalition and the opposition;

2013/05/07
Committee: AFET

2013/2052(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital F c (new)

Fc. whereas the EU-Malaysia partnership and cooperation agreement will provide unique opportunities to expand the EU's engagement in a number of areas of mutual interest with Malaysia such as trade cooperation, energy, science & technology, migration, counter-terrorism, human rights, good governance, anti- corruption, trafficking in persons and non-proliferation; whereas the PCA will also strengthen EU-Malaysia policy dialogue on environment, green technology and climate change.

2013/05/07
Committee: AFET

2013/2052(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 – point a

(a) to elevate the EU's relations with countries in Southeast Asia, including and in particular Malaysia, through the timely conclusion of the negotiations on partnership and cooperation agreements (PCAs) with five ASEAN countries; to raise awareness in the EU of the significant potential and the multi-faceted nature of those relations; and to emphasise that the PCAs will open a new strategic and political framework for relations between the EU and ASEAN countries, to stress the importance of active and frequent EU participation in high-level meetings and summits of organisations in the region, where the EU has been invited to take part;

2013/05/07
Committee: AFET

2013/2052(INI)

Filip KACZMAREK, Krzysztof LISEK

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2

2. Instructs its President to forward this resolution containing Parliament's recommendations to the Council, the Commission, the High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy/Vice-President of the European Commission (HR/VP), the European External Action Service and the Government and Parliament of Malaysia.

2013/05/07
Committee: AFET

2013/2034(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 – point a

a) poverty eradication should remain a priority in the new framework, along with the fight against inequality and sustainable development;

2013/03/26
Committee: DEVE

2013/2034(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 7 – introductory part

7. to improve the link between relief, rehabilitation, disaster risk reduction and development and to enhance coordination between humanitarian and development actors in order to guarantee the continuity of aid and build resilience, the need for which is highlighted by the recurring food crises in the Sahel region and the Horn of Africa;

2013/03/26
Committee: DEVE

2013/2034(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 7 a (new)

7a. to incorporate into development strategies the assessment and managing of disaster risk reduction in order to safeguard lives and livelihoods of populations

2013/03/26
Committee: DEVE

2013/0106(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 9

(9) Pursuant to Regulation (EC) No 2007/2004, border surveillance operations coordinated by the Agency are conducted in accordance with an operational plan. Accordingly, as regards sea operations, the operational plan should include specific information on the application of the relevant jurisdiction and legislation in the geographical area where the joint operation or pilot project takes place, including references to international and Union law, regarding interception, rescue at sea and disembarkation. ~~In turn, t~~This Regulation governs the issues of interception, rescue at sea and disembarkation in the context of sea border surveillance operations coordinated by the Agency.

2013/09/19
Committee: AFET

2013/0000(BUD)

Jan MULDER, George LYON, Angelika WERTHMANN, Anne E. JENSEN, Nils TORVALDS, Edward MCMILLAN-SCOTT, Göran FÄRM, Anna Maria CORAZZA BILDT, Ashley FOX, Lidia Joanna GERINGER DE OEDENBERG, Bart STAES, Diane DODDS, Ulrike LUNACEK, Krzysztof LISEK, Marisa MATIAS, Lara COMI, Isabelle DURANT

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9 a (new)

9a. Recalls the plenary decision for the Council to present a roadmap by June 2013 on the multiple seats of the EP and expects both the Committees concerned, the Secretary General and the Bureau to provide members with up-to-date figures and information on the financial and environmental impact of the multiple seat arrangement; suggests the EP's own impact assessment services examine this question also with respect to the impact of the EP's presence or partial presence on the respective communities and regions and present an assessment by June 2013 in order for these findings to be considered for the next MFF;

2013/01/10
Committee: BUDG

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;

2013/04/16
Committee: AFET

2012/2319(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 25 a (new)

25a. Draws attention to the general need to step up cooperation between the EDA and the EU Military Committee/EU Military Staff;

2013/04/16
Committee: AFET

2012/2319(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 40

40. Strongly supports pooling and sharing initiatives in education and training where significant savings can be made without affecting national sovereignty as regards operational deployments; highlights the success of the EDA’s Helicopter Training Programme and welcomes the launch of tactical air transport exercises by EDA, which should lead to the establishment of a permanent European airlift tactics training course; looks forward to more progress in developing a common integrated training system to train future fighter pilots; welcomes EDA’s work on more pooled and shared training in the areas of cyber defence, countering improvised explosive devices and naval operations; draws attention to the need for the EDA to take into account the training needs of Member States whose aircraft are produced under, for example, Russian licences;

2013/04/16
Committee: AFET

2012/2319(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 41 a (new)

41a. Draws attention to the need to avoid potential overlaps with NATO, e.g. in the area of cybersecurity training;

2013/04/16
Committee: AFET

2012/2319(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 42 a (new)

42a. Stresses the need to develop existing EU-NATO operational cooperation frameworks through the Berlin Plus agreements, as well as the need for strategic EU-NATO dialogue with a view to coordinating the operational efforts and strategic goals of both organisations with regard to a specific crisis;

2013/04/16
Committee: AFET

2012/2319(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 45 a (new)

45a. Draws attention to the need for the EU to step up information activities in order to enlarge the role of Pooling and Sharing;

2013/04/16
Committee: AFET

2012/2318(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Citation 4 a (new)

- having regard to the 7 October 2012 Declaration of the European Ministers responsible for the Integrated Maritime Policy and the European Commission, on a Marine and Maritime Agenda for growth and jobs, the "Limassol Declaration",

2013/04/03
Committee: AFET

2012/2318(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Citation 8 a (new)

- having regard to its resolution of 20 January 2011 on a sustainable EU policy for the High North1 and to the Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament and the Council of 26 June 2012 on Developing a European Union Policy towards the Arctic Region: progress since 2008 and next steps, ____________ 1 P7_TA(2011)0024

2013/04/03
Committee: AFET

2012/2318(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Citation 13

~~– having regard to the Council Decision on the European Union CSDP mission in Niger (EUCAP Sahel Niger) of 20124 , __________________ 4 OJ L 187 17.7.2012, p. 48.~~deleted

2013/04/03
Committee: AFET

2012/2318(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Citation 14

– having regard to the Council Decision on a European Union military mission to contribute to the training of the Malian Armed Forces (EUTM Mali) of 20135 , __________________ 5 OJ L 14 18.1.2013, p. 19-21.deleted

2013/04/03
Committee: AFET

2012/2318(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Citation 14 a (new)

- having regard to its resolution of 23 November 20101 on civilian-military cooperation and the development of civilian-military capabilities, __________ 1 P7_TA(2010)0419

2013/04/03
Committee: AFET

2012/2318(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Citation 14 c (new)

- having regard to the Council conclusions on the Horn of Africa of 14 November 2011, and, in particular, to the Strategic Framework set out in their annex,

2013/04/03
Committee: AFET

2012/2318(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Citation 16 a (new)

- having regard to its resolution of 15 January 20131 on EU Strategy for the Horn of Africa, _____________ 1 P7_TA-PROV(2013)0006

2013/04/03
Committee: AFET

2012/2318(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital A

A. whereas EU Member States a~~re responsible for~~ ltogether co~~ntrol of~~mprise a coastline of over 90 000 kilometres in length bordering two oceans and four seas, in addition to overseas territories and national security installations throughout other oceans; whereas EU Member States are responsible for the control, security and safety of the European coastal and territorial waters, Exclusive Economic Zones (EEZs), continental shelf, maritime infrastructure and marine resources; whereas Member States have the responsibility of being the principal security provider for seafarers on ships flying their flag and for their citizens; whereas States' inability to control their maritime space has consequences well outside their coastal and maritime zones;

2013/04/03
Committee: AFET

2012/2318(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital A a (new)

A a. whereas maritime spaces are open, vast and boundless spaces, only limited by maritime jurisdictions; whereas maritime spaces are difficult to control, especially since international maritime law aims principally at facilitating trade and guaranteeing free movement;

2013/04/03
Committee: AFET

2012/2318(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital B

B. whereas States have a duty to endeavour to enforce and reinforce international law, particularly UNCLOS and to guarantee the flow of maritime routes and the preservation of the Global Commons, commercial and environmental interests; whereas EU Member States altogether constitute the world's biggest EEZ (of around 25 million square metres); whereas 90 % of the EU's external trade and 40 % of its internal trade is transported by sea; whereas the EU is the world's leading maritime shipping actor, with European ship owners managing 30 % of the vessels and 35 % of world shipping tonnage - inter alia 55 % of container vessels and 35 % of tankers, representing 42 % of the value of global seaborne trade;

2013/04/03
Committee: AFET

2012/2318(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital C

C. whereas the importance of global maritime flows for the Union has increased exponentially as a result of globalisation and growing global interdependence; whereas the geostrategic maritime balance is fast changing, with emerging powers adopting access denial strategies to constrain traditional US and European presence at seas; whereas a more complex and diffuse maritime security environment makes effective multilateralism and international cooperation in regulating maritime affairs more difficultit is therefore in the EU's interest to ensure maritime security not only in the waters off its coasts but throughout the world's oceans and seas;

2013/04/03
Committee: AFET

2012/2318(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital D

D. whereas globalisation ~~also encourag~~facilitates the proliferation of ~~illegal maritime non- state actors who th~~different types of threats to maritime security; whereas those threats can derive both from the behaviours of states that could be intereaste~~n vulnerable~~d in disturbing international maritime ~~route~~flows and ~~infrastructure and~~from the illegal activities of non state actors - such as transnational crimes (arms or drugs trafficking for instance), international terrorism, or piracy that exploit the weaknesses of a fragmented global maritime governance system; whereas legal and illegal activities at sea have been growing in number and in complexity as a result of this multiplication of actors present at sea~~; whereas this puts pressure on the EU to inve~~ making it more and more difficult to dist in ~~a holistic approach in order to address the complexity of transnational challenges, which no Member State can meet alone~~guish legal from illegal activities;

2013/04/03
Committee: AFET

2012/2318(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital D a (new)

D a. whereas the global outlook on naval capabilities and power projection is fast changing, with emerging powers increasingly calling into question UNCLOS principles, international arbitration or regulation; whereas emerging powers have adopted access denial strategies to constrain traditional US and European military presence at sea; whereas, most significantly, China pursues its String of Pearls policy, endeavouring to increase and extend its presence at sea for a multitude of stated and unstated reasons, from securing trade and energy routes to controlling marine resources and maritime critical infrastructure;

2013/04/03
Committee: AFET

2012/2318(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital D b (new)

D b. whereas illegal maritime non-state actors proliferate, threatening critical maritime routes and infrastructures and exploiting the weaknesses of states and their jurisdictions;

2013/04/03
Committee: AFET

2012/2318(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital D c (new)

D c. whereas, as a global actor, the EU must consider security challenges and joint responses worldwide; whereas the fight against those non-conventional threats often takes place in challenging and dangerous environments, thus requiring both civilian and military means; whereas the CSDP, with both a civilian and a military dimension, is an appropriate framework to fight against dangerous threats at sea and along the coasts;

2013/04/03
Committee: AFET

2012/2318(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital D d (new)

D d. whereas the EU cannot ensure global maritime security on its own; whereas it needs to achieve strong partnerships with third countries and regional organisations, especially in remote areas - for instance Asia - where it is more difficult for the EU to deploy its own resources;

2013/04/03
Committee: AFET

2012/2318(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital E

E. whereas the ~~2007~~European Security Strategy (ESS) does not refer specifically to the maritime dimension, except by identifying piracy as an EU threat; whereas on the other hand, the European Integrated Maritime Policy (IMP) addresses maritime issues but barely toucheds upon the security dimension, thus leaving aside an area of increasing concern for the EU; whereas there is an imperative need to revise the EU approach to maritime s~~afety and m~~ecurity, notably with the adoption of a European Maritime sSecurity ~~by mainstreaming into both dimensions their existing interlinkages and identifying common objectives, risks, means available and possible theatres for articulated opera~~Strategy (EMSS) clarifying how the IMP should contribute to the implementation of the ESS; whereas this EMSS should define EU 's security interests and strategic goals, and identify the available and necessary means for intervention;

2013/04/03
Committee: AFET

2012/2318(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital F

F. whereas different maritime zones have become interconnected, thus influencing each other and maritime flows elsewhere, with overfishing and environmental degradation being increasingly prevalent across the globe, whether due to the impact of critical maritime projects, such as the construction of canals or port infrastructure opening new competing routes, or to local and proxy conflicts, piracy and organised crime operating in lawless zones, causing maritime bottlenecks and diversions; whereas this increasingly changing reality has highlighted the need for the EU to develop partnerships in order to fight the causes of instability and look for sustainable holistic solutions; whereas instability in the Indian Ocean, off the coast of Somalia in the Horn of Africa is one of the most telling examples of this complexity and has motivated the creation of the EU's first ever naval operation, EUNAVFOR Atalanta, within the framework of the CSDP;deleted

2013/04/03
Committee: AFET

2012/2318(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital G

G. whereas the global outlook on naval capabilities and power projection is fast changing, with emerging powers increasingly unwilling to adhere to UNCLOS principles or submit to international arbitration or regulation; whereas, most significantly, China pursues its String of Pearls policy, endeavouring to increase and extend its presence at sea for a multitude of stated and unstated reasons, from securing trade and energy routes to controlling marine resources and maritime critical infrastructure; whereas, as a global actor, the EU must consider security challenges and possible joint responses worldwide, from the nearby Mediterranean Sea and West Atlantic areas to the Pacific, via East and West, and from the Arctic to the Antarctic;deleted

2013/04/03
Committee: AFET

2012/2318(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital H

H. whereas a European Maritime Security Strategy (EMSS) is needed in order to mainstream the stakes, risks and opportunities that the European Union faces at sea, including protection for European citizens; whereas that strategy, while grounded in European values and principles, must be forward-looking and proactive and mobilise all relevant institutions and actors, both civilian and military;deleted

2013/04/03
Committee: AFET

2012/2318(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital I

I. whereas conflict and instability ~~at sea or in areas of the world~~ affecting the EU's interest in open maritime flows and safe access require a greater insight into the nexus between human security, state governance and development, which must be at the core of the EU Maritime Security Strategy and any action plan deriving from it; whereas the latter should involve coordination among different EU initiatives, agencies and instruments, with a view to addressing the root causes of instability and helping to solve conflict, enforce peace and assist state-building, governance and development needs, including security sector reform, energy supply, maritime and other trade and transport security, fisheries and environment protection and climate change impact, on the model of EU's strategy for the Horn of Africa, a comprehensive approach involving EU's political, diplomatic, social, and economic tools; whereas this comprehensive approach must be at the core of the EMSS and should involve coordination among different EU initiatives, agencies and instruments, with a view to addressing the root causes of instability;

2013/04/03
Committee: AFET

2012/2318(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2

2. Reminds Member States that only in a spirit of commitment, mutual understanding and genuine solidarity will the Union be able to fulfil its role as a global security provider ~~and to project its political, diplomatic, social, econom~~; recalls, in this connection, that the Lisbon Treaty introduced a number of signific an~~d cultural influence worldwide, enhancing the security of Europe and that of its citizens; recalls, in this connection, that Article 42(7) TEU (‘~~t innovations that provide for the institutional framework for effective solidarity among all the Member States in relation to the CSDP : the 'mutual defence clause’' or ‘'mutual assistance clause~~’) and~~ ', the permanent structured cooperation (Article 2242 T~~FEU (‘~~UE), and the 'solidarity clause~~’), introduced by the Lisbon Treaty, provide for~~' (Article 222 TFEU); recalls that those inst~~itutional framework for effective solidarity among all the Member States in the field of the security and defence of the Union;~~ruments have yet to be implemented and commends, therefore, the Commission and the European External Action Service (EEAS) for the Joint Proposal on the arrangements for the implementation by the Union of the solidarity clause and invites them to assess what this would entail in the event of its being activated to address any challenges at sea or involving maritime assets or infrastructure; urges the Council to swiftly approve this proposal;

2013/04/03
Committee: AFET

2012/2318(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3

3. Urges the Member States and the EU institutions, bodies, and agencies concerned to demonstrate commitment and to work together to ensure the control, security and safety of the European coastal and territorial waters, Exclusive Economic Zones (EEZs), continental shelf, maritime infrastructure and marine resources; recalls that they must also guarantee the flow of maritime routes and the preservation of the Global Commons, vital for the world's and Europe's own security, commercial and environmental interests; notes that the Member States have the responsibility of being the principal security provider for seafarers on ships flying their flag and of affording protection to their citizens, particularly by rescuing those in crisis zones; stresses that the EU and its Members States have a duty to endeavour to enforce and reinforce international law, particularly UNCLOS, to regulate global maritime affairs and to prevent a race for the exploitation of raw materials and mineral and halieutic resources in the high seas which could cause environmental degradation and spark international conflict;deleted

2013/04/03
Committee: AFET

2012/2318(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6

6. Invites the High Representative, the Commission, ~~the Council and all other bodies participating in the relevant task force to elaborate an EU Maritime Security Strategy that involves, and is~~and the Council to elaborate an EMSS centred on, articulation and coordination among all European actors relevant to maritime ~~safety and~~ security; urges the Commission and the HR/VP, accordingly, to address the shortcomings of the 2007 Integrated Maritime Policy, which failed to make use of the full potential of a truly integrated operational approach to all EU agencies, bodies and instruments which could assist in improving results and cutting/sharing costs; is of the view that the EMSS should be the offspring of the European Security Strategy and a sibling of the Integrated Maritime Policy andMP which does not include a security dimension as well as the limits of the ESS that fails to tackle maritime security threats and risks; claims that its level of ambition ands well as means and capabilities should be determined ~~not just by direct maritime interests but by the need to regulat~~by the need to act as a global security provider, thereby ensuring free maritime flows and access on the high seas worldwide;

2013/04/03
Committee: AFET

2012/2318(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7

7. Stresses that in today's world the complexity, integration and level of interaction among state, commercial and non-state actors at sea demands a comprehensive approach that addresses the intricacy of the challenges and threats to European interests, beyond their purely safety or security nature, but also consider the political, economic and other opportunities opened up by such interaction; insists that this approach should not shy away from fully seizing the potential offered by the multiple EU bodies and agencies working together, instead of perpetuating the gaps, overlaps and inconsistencies in implementing common standards, the reluctance to share information, and the divergent approaches to cyber governance that exist today in several areas of maritime-related initiatives and activities;deleted

2013/04/03
Committee: AFET

2012/2318(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8 a (new)

8 a. Acknowledges that increasing traffic at sea and the development of off-shore and coastal activities are challenging maritime security by making it more and more difficult to distinguish legal from illegal activities at sea;

2013/04/03
Committee: AFET

2012/2318(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8 b (new)

8 b. Notes that the EU is facing conventional threats to its security and notably since the emergence of new maritime powers has rendered more likely potential interstate rivalries over the ownership of maritime areas (disputes over jurisdiction, territorial claims, exploration and exploitation licences in Deep Sea Zones); notes, in addition, that emerging countries have developed their maritime capabilities (navies, submarines) and, at the same time, tend to call international maritime law principles into question;

2013/04/03
Committee: AFET

2012/2318(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8 c (new)

8 c. Warns against the illegitimate exploitation of important natural resources and minerals in EU Member States' waters or in neighbouring seas; notes that the unmanaged race for marine, natural and mineral resources may have a damaging impact on the marine ecosystem, thus increasing the environmental impact of activities at sea; recalls that the exploitation of marine resources can also lead to an undesirable militarisation of maritime zones;

2013/04/03
Committee: AFET

2012/2318(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8 d (new)

8 d. Notes that the EU needs to build strong partnerships with third countries and regional organisations in order to ensure the security and the stability of commerce and resource exploitation; highlights the fact that a strong maritime dimension of the CSDP would provide the EU with the ability to act as an effective international arbitrator when needed;

2013/04/03
Committee: AFET

2012/2318(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9

9. Notes that direct and indirect risks to the security of the EU are currently posed by non-conventional threats ~~and actors intending to prolifer~~; notes thate t~~errorism and weapons of mass destruction (WMD) in the southern neighbourhood and further into the African continent,~~hose actors tak~~ing~~e advantage of difficulties in enforcing the law in maritime zones, coastal areas and in general resulting from state failure, state fragility or lack of state control; notes that these threats and actors dangerously interact with organised criminal networks which engage in human trafficking and other illicit activities, such as trafficking in drugs and arms, including small arms and light weapons and WMD components, thereby worsening political and humanitarian crises, obstructing social and economic development, democracy and the rule of law, fuelling deprivation and causing migration, internal displacement of people and immense human suffering;

2013/04/03
Committee: AFET

2012/2318(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9 a (new)

9 a. Notes that one of the main threats to EU maritime security is the rise of maritime terrorist activities around the world that directly threaten EU civilian and military vessels, port facilities and energy installations and take advantage of the sea to attack and infiltrate land-based targets; notes that these actors interact with transnational organised criminal networks engaging in illegal activities at sea, such as smuggling, human trafficking, illegal immigration, drugs and weapons trafficking, including small arms, light weapons and WMD components;

2013/04/03
Committee: AFET

2012/2318(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10

10. Is alarmed by increasing evidence that terrorist networks and non-state actors are acquiring sophisticated maritime capabilities, including submarine capabilities, ~~thus significantly improving their threat potential, indicating an expansion of their activities close to Europe, notably on both sides of the South Atlantic Ocean~~mining capabilities, and Water-Borne Improvised Explosive Devices (WBIED), thus significantly improving their threat potential and ability to escape control;

2013/04/03
Committee: AFET

2012/2318(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11

11. Remains concerned by the piracy along the eastern and western African coastline~~, which is seriously hindering freedom of access and flow in those seas~~; Recalls that pirates' attacks - from armed robbery, kidnapping of vessels and crews, and money extortion - are seriously hindering freedom of access and flow in those seas and thereby represent a considerable threat to international trade and maritime security; recalls that piracy is generally a problem stemming from lack of governance and development o~~n shore, and that it can only be count~~f the coastal states concerned through a holistic approach ranging from surveillance to coastguard training, countering illegal financial flows, legislation and addressing the social, economic and political root causes, along with the pressing security needs on the sea, as EUNAVFOR Atalanta off the Horn of Africa illustrates, evolving as it has from an initial uncoordinated stage into a more strategic and comprehensive direction; hopes that the EU will built on the achievements of the CSDP operation EUNAVFOR Atalanta to launch CSDP operations to combat piracy elsewhere;

2013/04/03
Committee: AFET

2012/2318(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12 a (new)

12 a. Notes that the fight against non- conventional activities needs to rely on the whole range of CSDP instruments, including military, since interventions often take place in highly difficult landscape, with actors having at their disposal a wide range of dangerous weapons; claims that, on the model of EU action in the Horn of Africa where the EUNAVFOR Atalanta operation and the EUCAP NESTOR operation are ongoing, CSDP operations must be accompanied by the other EU external instruments with the view to address the social, economic and political root causes of crisis and ensure the sustainable securitisation of the regions concerned;

2013/04/03
Committee: AFET

2012/2318(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14

14. Acknowledges that increasing traffic at sea is likely to increase the potential for disasters such as oil spills and other environmental pollution incidents, toxic waste dumping and illegal oil bunkering; stresses that the EU must further develop a strategy that builds on past experience of serious environmental disasters at sea by ensuring that all actors, EU bodies and agencies, in combination with Member State authorities, ~~intervene~~act in a coordinated manner~~, while discharging their respective responsibility, with a view to creating the appropriate synergies, in a spirit of solidarity and more effective action~~ and define the appropriate strategy to prevent and respond to such risks;

2013/04/03
Committee: AFET

2012/2318(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15

15. Warns against the risk of escalation and the illegitimate exploitation of important natural resources and minerals in EU Member States' waters or in neighbouring seas; notes that the unmanaged race for marine, natural and mineral resources may have a damaging impact on the marine ecosystem, thus increasing the environmental impact of activities at sea; recalls that the exploitation of marine resources can also lead to an undesirable militarisation of maritime zones;deleted

2013/04/03
Committee: AFET

2012/2318(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Subheading 5

The Atlantic Ocean and West Africa

2013/04/03
Committee: AFET

2012/2318(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19 a (new)

19 a. Notes that the Atlantic Ocean is Europe's life-line for trade; is concerned that the Atlantic, and in particular the Caribbean zone, is the main route used for the transit of drugs coming from South America; is worried by the fact that the development of economic activities in the coming decades, notably with the enlargement of the Panama canal, will foster the rise of criminal activities in the zone, therefore putting at risk the security of the European citizens living there;

2013/04/03
Committee: AFET

2012/2318(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20

20. Believes that the West African coast, and specifically the Gulf of Guinea, today host some of the most substantial impending threats against Europe; is deeply concerned that along the West African coastline serious challenges are developing in relation to criminal activity, trafficking of drugs, human beings and weapons~~, including the proliferation of WMDs~~; concurrently, Gulf of Guinea countries are increasingly an operating ground for regional terrorist networks, such as Boko Haram in Nigeria, whose actions spill over to neighbours and which are linked to networks with global outreach, such as Al-Qaeda in the Islamic Maghreb, as the crisis in Mali is vividly illustrating;

2013/04/03
Committee: AFET

2012/2318(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 25

25. Stresses that there is a need to identify adequate European naval capabilities with the aim of enhancing the effectiveness of EU activities in the Gulf of Guinea, specifically in the field of surveillance, patrolling and the fight against organised crime; suggests that specific synergies be created in order to bring added value from the articulation of existing EU instruments and structures, especially the expertise of the European Defence Agency (EDA), the European Maritime Safety Agency (EMSA), the European Space Agency (ESA) and the EU Satellite Centre (SatCen);

2013/04/03
Committee: AFET

2012/2318(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 29

29. Highlights the ~~recent but reversible success achieved by~~success of EUNAVFOR Atalanta in curbing the occurrence of pirate attacks in the Western Indian Ocean and in enhancing the credibility of the CSDP; notes that Operation Atalanta is the first ever CSDP naval mission and that it should constitute a ~~basis~~model for the ~~further development and implementation of the maritime dimension of the CDSP~~launch of future similar CSDP operations , taking stock of its successes, its shortcomings and lessons learned; welcommends the ~~EU's coordinating role and the cooperative environm~~positive role takent b~~etween Atalanta and other security p~~y EUNAVFOR Atalanta in the SHADE (Shared Awartenerss ~~in the region, such as NATO's operation Ocean Shield, as well as the navies of some regional emerging powers; the same is true for th~~and De-confliction) mechanism to promote coo~~per~~rdination with other EU actors, such as the SatCen and EMSA, particularly in the field of satellite vessel imagery interpretation, even when there are no formal arrangements underpinning such cooperation; calls on the EU to formalise the bridging among existing EU tools and bodies, such as that developed among Atalanta, EMSA and SatCen, so as to avoid duplication of tasks, resources and expertise and to reap the clear operational benefits of such synergiesbetween the multinational, national and regional naval forces operating in the area, and notably with NATO's operation Ocean Shield;

2013/04/03
Committee: AFET

2012/2318(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 30 a (new)

30 a Welcomes the Commission's communication of 26 June 2012 untitled "Developing a European Union Policy towards the Arctic Region: progress since 2008 and next steps", which represents the basis of EU's policy in the Arctic;

2013/04/03
Committee: AFET

2012/2318(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 31

31. Stresses that the opening of the Arctic route is a direct consequence of climate change, and highlights the fact that, first and foremost, the EU should invest itself in the preservation and conservation of the region, its resources and critical environmental assets; underlines the importance of overall stability and peace in the region; stresses, therefore, the need for a united, coordinated EU policy on the region, in which the EU’s priorities, potential challenges and strategy are clearly defined; highlights the fact that, alongside the Danish interests in the Arctic, a future accession of Iceland to the EU would deepen the Union’s transformation into an Arctic coastal entity, underlining the need for an ever more coordinated Arctic policy at EU level; takes the view that EU policy on the Arctic should be shaped by dialogue with all of the partners in the region, including Russia; stresses, furthermore, that, in view of its potential and engagement in the Arctic to date, the EU can and should make a greater effort to enhance and strengthen the position of European observer countries in the Arctic Council;

2013/04/03
Committee: AFET

2012/2318(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 32

32. Underlines the potential importance of the safety and security of new world trade routes through the sea passage opened in the Arctic, including for the EU and its Member States' economies; underlines the fact that the EU and its Member States should actively uphold the freedom of the seas and the right to free passage through international waterways; stresses that existing long-standing territorial disputes between Arctic states call for greater EU involvement in the region and an assessment of what tools and capabilities might be needed to respond to conflict in the area; highlights, in any case, the need to avoid the militarisation of the Arctic; calls on the Commission to put forward proposals as to how the Galileo Project could have an impact on Arctic policy and how it could be developed to enable safer navigation in Arctic waters, thus investing in the safety and accessibility of the North East Passage in particular; notes that certain states are already greatly politically active in the Pacific - notably Australia - and that the EU should rely on bilateral and multilateral cooperation in order to ensure security and safety in the region;

2013/04/03
Committee: AFET

2012/2318(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 33

33. Underlines the global importance of the Pacific Ocean, and notably of the South China Sea, through which one third of the world's trade is transported; is alarmed at the escalating tension, and urgently appeals to all the parties involved to refrain from unilateral political and military actions, to tone down statements and to settle their conflicting territorial claims in the South China Sea by means of international arbitration, in accordance with international law, in particular UNCLOS, in order to ensure regional stability and the freedom and safety of navigation in the South China Sea;

2013/04/03
Committee: AFET

2012/2318(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 35

35. Stresses the importance of the enlargement of the Panama Canal, which should be completed in 2014, for changing the geostrategic maritime balance and the extraordinary opportunities that this will open up to the EU and Member States ~~if their~~; warns that Member States' shipping and port infrastructures should be prepared to face the predictable increase in maritime commercial flows and the security and safety risks entailed, arising inter alia from additional environmental stress and criminal activity; emphasises that this connection between the Pacific and the Atlantic Oceans could become a significant alternative transport route from Asia to Europe and vice-versa via the west;

2013/04/03
Committee: AFET

2012/2318(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 40

40. Recalls that dual-use capabilities are ~~relevant and should be welcomed~~necessary in the implementation of the CSDP, in light of the complex security challenges in today's world; stresses that the current crises in the Sahel and the Horn of Africa have highlighted the need for ~~a comprehensive approach that makes use, on the one hand, of the full range of civilian-military engagement and, on the other, of~~ dual-use equipment and capacities, including European naval capabilities; invites the Member States to work with the appropriate EU bodies and agencies, notably the Commission, the EDA and the ~~Commission,~~ESA in seeking EU funding for dual-use capability development, which is a way to fill in capability gaps at the national, regional and Union level; recalls the dual- use potential of the Galileo programme and its value for the implementation and effectiveness of CSDP operations, particularly in the maritime domain;

2013/04/03
Committee: AFET

2012/2318(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 44

44. Calls for ~~the creation of a truly European coastguard, based on the experience already gained by~~effective cooperation between national coastguards, Frontex and the European Patrol Network;

2013/04/03
Committee: AFET

2012/2318(INI)

Edward MCMILLAN-SCOTT, Oldřich VLASÁK, Esther DE LANGE, Raül ROMEVA i RUEDA, Mário DAVID, Lara COMI, Anna Maria CORAZZA BILDT, Lidia Joanna GERINGER DE OEDENBERG, Ulrike LUNACEK, Krzysztof LISEK, Diane DODDS, Judith A. MERKIES, Bart STAES

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 47

47. Regrets the fact that the situation which persists today is one of duplication, overlap, waste of resources and turf war among EU bodies and agencies working in the field of maritime security; urges the EU to further study ways in which it can reduce the administrative and financial burden stemming from useless overlap of functions, expertise, equipment and resources among several EU bodies and actors, thus enabling the HR/VP to assert her coordinating function; calls on the EU to formalise the bridging among existing EU tools and bodies, such as that developed through Atalanta, EMSA and SatCen, so as to avoid duplication of tasks, resources and expertise and to reap the clear operational benefits of such synergies;

2013/04/03
Committee: AFET

2012/2308(INI)

Göran FÄRM, Edward MCMILLAN-SCOTT, Anne E. JENSEN, Nils TORVALDS, Jan MULDER, George LYON, Angelika WERTHMANN, Dan JØRGENSEN, Bart STAES, Helga TRÜPEL, Ulrike LUNACEK, Anna Maria CORAZZA BILDT, Isabelle DURANT, Lidia Joanna GERINGER DE OEDENBERG, Krzysztof LISEK

Draft opinion
Recital A

A. whereas Parliament's estimates for 2014 put the overall budget at EUR 1 808 144 206, with costs directly related to the geographic dispersion estimated at ~~EUR 180 000 000~~between EUR 169 million and EUR 204 million;

2013/07/17
Committee: BUDG

2012/2308(INI)

Göran FÄRM, Edward MCMILLAN-SCOTT, Anne E. JENSEN, Nils TORVALDS, Jan MULDER, George LYON, Angelika WERTHMANN, Dan JØRGENSEN, Bart STAES, Helga TRÜPEL, Anna Maria CORAZZA BILDT, Isabelle DURANT, Lidia Joanna GERINGER DE OEDENBERG, Krzysztof LISEK, Ulrike LUNACEK

Draft opinion
Recital A a (new)

Aa. whereas since the beginning of the current legislature, both individual committees and the plenary have made several specific requests to the European Parliament's administration to provide comprehensive, detailed and reliable estimates of the additional costs relating to each of the three places of work;

2013/07/17
Committee: BUDG

2012/2308(INI)

Göran FÄRM, Edward MCMILLAN-SCOTT, Anne E. JENSEN, Jan MULDER, Nils TORVALDS, George LYON, Dan JØRGENSEN, Bart STAES, Helga TRÜPEL, Anna Maria CORAZZA BILDT, Isabelle DURANT, Lidia Joanna GERINGER DE OEDENBERG, Krzysztof LISEK, Ulrike LUNACEK

Draft opinion
Recital A b (new)

Ab. whereas, the numbers provided by the Secretary-General's report to the Bureau of September 2002 are the last overall cost estimates available;

2013/07/17
Committee: BUDG

2012/2308(INI)

Edward MCMILLAN-SCOTT, Göran FÄRM, Anne E. JENSEN, Nils TORVALDS, Jan MULDER, George LYON, Dan JØRGENSEN, Bart STAES, Helga TRÜPEL, Anna Maria CORAZZA BILDT, Isabelle DURANT, Lidia Joanna GERINGER DE OEDENBERG, Krzysztof LISEK, Ulrike LUNACEK

Draft opinion
Recital A c (new)

Ac. whereas the 2002 Secretary-General's estimate was confirmed by the joint working group report of the Bureau and the Committee on Budgets on Parliament's budget for 2012, when complementing the EUR 148 million estimate by the EUR 25 million of annual amortisation cost for the Strasbourg buildings that need to be taken into account since the purchase of named buildings;

2013/07/17
Committee: BUDG

2012/2308(INI)

Edward MCMILLAN-SCOTT, Lidia Joanna GERINGER DE OEDENBERG, Mário DAVID, Lara COMI, Anna Maria CORAZZA BILDT, Krzysztof LISEK, Ulrike LUNACEK, Bart STAES, Esther DE LANGE, Oldřich VLASÁK, Diane DODDS, Judith A. MERKIES, Dan JØRGENSEN, Raül ROMEVA i RUEDA

Motion for a resolution
Citation 11

– having regard to Rules 5.3, 29, 41, 48 and 74a of its Rules of Procedure,

2013/07/05
Committee: AFCO

2012/2308(INI)

Edward MCMILLAN-SCOTT, Göran FÄRM, Anne E. JENSEN, Nils TORVALDS, Jan MULDER, George LYON, Angelika WERTHMANN, Dan JØRGENSEN, Bart STAES, Helga TRÜPEL, Anna Maria CORAZZA BILDT, Isabelle DURANT, Lidia Joanna GERINGER DE OEDENBERG, Krzysztof LISEK, Ulrike LUNACEK

Draft opinion
Recital B a (new)

~~1 Economic impact of the presence of the~~Ba. whereas the European Parliament's economic impact on the city and region of Strasbourg is low in comparison with other European bodies with permanent staff there, contributing some 223 jobs compared to the almost 3000 permanent employees of the Council of Europe an ~~Institutions in Strasbourg, CityConsult Médiascopie EDR Group, January 2011.~~d a further 4000 employees associated with Eurocorps, the European Court for Human Rights, Arte and diplomats, which translates into some 17million Euro gains from the seat of the EP at Strasbourg and some 400 million Euro for the other bodies1 that contribute regularly and permanently to the local economy;

2013/07/17
Committee: BUDG

2012/2308(INI)

Edward MCMILLAN-SCOTT, Krzysztof LISEK, Ulrike LUNACEK, Bart STAES, Esther DE LANGE, Oldřich VLASÁK, Diane DODDS, Judith A. MERKIES, Dan JØRGENSEN, Raül ROMEVA i RUEDA, Mário DAVID, Lara COMI, Anna Maria CORAZZA BILDT, Lidia Joanna GERINGER DE OEDENBERG

Motion for a resolution
Citation 12 a (new)

– having regard to the parliament's vote on 23 October 2012, which saw a majority of 78% of Members call on EU governments to revise the issue of parliament's official seat; Strasbourg;

2013/07/05
Committee: AFCO

2012/2308(INI)

Göran FÄRM, Edward MCMILLAN-SCOTT, Anne E. JENSEN, Nils TORVALDS, Jan MULDER, George LYON, Angelika WERTHMANN, Dan JØRGENSEN, Bart STAES, Helga TRÜPEL, Anna Maria CORAZZA BILDT, Isabelle DURANT, Lidia Joanna GERINGER DE OEDENBERG, Krzysztof LISEK, Ulrike LUNACEK

Draft opinion
Recital C a (new)

Ca. whereas a reply given to the EP Budgetary Control Committee in preparation for the EP discharge for 2011 does not provide estimates on the potential savings, but only a partial estimate of the additional costs of the Strasbourg seat; whereas this EUR 55 million estimate does not include many budget lines that were included in previous and following estimates, namely the cost of data processing, equipment and movable property, travel expenses of political groups as well as any potential savings connected to time lost travelling (totalling EUR 68 million); whereas this estimate provides lower numbers on several budget lines than both previous and following estimates without providing any justification (totalling EUR 25 million);

2013/07/17
Committee: BUDG

2012/2308(INI)

Göran FÄRM, Edward MCMILLAN-SCOTT, Anne E. JENSEN, Nils TORVALDS, Jan MULDER, George LYON, Angelika WERTHMANN, Dan JØRGENSEN, Bart STAES, Helga TRÜPEL, Anna Maria CORAZZA BILDT, Isabelle DURANT, Lidia Joanna GERINGER DE OEDENBERG, Krzysztof LISEK, Ulrike LUNACEK

Draft opinion
Recital C b (new)

Cb. whereas none of these estimates includes the additional costs of the European Parliament's geographic dispersion on the other European Union institutions, in particular the European Commission and Council, EU member states' representations, journalists and civil society representatives;

2013/07/17
Committee: BUDG

2012/2308(INI)

Göran FÄRM, Edward MCMILLAN-SCOTT, Anne E. JENSEN, Nils TORVALDS, Jan MULDER, George LYON, Angelika WERTHMANN, Dan JØRGENSEN, Bart STAES, Helga TRÜPEL, Anna Maria CORAZZA BILDT, Isabelle DURANT, Lidia Joanna GERINGER DE OEDENBERG, Krzysztof LISEK, Ulrike LUNACEK

Draft opinion
Recital C c (new)

Cc. whereas ¾ of members believe that the EP should find significant structural savings and these could be found in re- evaluating the EP's geographical dispersion of places of work, illustrated by a breakdown of the costs of Brussels, Luxembourg and Strasbourg set out in a transparent and credible format to standards expected from a major public body;

2013/07/17
Committee: BUDG

2012/2308(INI)

Edward MCMILLAN-SCOTT, Anne E. JENSEN, Nils TORVALDS, Jan MULDER, George LYON, Dan JØRGENSEN, Bart STAES, Anna Maria CORAZZA BILDT, Isabelle DURANT, Lidia Joanna GERINGER DE OEDENBERG, Krzysztof LISEK, Ulrike LUNACEK

Draft opinion
Recital C d (new)

Cd. whereas the historical reasons for the European bodies permanently seated in Strasbourg are well-known in respect e.g. the European Court for Human Rights and the Council of Europe, and while the European Assembly /Parliament for convenience initially used the latter's Chamber, the choice of Brussels as the seat of the European Commission and of NATO reflect the EU's aspirations for a continent progressively united in prosperity and security;

2013/07/17
Committee: BUDG

2012/2308(INI)

Göran FÄRM, Edward MCMILLAN-SCOTT, Anne E. JENSEN, Nils TORVALDS, Jan MULDER, George LYON, Angelika WERTHMANN, Dan JØRGENSEN, Bart STAES, Anna Maria CORAZZA BILDT, Isabelle DURANT, Lidia Joanna GERINGER DE OEDENBERG, Krzysztof LISEK, Ulrike LUNACEK

Draft opinion
Recital C e (new)

Ce. whereas situating the co-legislators of the EU in a single place does not undermine the tradition of polycentrism in the EU but bears significant efficiency and transparency gains for EU citizens;

2013/07/17
Committee: BUDG

2012/2308(INI)

Edward MCMILLAN-SCOTT, Anne E. JENSEN, Nils TORVALDS, Jan MULDER, George LYON, Angelika WERTHMANN, Dan JØRGENSEN, Bart STAES, Anna Maria CORAZZA BILDT, Isabelle DURANT, Lidia Joanna GERINGER DE OEDENBERG, Krzysztof LISEK, Ulrike LUNACEK

Draft opinion
Recital C f (new)

Cf. whereas, in many Member States, parliament's seat is laid down either in the Constitution or by law and whereas the European Parliament is a co-legislator of European law and can call for changes of the European treaties under article 48 of the Lisbon Treaty;

2013/07/17
Committee: BUDG

2012/2308(INI)

Edward MCMILLAN-SCOTT, Anne E. JENSEN, Nils TORVALDS, Jan MULDER, George LYON, Angelika WERTHMANN, Dan JØRGENSEN, Bart STAES, Anna Maria CORAZZA BILDT, Isabelle DURANT, Lidia Joanna GERINGER DE OEDENBERG, Krzysztof LISEK, Ulrike LUNACEK

Draft opinion
Recital C g (new)

Cg. whereas during the European Year of Citizens it is appropriate to show that their voice is not only heard but that their directly elected representatives are taking action on their behalf in order to end the monthly travel between the EP's places of work;

2013/07/17
Committee: BUDG

2012/2308(INI)

Göran FÄRM, Edward MCMILLAN-SCOTT, Anne E. JENSEN, Nils TORVALDS, Jan MULDER, George LYON, Angelika WERTHMANN, Dan JØRGENSEN, Bart STAES, Anna Maria CORAZZA BILDT, Isabelle DURANT, Lidia Joanna GERINGER DE OEDENBERG, Krzysztof LISEK, Ulrike LUNACEK

Draft opinion
Recital C h (new)

Ch. whereas the European institutions must do everything to further European political integration and bridge the perceived distance from citizens by tackling a major structural issue of the institutions and promoting European understanding, transparency, accountability and coherence by having the EU's decision making bodies in one place;

2013/07/17
Committee: BUDG

2012/2308(INI)

Göran FÄRM, Edward MCMILLAN-SCOTT, Anne E. JENSEN, Nils TORVALDS, Jan MULDER, George LYON, Angelika WERTHMANN, Dan JØRGENSEN, Bart STAES, Anna Maria CORAZZA BILDT, Isabelle DURANT, Lidia Joanna GERINGER DE OEDENBERG, Krzysztof LISEK, Ulrike LUNACEK

Draft opinion
Recital C i (new)

Ci. whereas 6% of the EU budget is intended for administrative purposes and that the European Union, with a relatively small operating budget for 500 million inhabitants, must set an example in these times of crisis by streamlining its own budgetary impact as much as possible without prejudice to the proper functioning of the European Parliament, adding that the efficiency gains of having a single seat near the co-legislator cannot be ignored;

2013/07/17
Committee: BUDG

2012/2308(INI)

Göran FÄRM, Edward MCMILLAN-SCOTT, Anne E. JENSEN, Nils TORVALDS, Jan MULDER, George LYON, Dan JØRGENSEN, Bart STAES, Anna Maria CORAZZA BILDT, Isabelle DURANT, Lidia Joanna GERINGER DE OEDENBERG, Krzysztof LISEK, Ulrike LUNACEK

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 a (new)

1a. Considers that while the seats of the European Institutions are enshrined in the Treaties, so is article 48, which allows for a proposal for treaty change;

2013/07/17
Committee: BUDG

2012/2308(INI)

Edward MCMILLAN-SCOTT, Anna Maria CORAZZA BILDT, Mário DAVID, Raül ROMEVA i RUEDA, Göran FÄRM, Judith A. MERKIES, Krzysztof LISEK, Dan JØRGENSEN, Lara COMI, Diane DODDS, Lidia Joanna GERINGER DE OEDENBERG, Bart STAES, Ulrike LUNACEK

Draft opinion
Paragraph C a (new)

Ca. whereas MEPs have repeatedly requested the Parliament's Administration procure for a Eurobarometer survey which asks European citizens for their views on Parliament's split-site arrangement;

2013/06/24
Committee: PETI

2012/2308(INI)

Edward MCMILLAN-SCOTT, Esther DE LANGE, Oldřich VLASÁK, Diane DODDS, Judith A. MERKIES, Dan JØRGENSEN, Raül ROMEVA i RUEDA, Mário DAVID, Lara COMI, Anna Maria CORAZZA BILDT, Lidia Joanna GERINGER DE OEDENBERG, Ulrike LUNACEK, Krzysztof LISEK, Bart STAES

Motion for a resolution
Recital Q a (new)

Qa. whereas Members have repeatedly requested up-to-date breakdowns of the financial, environmental and social costs of the parliament's working arrangements, because the Administration has yet to produce a consistent and coherent set of figures;

2013/07/05
Committee: AFCO

2012/2308(INI)

Edward MCMILLAN-SCOTT, Dan JØRGENSEN, Raül ROMEVA i RUEDA, Mário DAVID, Lara COMI, Anna Maria CORAZZA BILDT, Lidia Joanna GERINGER DE OEDENBERG, Ulrike LUNACEK, Krzysztof LISEK, Bart STAES, Diane DODDS, Judith A. MERKIES, Oldřich VLASÁK, Esther DE LANGE

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4

4. Acknowledges that any future decision by Parliament on its working arrangements must allow sufficient time for debate and reflection, as well as for an orderly transition; requests a study into the one- off cost of moving all parliament's activities to a single working location;

2013/07/05
Committee: AFCO

2012/2308(INI)

Edward MCMILLAN-SCOTT, Esther DE LANGE, Oldřich VLASÁK, Judith A. MERKIES, Diane DODDS, Bart STAES, Krzysztof LISEK, Ulrike LUNACEK, Lidia Joanna GERINGER DE OEDENBERG, Anna Maria CORAZZA BILDT, Raül ROMEVA i RUEDA, Dan JØRGENSEN, Mário DAVID, Lara COMI

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5 a (new)

5a. Asks the Administration to provide a comprehensive analysis of the potential savings for our budget if the parliament had only one place of work, in Brussels; asks that this analysis includes the budgetary aspects and the ancillary costs such as savings made as a result of loss of working time and efficiency;

2013/07/05
Committee: AFCO

2012/2308(INI)

Edward MCMILLAN-SCOTT, Lara COMI, Mário DAVID, Dan JØRGENSEN, Raül ROMEVA i RUEDA, Esther DE LANGE, Oldřich VLASÁK, Judith A. MERKIES, Diane DODDS, Bart STAES, Anna Maria CORAZZA BILDT, Lidia Joanna GERINGER DE OEDENBERG, Ulrike LUNACEK, Krzysztof LISEK

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5 b (new)

5b. Asks the Administration to procure that EMAS or suitable external consultants provide an analysis of the environmental aspects if the parliament held all its plenary sessions in Brussels;

2013/07/05
Committee: AFCO

2012/2308(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5 c (new)

5c. Asks the Administration to procure that the parliament's Medical Service provide an analysis of the health effects of the monthly session in Strasbourg on Members, staff and assistants;

2013/07/05
Committee: AFCO

2012/2308(INI)

Edward MCMILLAN-SCOTT, Anna Maria CORAZZA BILDT, Mário DAVID, Raül ROMEVA i RUEDA, Göran FÄRM, Judith A. MERKIES, Krzysztof LISEK, Dan JØRGENSEN, Lara COMI, Diane DODDS, Lidia Joanna GERINGER DE OEDENBERG, Bart STAES, Ulrike LUNACEK

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 a (new)

3a. Calls on the relevant services of the European Parliament to make an assessment of the agreement between the authorities in Luxembourg and the European Parliament, on the number of staff to be present in Luxembourg, taking into account a revision of the Parliament's needs; this assessment shall include suggestions on how to renegotiate this agreement, without prejudice to the legal provisions;

2013/06/24
Committee: PETI

2012/2308(INI)

Edward MCMILLAN-SCOTT, Anna Maria CORAZZA BILDT, Mário DAVID, Raül ROMEVA i RUEDA, Göran FÄRM, Judith A. MERKIES, Krzysztof LISEK, Dan JØRGENSEN, Lara COMI, Diane DODDS, Lidia Joanna GERINGER DE OEDENBERG, Bart STAES, Ulrike LUNACEK

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 b (new)

3b. Calls on Parliament's Administration to procure for Eurobarometer or similar professional polling service to conduct a survey of EU citizens' views on the maintenance of Parliament's split site working arrangement by 1 January 2014, with specific reference to the financial, environmental and efficiency costs of this arrangement;

2013/06/24
Committee: PETI

2012/2303(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital A

A. whereas arms exports can have inter alia a considerable impact not only on security, but also on development, ~~and must~~ therefore ~~be at the very least embedded within a strict arms control system operating with maximum effectiveness~~it is important to strengthen the European Union's export control policy for military technology and equipment;

2013/03/11
Committee: AFET

2012/2303(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital F

F. whereas Article 10 of the Common Position clearly states that ~~compliance with the eight c~~the Member States, where appropriate~~ria takes precedence over any~~, may also take into account the effect of proposed exports on their economic, social, commercial orand industrial interests ~~of Member States;~~, these factors shall not affect the application of the above criteria.

2013/03/11
Committee: AFET

2012/2303(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital H

H. whereas the Common Position ~~conta~~defines ~~no democratically produced and binding list, together with reasons, identifying~~the broadest common understanding for the countr~~ies arms~~ol of exports ~~to which would violate one or more of the eight criteria~~of military technology and equipment serving the coordination of national export control systems;

2013/03/11
Committee: AFET

2012/2303(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital I

I. whereas ~~there is no standardised~~a development towards a stronger 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 havinghas been observed since the presentation of the annual Council reports according to article 8(2) of Council Common Position 2008/944/CFSP defining common rules governing control of exports of military technology and equipment; whereas the Member Countries shall overcome legislative and organizational obstacles in order to achieve better possible compliance with the eight criteria independently verified;

2013/03/11
Committee: AFET

2012/2303(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital J

J. whereas ~~little~~significant progress has been made on reaching agreement between the Member States with regard to applying and interpreting the Common Position’s eight criteria, principally thanks to the Common Position User’s Guide, drawn up by COARM, giving detailed definitions of best practices with regard to the application of the criteria;

2013/03/11
Committee: AFET

2012/2303(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital M

M. whereas, despite the progress made with regard to transparency thanks to the COARM information exchange mechanism, 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;

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 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~~Wassenaar Arrangement agenda; whereas the EU control regime of export of dual~~- use~~ goods, a~~re still not c~~nd technologies is governed by ~~a legally binding arms exports control system~~Regulation 428/2009;

2013/03/11
Committee: AFET

2012/2303(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital O

O. whereas ~~many surveillance~~the use of military technolog~~ies~~y and ~~surveillance software products and many other goods used in a host of recipient countries for repressive measures against~~equipment, produced in the EU, vary in their ~~populations are not included either in the Common Military List of the European Union or in the EU list of dual-use good~~d countries;

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, which, in connection with issuing arms exports licences, should have been (and must be) taken into account, was (and is) known; whehave shown that the Common Position has been implemented effectively; whereas those events have indeed been discussed at almost every COARM meeting held since the beginning of 2011, and whereas those meetings made it possible to harmonise the required review of Member States’ national policies with regard to exports to the countries concerned; whereas this consultation process between Member States has been accompanied by enhanced due diligence measures, suspension measureas ~~the events of the Arab Spring have reveale~~and measures to postpone authorisation, and twhe ~~weaknesses of the Common Position and, to some extent, a number of countries’ disregard for it and the criteria it contains~~reas, as a result of the existing information exchange mechanisms both within and outside COARM, it was possible for the various Member States to take these decisions swiftly;

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 crisis regions and countries with a questionable human rights record, 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~~more uniform 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 3

3. Takes the view that, because of the negative impact of arms spending on the development prospects of poorer recipient countries, criterion 8 should be upgraded by making denial of export licences automatic if they are incompatible with development;deleted

2013/03/11
Committee: AFET

2012/2303(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4

4. Takes the view that the Common Position ~~should be~~would benefit – with account being taken of the degree of confidentiality required by the Member States in their decision-making – from being complemented by a regularly updated, publicly accessible list, with ~~detailed reasons, providing information on~~reasons indicating the extent to which exports to particular recipient countries are, or are not, in keeping with the eight criteria;

2013/03/11
Committee: AFET

2012/2303(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5

5. Considers ~~that~~as appropriate to prepare an advisability and feasibility study on whether a standardised verification and reporting system sh~~ould~~all be established to provide information as to whether, and to what extent, individual EU Member States' exports violate the eight criteria;

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~~ensure the criteria ~~from being~~are 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 stopped because of political, economic or geostrategic interestsin a more uniform way;

2013/03/11
Committee: AFET

2012/2303(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7

7. ~~Regrets~~Takes note of the fact that the~~re is no possibility of having compliance with the eight criteria independently verified, that there are no mechanisms for sanctions for vio~~ control of complying to the criteria takes place according to national regulations; is of the eight criteria by a Member State, and that there are no plans to that effect; takes the view that ways and means of carrying out independent verification and mechanisms for sanctions for violations of the Common Position should be provided foropinion that national parliaments or specific parliamentary bodies have to assure the effective control of the application of the criteria;

2013/03/11
Committee: AFET

Monica MACOVEI, Krzysztof LISEK, Traian UNGUREANU, Inese VAIDERE, Cristian Dan PREDA

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5

5. Recognises in this regard the natural roles of the European Defence Agency (EDA) as a bridge between the defence community and the Commission and as a facilitator between military stakeholders; is in favour of strengthening the EDA's role in building political awareness, networking ~~and~~, assisting with the deployment phase of SESAR and supporting Member States in the financial and risk analysis; notes that the EDA is well placed to contribute to future SES challenges, for example in the field of equipment and training; welcomes the decision by Member States to involve the EU Military Staff (EUMS) in supporting the EDA in connection with SESAR; welcomes the establishment of the SES/SESAR Military Implementation Forum sponsored by the EDA and encourages its further ~~development~~effective continuation, as it has the strong merit of bringing all relevant actors in the defence community to the table; emphasises that cooperation with NATO is indispensable and welcomes ongoing developments in this regard;

2012/05/25
Committee: AFET

2012/0309(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 2

(2) The imposition of the visa requirement on the nationals of Dominica, Grenada, Kiribati, Marshall Islands, Micronesia, Nauru, Palau, Saint Lucia, Saint Vincent and the Grenadines, Samoa, Solomon Islands, Timor-Leste, Tonga, Trinidad and Tobago, Tuvalu, the United Arab Emirates and Vanuatu is no longer justified. These countries do not present any risk of illegal immigration or a threat to public policy for the Union in accordance with the criteria set out in recital 5 of Regulation (EC) N° 539/2001. Consequently, nationals of those countries should be exempt from the visa requirement for stays of no more than three months in all and references to those countries should be transferred to Annex II.

2013/07/12
Committee: LIBE

2012/0309(COD)

Mário DAVID, Antonio CANCIAN, Timothy KIRKHOPE, Timothy Charles Ayrton TANNOCK, Krzysztof LISEK, Roberta METSOLA, Tunne KELAM, Georgios PAPANIKOLAOU, Paulo RANGEL, Niccolò RINALDI, Antonyia PARVANOVA, Ismail ERTUG, Nuno TEIXEIRA, Nirj DEVA, Salvador SEDÓ i ALABART, Arnaud DANJEAN, Adrian SEVERIN, Ivo VAJGL, Filip KACZMAREK, Elena Oana ANTONESCU, Monica MACOVEI, Dimitrios DROUTSAS, David CASA, Antonio LÓPEZ-ISTÚRIZ WHITE, Emilio MENÉNDEZ del VALLE, Anne DELVAUX, Paul RÜBIG, Inese VAIDERE, Agustín DÍAZ DE MERA GARCÍA CONSUEGRA, Andrey KOVATCHEV, Eduard KUKAN, Kristiina OJULAND, Paweł Robert KOWAL, Ioan Mircea PAŞCU, Cristian Dan PREDA, Seán KELLY, Antigoni PAPADOPOULOU, Rodi KRATSA-TSAGAROPOULOU, Kinga GÁL, Alejo VIDAL-QUADRAS, Burkhard BALZ, Oldřich VLASÁK, Ramona Nicole MĂNESCU, Davor Ivo STIER, Norica NICOLAI, José Manuel FERNANDES, Hans-Peter MAYER, Anna IBRISAGIC, Petru Constantin LUHAN, Svetoslav Hristov MALINOV, Bogusław SONIK, Jacek PROTASIEWICZ, Tiziano MOTTI, Kyriacos TRIANTAPHYLLIDES, Bogusław LIBERADZKI, José Ignacio SALAFRANCA SÁNCHEZ-NEYRA, Diogo FEIO

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 3

(3) Exemption from the visa requirement for nationals of Dominica, Grenada, Kiribati, Marshall Islands, Micronesia, Nauru, Palau, Saint Lucia, Saint Vincent and the Grenadines, Samoa, Solomon Islands, Timor-Leste, Tonga, Trinidad and Tobago, Tuvalu, the United Arab Emirates and Vanuatu should not come into force until bilateral agreements on visa waiver between the Union and the countries concerned have been concluded in order to ensure full reciprocity.

2013/07/12
Committee: LIBE

2012/0309(COD)

Mário DAVID, Antonio CANCIAN, Timothy KIRKHOPE, Timothy Charles Ayrton TANNOCK, Krzysztof LISEK, Roberta METSOLA, Tunne KELAM, Georgios PAPANIKOLAOU, Paulo RANGEL, Niccolò RINALDI, Antonyia PARVANOVA, Ismail ERTUG, Nuno TEIXEIRA, Nirj DEVA, Salvador SEDÓ i ALABART, Arnaud DANJEAN, Adrian SEVERIN, Ivo VAJGL, Filip KACZMAREK, Elena Oana ANTONESCU, Monica MACOVEI, Dimitrios DROUTSAS, David CASA, Antonio LÓPEZ-ISTÚRIZ WHITE, Emilio MENÉNDEZ del VALLE, Anne DELVAUX, Paul RÜBIG, Inese VAIDERE, Agustín DÍAZ DE MERA GARCÍA CONSUEGRA, Andrey KOVATCHEV, Eduard KUKAN, Kristiina OJULAND, Paweł Robert KOWAL, Ioan Mircea PAŞCU, Cristian Dan PREDA, Seán KELLY, Antigoni PAPADOPOULOU, Rodi KRATSA-TSAGAROPOULOU, Kinga GÁL, Alejo VIDAL-QUADRAS, Burkhard BALZ, Oldřich VLASÁK, Ramona Nicole MĂNESCU, Davor Ivo STIER, Norica NICOLAI, José Manuel FERNANDES, Hans-Peter MAYER, Anna IBRISAGIC, Petru Constantin LUHAN, Svetoslav Hristov MALINOV, Jacek PROTASIEWICZ, Tiziano MOTTI, Kyriacos TRIANTAPHYLLIDES, Bogusław LIBERADZKI, José Ignacio SALAFRANCA SÁNCHEZ-NEYRA, Diogo FEIO, Bogusław SONIK

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

(a) in point 1, the references to Dominica, Grenada, Kiribati, Marshall Islands, Micronesia, Nauru, Palau, Saint Lucia, Saint Vincent and the Grenadines, Samoa, Solomon Islands, Timor-Leste, Tonga, Trinidad and Tobago, Tuvalu, the United Arab Emirates and Vanuatu are deleted and a reference to South-Sudan is inserted;

2013/07/12
Committee: LIBE

2012/0309(COD)

Mário DAVID, Antonio CANCIAN, Timothy KIRKHOPE, Timothy Charles Ayrton TANNOCK, Krzysztof LISEK, Roberta METSOLA, Tunne KELAM, Georgios PAPANIKOLAOU, Paulo RANGEL, Niccolò RINALDI, Antonyia PARVANOVA, Ismail ERTUG, Nuno TEIXEIRA, Nirj DEVA, Salvador SEDÓ i ALABART, Arnaud DANJEAN, Adrian SEVERIN, Ivo VAJGL, Filip KACZMAREK, Elena Oana ANTONESCU, Monica MACOVEI, Dimitrios DROUTSAS, David CASA, Antonio LÓPEZ-ISTÚRIZ WHITE, Emilio MENÉNDEZ del VALLE, Anne DELVAUX, Paul RÜBIG, Inese VAIDERE, Agustín DÍAZ DE MERA GARCÍA CONSUEGRA, Andrey KOVATCHEV, Eduard KUKAN, Kristiina OJULAND, Paweł Robert KOWAL, Ioan Mircea PAŞCU, Cristian Dan PREDA, Seán KELLY, Antigoni PAPADOPOULOU, Rodi KRATSA-TSAGAROPOULOU, Kinga GÁL, Alejo VIDAL-QUADRAS, Burkhard BALZ, Oldřich VLASÁK, Ramona Nicole MĂNESCU, Davor Ivo STIER, Norica NICOLAI, José Manuel FERNANDES, Hans-Peter MAYER, Anna IBRISAGIC, Petru Constantin LUHAN, Svetoslav Hristov MALINOV, Bogusław SONIK, Jacek PROTASIEWICZ, Tiziano MOTTI, Kyriacos TRIANTAPHYLLIDES, Bogusław LIBERADZKI, José Ignacio SALAFRANCA SÁNCHEZ-NEYRA, Diogo FEIO

Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – point 2 – point a – two last references

"Tuvalu*", "United Arab Emirates*" and "Vanuatu*"

2013/07/12
Committee: LIBE

2012/0202(COD)

Draft legislative resolution
Paragraph 1 (new)

1. Rejects the Commission proposal;

2012/12/20
Committee: ITRE

2011/2316(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital A a (new)

A a. whereas the Eastern Partnership strengthens the multilateral relations between the countries involved, contributes to the exchange of information and experience on the issues of transformation, reform and modernisation, and provides the European Union with additional instruments to support these processes;

2012/03/01
Committee: AFET

2011/2316(INI)

Monica MACOVEI, Krzysztof LISEK, Vytautas LANDSBERGIS, Cristian Dan PREDA, Traian UNGUREANU, Inese VAIDERE

Motion for a resolution
Recital H a (new)

H a. whereas the EU in its relations with Armenia and Azerbaijan respects the principles of sovereignty and territorial integrity and in its approach to resolving regional conflicts supports the basic principles of the Helsinki Final Act, i.e. Non-Use of Force, Territorial Integrity, and the Equal Rights and Self- Determination of Peoples;

2012/03/01
Committee: AFET

2011/2316(INI)

Monica MACOVEI, Krzysztof LISEK, Cristian Dan PREDA, Traian UNGUREANU, Vytautas LANDSBERGIS, Inese VAIDERE

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 – point a a (new)

(a a) ensure that the conclusion of the EU-Azerbaijan Association Agreement, in line with the demands made in the Parliament's Report on the need for an EU strategy for the South Caucasus of 23 April 2010 and with OSCE Minsk Group Basic Principles, is linked to a substantial progress towards the resolution of the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict, including confidence-building measures and active incident-prevention on the line of contact, the right of all internally displaced persons and refugees to return to their home places and properties and international security guarantees that would include a genuine multinational peacekeeping operation;

2012/03/01
Committee: AFET

2011/2316(INI)

Monica MACOVEI, Krzysztof LISEK, Cristian Dan PREDA, Traian UNGUREANU, Inese VAIDERE

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 – point b

(b) incorporate in the Association Agreement clauses and benchmarks on the protection and promotion of human rights which reflect the principles and rights enshrined in the Constitution of Azerbaijan and the highest international and European standards, drawing to the fullest possible extent on Council of Europe and OSCE frameworks and insisting particularly on the rights of internally displaced persons (IDPs) and their right to return in safety and dignity to their home lands; ensure that the negotiations take full account of the need to safeguard the rights and livelihoods of internally displaced persons;

2012/03/01
Committee: AFET

2011/2316(INI)

Monica MACOVEI, Traian UNGUREANU, Cristian Dan PREDA, Krzysztof LISEK

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 – point e a (new)

(e a) call for stronger role for the EU in resolution of the conflict, by continuing the implementation of confidence building measures, which will bring together both – the Armenian and the Azerbaijani communities of the Nagorno-Karabakh region and spreading the ideas of peace, reconciliation and trust among them;

2012/03/01
Committee: AFET

2011/2316(INI)

Monica MACOVEI, Traian UNGUREANU, Cristian Dan PREDA, Krzysztof LISEK

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 – point e b (new)

(e b) stress that the resolution of the conflict between Armenia and Azerbaijan is essential to economic and social development in the region as a whole and to build trust, improve good neighbourly relations, achieve full-scale regional cooperation; and stress s that real efforts are needed to pave the way for a lasting peace; asks all relevant authorities to avoid provocative policies and rhetoric, inflammatory statements and manipulation of history; stress to continue to do everything possible within the framework of the Eastern Partnership to bring about political and economic rapprochement between Armenia and Azerbaijan, and to firmly establish regional conflict resolution as an integral component of this;

2012/03/01
Committee: AFET

2011/2316(INI)

Monica MACOVEI, Krzysztof LISEK, Cristian Dan PREDA, Traian UNGUREANU

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 – point f

(f) strengthen the European Union's conflict-resolution capacity, inter alia by supporting the efforts of the Minsk Group and clearing the way for the implementation of confidence-building measures, as the Presidents of both Azerbaijan and Armenia have agreed; calls on the leaders of Armenia and Azerbaijan to act responsibly, avoid inflammatory speeches and prepare the ground, so that the public opinions accept and fully understand the benefits of a comprehensive settlement;

2012/03/01
Committee: AFET

2011/2316(INI)

Monica MACOVEI, Traian UNGUREANU, Cristian Dan PREDA, Krzysztof LISEK

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 – point f a (new)

(f a) welcome that much work had been done by the OSCE Minsk Group Co- Chairs and the parties to make progress towards agreement on the Basic Principles and call to continue to work with the all the parties OSCE Minsk Group Co-Chairs;

2012/03/01
Committee: AFET

2011/2316(INI)

Monica MACOVEI, Krzysztof LISEK, Cristian Dan PREDA, Vytautas LANDSBERGIS, Traian UNGUREANU, Inese VAIDERE

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 – point f b (new)

(f b) stress that hundreds of thousands of refugees and internally displaced persons who fled their homes during or in connection with the Nagorno-Karabakh war remain displaced and denied their rights, including the right to return, property rights and the right to personal security; those rights should be unconditionally respected and provided without any delay; call to the Commission and Members Sates to continue and extend the EU assistance and financial support to Azerbaijan in dealing with the situation of displaced persons;

2012/03/01
Committee: AFET

2011/2316(INI)

Monica MACOVEI, Inese VAIDERE, Traian UNGUREANU, Cristian Dan PREDA, Krzysztof LISEK

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 – point g a (new)

(g a) encourage Russia which is a key partner in the resolution of the conflict in Nagorno-Karabakh, to assume a more constructive role that is not based on maintaining the status quo but on ending the regional arms race and on achieving a permanent solution, to refrain from any unilateral attempts to modify the updated version of Madrid principles and to continue to work closely with two other Co-chairs to convince the parties to accept them as a basis for further negotiations;

2012/03/01
Committee: AFET

2011/2316(INI)

Monica MACOVEI, Inese VAIDERE, Traian UNGUREANU, Cristian Dan PREDA, Krzysztof LISEK

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 – point g b (new)

(g b) call for the support of Turkey in playing a constructive role in the resolution of the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict and in fulfilling its responsibility in that region;

2012/03/01
Committee: AFET

2011/2316(INI)

Monica MACOVEI, Krzysztof LISEK, Cristian Dan PREDA, Traian UNGUREANU

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 – point m a (new)

(m a) welcomes the reforms taken made by Azerbaijani authorities in the judiciary, with a view to ensuring greater independence of judges, improving selection and appointment procedures, eliminating judicial corruption and susceptibility to the influence of the executive; acknowledges that the relevant laws, including the law on the Bar, have been adopted; encourages the authorities in charge to continue implementing legislation to combat corruption and to focus on high-level corruption cases as well as to improve significantly transparency of public expenditure and of the funding of political parties; emphasizes on the need to improve the independence, the efficiency and resources of the judiciary; reminds of the importance of the court system functioning free from political interference; stresses the need to establish a convincing track record of recruiting and appointing judges and state prosecutors based on the application of uniform, transparent, objective and nationally applicable criteria and to build up an enforcement record of prosecutions and convictions against which progress can be measured; calls for the unification of jurisprudence in order to ensure a predictable judicial system and public trust;

2012/03/01
Committee: AFET

2011/2316(INI)

Monica MACOVEI, Krzysztof LISEK, Vytautas LANDSBERGIS, Cristian Dan PREDA, Traian UNGUREANU, Inese VAIDERE

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 – point n a (new)

(n a) emphasise the vital importance of Azerbaijan in the diversification of the energy supplies and routes of their delivery to Europe, and in this connection commends the efforts of Azerbaijan in promoting such pioneering projects as the Baku-Tbilisi-Ceyhan and the Baku- Tbilisi-Erzurum pipelines, which played a significant role in the opening-up the resource potential of the Caspian basin to the international markets as well as the fulfilment of the AGRI Project, the first ever Liquified Natural Gas (LNG) transport and delivery system at the Black Sea, together with Georgia and Romania;

2012/03/01
Committee: AFET

2011/2316(INI)

Monica MACOVEI, Krzysztof LISEK, Vytautas LANDSBERGIS, Cristian Dan PREDA, Traian UNGUREANU, Inese VAIDERE

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 – point n b (new)

(n b) ensure the continued focused attention of the EU to the development of the energy cooperation with Azerbaijan and sustainable support by the EU in political, financial and technological fields;

2012/03/01
Committee: AFET

2011/2316(INI)

Monica MACOVEI, Krzysztof LISEK, Vytautas LANDSBERGIS, Cristian Dan PREDA, Traian UNGUREANU, Inese VAIDERE

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 – point r a (new)

(r a) to further encourage a profound level of cooperation with and within the Eastern Partnership, as well as to regularly inform the European Parliament on its progress;

2012/03/01
Committee: AFET

2011/2315(INI)

Monica MACOVEI, Krzysztof LISEK, Vytautas LANDSBERGIS, Cristian Dan PREDA, Traian UNGUREANU, Inese VAIDERE

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 – point a a (new)

(a a) ensure that the conclusion of the EU-Armenia Association Agreement, in line with the demands made in the Parliament’s Report on the need for an EU strategy for the South Caucasus of 23 April 2010 and with OSCE Minsk Group Basic Principles, is linked to a substantial progress towards the resolution of the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict, including confidence-building measures and active incident-prevention on the line of contact, the withdrawal of Armenian forces from the all occupied territories of Azerbaijan surrounding Nagorno-Karabakh and their gradual return to Azerbaijani control, the right of all internally displaced persons and refugees to return to their home places and properties and international security guarantees that would include a genuine multinational peacekeeping operation;

2012/02/29
Committee: AFET

2011/2177(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13

13. Suggests that the Member States ask the European Defence Agency (EDA) to examine how to improve coordination of defence planning in Europe; recalls that the Treaty tasks the Agency to evaluate the observance of capability commitments and to promote the harmonisation of operational needs, and calls for better implementation of these tasks; recommends that, as a first step in the exercise, the Member States could submit their draft national security and defence reviews to the EDA for advice, to assess them in particular in the light of the Capability Development Plan, as well as of the plans of the other Member States and of ~~relevant NATO initiative~~the NATO Defence Planning Process; believes that, in the very short term, the EDA could also play an important role in defining capability priorities and identifying redundancies in Member States'’ capabilities;

2011/10/24
Committee: AFET

2011/2177(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17

17. Stresses that, in particular in areas such as strategic transportation, logistical support, maintenance, space capabilities, medical support, education and training, as well as certain niche capabilities, Member States can greatly profit from pooling or sharing of some functions and assets without creating significant dependencies that would limit their sovereign decision- making; strongly encourages initiatives addressing capability gaps in areas such as air-to-air refuelling, maritime surveillance, ~~UAVs, CBRN protection, countering~~ unmanned vehicles, protection against chemical, biological, radiological and nuclear risks, countering improvised explosive devices (IEDs), satellite communication, intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance (ISR) sensors and platforms, and com~~bat~~mand and ~~information~~control systems;

2011/10/24
Committee: AFET

2011/2177(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19

19. First, on ‘joint ownership’, calls on the Member States to explore the possibilities for certain equipment to be jointly acquired by consortia of participating countries or by the EU itself, taking inspiration from initiatives such as the Strategic Airlift Capability implemented under NATO, the NATO AWACS programme or the EU's Galileo or to search for possibilities of EU funding or co-funding of equipment acquired by consortia of Member States; stresses the potential of joint ownership for the most expensive equipment, such as for space capabilities, UAVs or strategic transport aircraft;

2011/10/24
Committee: AFET

2011/2177(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 25

25. Considers that an civil-military EU Operational Headquarters, for which it has repeatedly called, would not only substantially enhance the EU's capacity to support international peace and security, but would in the long run also generate savings for the national budgets in the logic of pooling and sharing; calls on the Vice- President / High Representative to continue work based on the ‘Weimar initiative’ and to investigate legal options for the establishment of permanent EU military planning and conduct capability of this kind;

2011/10/24
Committee: AFET

2011/2177(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 26

26. Takes note of the ‘Smart Defence’ initiative within NATO and highlights the importance of continuous coordination and deconfliction between the EU and NATO at all levels to avoid unnecessary duplication; calls in particular on the EDA and the Allied Command Transformation to cooperate closely to make sure that pooling and sharing projects of both organisations are complementary and are always implemented in the framework with the most added value;

2011/10/24
Committee: AFET

2011/2177(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 47

47. Stresses that offset practices that may accompany defence procurement not covered under Directive 2009/81/EC, for which the exemption under Article 346 TFEU has been applied, should be consistent with the principles of transparency and non-discrimination and must especially not cause risks of corruption or disrupt the functioning of the European defence equipment market;

2011/10/24
Committee: AFET

2011/2177(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 60

60. Calls on all relevant actors to assess whether EU-owned assets along the Galileo model, as set out under (B), could be a viable and cost-effective option, especially in areas such as strategic and tactical transport or surveillance;

2011/10/24
Committee: AFET

2011/2177(INI)

Krzysztof LISEK, Arnaud DANJEAN, Michael GAHLER

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 61

61. Urges the Member States to increase the budget of the EDA as a matter of priority, recognising the Agency's added value in compensating, through cooperation, for cuts decided at national level; deplores the fact that the Council Decision on the EDA has not provided the Agency with a multiannual budgetary framework comparable to the EU's general budget;

2011/10/24
Committee: AFET

2011/2177(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 61 a (new)

61a. Points out that the EU Satellite Centre, operating with a modest budget, has demonstrated its efficiency and added value throughout a variety of security and defence operations; recalls the growing demand for satellite imagery, including in the wake of the recent events in Northern Africa; calls on the Member States to provide the Centre with a more important budget, and, given in particular its civil- military uses, takes the view that it should be funded from the EU budget;

2011/10/24
Committee: AFET

2011/2177(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 62

62. IWelcomes the efforts of the Polish Council Presidency in reviewing the ATHENA mechanism; encourages the Member States to increase their efforts in finding an agreement on common financing; invites the Member States to consider, as part of the review of the ATHENA mechanism, the possibility of extending the mechanism to provide also common funding for actions or acquisitions which support the aim of greater cost efficiency in European defence, but cannot be financed from the EU budget, notably a common financing of provided equipment;

2011/10/24
Committee: AFET

2011/2157(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17 a (new)

17a. Welcomes the increased interaction of partner countries in EU agencies in various areas, and underlines the need to establish a priority list to facilitate participation of partner countries in programmes and agencies;

2011/10/11
Committee: AFET

2011/2157(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21 a (new)

21a. Supports further cooperation in the transport sector, including by linking the infrastructure network of EU and partner countries more tightly in order to facilitate exchanges of people and goods. This can be achieved through closer market integration and improved infrastructure links;

2011/10/11
Committee: AFET

2011/2157(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 29

29. Welcomes the proposal for the new European Neighbourhood Instrument (ENI) and the increase of funding for the ENP, as requested in its previous resolutions; considers that the distribution of funds should be flexible and adequate for both regions while keeping the regional balance, with an approach that is performance-driven and not geographically driven; notes that more flexibility and simplification should respect the right of democratic scrutiny and be accompanied by increased supervision of the spending;

2011/10/11
Committee: AFET

2011/2133(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital F

F. whereas the unresolved Russia-Georgia conflict hampers the stability and development of Georgia; whereas Russia continues to occupy the Georgian regions of Abkhazia and Tskhinvali Region/South Ossetia, in violation of the fundamental norms and principles of international law; whereas ethnic cleansing and forcible demographic changes have taken place in the areas under the effective control of the occupying force, which bears the responsibility for human rights violations in these areas;

2011/09/28
Committee: AFET

2011/2133(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital G

G. whereas, in its Joint Communication on ‘A new response to a changing Neighbourhood’, the EU stated its ambition to engage more pro-actively in conflict resolution; whereas the EU Monitoring Mission (EUMM) is carrying out an important role on the ground and the EU Special Representative for South Caucasus and the Crisis in Georgia is co- chairing the Geneva talks; whereas these talks have yielded little result to date;

2011/09/28
Committee: AFET

2011/2133(INI)

Andrey KOVATCHEV, Krzysztof LISEK

Motion for a resolution
Recital H

H. whereas the EU stresses the right of Georgia to join any international organisation or alliance, while respecting international law ~~and the principles of good neighbourliness and peaceful cooperation~~, reiterates its firm belief in the principle that no third country has a veto over the sovereign decision of another country to join any international organisation or alliance or the right to destabilise a democratically elected government;

2011/09/28
Committee: AFET

2011/2133(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 – point e a (new)

(ea) to emphasise the importance of inter- ethnic and religious tolerance;

2011/09/28
Committee: AFET

2011/2133(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 – point f

(f) to recognise Georgia’s regions of Abkhazia and the Tskhinvali Region/South Ossetia as occupied territories;

2011/09/28
Committee: AFET

2011/2133(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 – point j

(j) to express concern over the ~~reports on alleged~~ terrorist acttacks oin Georgia~~n territory with Russian invol~~ since last year and to call on Russia to cooperate in investigation of the above-mentioned terrorist attacks;

2011/09/28
Committee: AFET

2011/2050(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Citation 3

– having regard to the objective shared by the EU and Russia, set out in the joint statement issued following the 11th EU- Russia Summit held in St Petersburg on 31 May 2003, of creating a common economic space, a common space of freedom, security and justice, a common space of cooperation in the field of external security and a common space of research and education, including cultural aspects (the ‘four common spaces’),deleted

2012/09/11
Committee: AFET

2011/2050(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital A

A. whereas the EU’s evolving common foreign and security policy should include Russia as a strategic partner; whereas Russia is a ~~country whose cultur~~n enormous country, a substantial pro~~ots lie in Europe and which~~portion of whose inhabitants see themselves as having a European identity, and is an important global and regional player, with membership in the United Nations Security Council, the G8, the G20 the Council of Europe and OSCE;

2012/09/11
Committee: AFET

2011/2050(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital B

B. whereas the EU and Russia are mutually interdependent, both economically and politically, and whereas enhanced cooperation and good-neighbourly relations between the EU and Russia ~~are~~should therefore be seen as being of major importance for the stability, security and prosperity of both Europe and Russia;

2012/09/11
Committee: AFET

2011/2050(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital B a (new)

Ba. whereas the current partnership and cooperation agreement was intended to step up cooperation with Russia, including in economic matters, with a view to making the country more democratic, modern, wealthy and well-governed, and whereas those goals have not been achieved;

2012/09/11
Committee: AFET

2011/2050(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital B b (new)

Bb. whereas the situation as regards the rule of law, human rights and civil liberties is deteriorating in the Russian Federation; whereas Russia is now less democratic than it was before the partnership and cooperation agreement was concluded; whereas, Russia, where Vladimir Putin is now in his third term of office, has developed a mechanism for exercising power – extending to presidential elections – that undermines the spirit of the Russian Constitution and is at odds with European standards; whereas the last Duma elections were not deemed to have been conducted in accordance with OSCE standards;

2012/09/11
Committee: AFET

2011/2050(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital B c (new)

Bc. whereas in many areas of foreign policy Russia is acting contrary to EU interests, one example being its policy towards Iran and Syria, and whereas it is also violating international standards, examples of this being its invasion of Georgia, its occupation of South Ossetia and Abkhazia and continued patronage of the self-proclaimed, separatist state of Transnistria, and its hampering of efforts to settle the Nagorno-Karabakh dispute;

2012/09/11
Committee: AFET

2011/2050(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital B d (new)

Bd. whereas the Russian Federation is showing no inclination to modernise its economy, which is based on large-scale exploitation and export of mineral resources;

2012/09/11
Committee: AFET

2011/2050(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital B e (new)

Be. whereas corruption is omnipresent and has become an integral part of the way in which the country is run;

2012/09/11
Committee: AFET

2011/2050(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital C

~~C. whereas both the EU and Russia have experienced profound political, institutional, social and economic changes since 1994, when the current Partnership and Cooperation Agreement (PCA) was signed;~~deleted

2012/09/11
Committee: AFET

2011/2050(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital D

D. whereas these changes, along with the new challenges and opportunities facing the EU-Russia relationship, have to be addressed on both the bilateral and the multilateral level; whereas the basis for a genuine strategic partnership should be an ambitious and comprehensive new Partnership and Cooperation Agreement covering the most important areas of cooperation; whereas the need for building a genuine partnership between the EU and Russian societies should be emphasised;deleted

2012/09/11
Committee: AFET

2011/2050(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital E

E. whereas the European Union continues to be committed to further deepening and developing its relations with Russia, on the basis of common interests and a commitment to uphold universal values and principles;deleted

2012/09/11
Committee: AFET

2011/2050(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 – introductory part

1. Addresses, in the context of the ongoing negotiations on the new agreement, the following recommendations to the Council, the Commission and the European External Action Service: General: I. the necessary conclusions must be drawn from the failure of the policy pursued to date by the EU towards Russia and from the fact that Russia has its own, different vision of development, which often competes with that of the EU; II. account needs to be taken of the fact that the Russian authorities have based their system of governance on principles that are contrary to the spirit of European democracy and the rule of law; III. it should be remembered that in many areas the economic policy pursued by Russia is harming EU interests; IV. efforts need to be made to step up cooperation in all areas in which EU and Russian interests are likely to coincide, while opposing Russian policy in areas in which it constitutes a threat to European interests and values; V. it should be remembered that the goal of EU policy towards Russia is to secure the democratisation and modernisation of the country and to give civil society a more prominent role; VI. a distinction therefore need to be made between EU policy towards the Russian authorities, which should be based on principles of conditionality, and EU policy towards the Russian people, which should be a policy of complete openness aimed at stepping up contacts between EU and Russian citizens;

2012/09/11
Committee: AFET

2011/2050(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 – point a

(a) ensure that the new agreement provides a comprehensive and forward-looking framework for the further development of relations with Russia in upcoming years which is economically advantageous for the EU, and take the necessary action to ensure that the negotiations with Russia continue at a ~~steady pace~~n appropriate pace dependent on a genuine willingness on Russia's part to adopt European standards and fulfil the commitments entered into;

2012/09/11
Committee: AFET

2011/2050(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 – point h

(h) ~~follow closely~~attentively monitor Russia’s internal evolution, ~~broaden dialogue with Russia’s civil society and~~work together with all major political protagonists, support institution building in Russia and the principles of democracy, human rights and the rule of law; actively support, in so doing, all social initiatives seeking to build a civil society based on democratic principles and the rule of law, paying particular attention to the use of the internet for that purpose;

2012/09/11
Committee: AFET

2011/2050(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 – point i

(i) ~~stress the importance of~~make use of existing legal instruments to persuade Russia’s full ~~compliance with its~~y to adhere to the international legal obligations ~~and~~it has entered into and to comply with the fundamental human rights principles enshrined in the European Convention on Human Rights and the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), both of which Russia is party to; recall that political pluralism, media freedom, independence of the judiciary, freedom of speech and assembly, and non- discrimination are the necessary preconditions for Russia’s further development and modernisation;

2012/09/11
Committee: AFET

2011/2050(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 – point j a (new)

(ja) emphasise the need to stop using repressive measures against opponents of the current regime; ensure that full light is shed on the many human rights breaches that have occurred, as well as the hitherto unexplained circumstances surrounding the deaths of independent pro-democracy activists, journalists and businessmen, the arrests of opposition leaders following the last presidential elections, the brutal beatings of peaceful demonstrators, the imprisonment of Mikhail Khodorkovsky and the deaths of Sergei Magnitsky, Alexander Litvinenko and Anna Politkovskaya, which have yet to be cleared up;

2012/09/11
Committee: AFET

2011/2050(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 – point p

(p) st~~ep up the EU-Russia cooperation on the resolution of protracted conflicts in Moldova and South Caucasus, on the basis of international law and peaceful conflict resolution~~ress the need for Russia to withdraw from the occupied areas of Abkhazia and Ossetia, to stop supporting the separatist authorities in Transnistria and make genuine efforts to settle the Nagorno- Karabakh dispute;

2012/09/11
Committee: AFET

2011/2050(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 – point q

(q) pursue the efforts for full implementation of common steps towards visa-free short-term travel, with a view of a gradual phasing out of the visa regime between the Schengen countries and Russia; facilitate as much and as quick as possible visa facilitation for academics, students and researchers and for youth exchange purposes;

2012/09/11
Committee: AFET

2011/2050(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 – point q a (new)

(qa) as soon as Russia has met the necessary technical requirements, allow Russian citizens to enter the EU freely by no longer requiring visas for travel between Russia and Schengen Member States; in view of the fact that visa-free entry to the EU could be used by Russia as a means of expanding its influence in the occupied Georgian territories of South Ossetia and Abkhazia, visa-free travel should first of all be introduced for Georgian citizens, with visa requirements for the other Eastern Partnership countries then being lifted no later than the visa requirements on Russian citizens;

2012/09/11
Committee: AFET

2011/2050(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 – point r

(r) ~~take into due consideration~~in view of the deep, and growing ~~and irreversible~~ economic interdependence of the two partners, as reciprocal import markets and suppliers of goods, services and energy, the policy towards Russia which has been pursued to date and which has not had the desired effect should be abandoned and new, more effective, measures should be devised;

2012/09/11
Committee: AFET

2011/2050(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 – point u

(u) ~~insist on a bilateral agreement between the EU and Russia that in the long run could be the basis for an agreement~~point out that in the long run a similar agreement that is in keeping with the interests and specific economic circumstances of all Customs Union members could be negotiated between the EU and the ~~Russian-led~~ Customs Union;

2012/09/11
Committee: AFET

2011/2050(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 – point v

(v) ~~encourage the Russian counterparts to show the political will to reach an agreement on ‘trade and investments’ provisions that are to be built on the provisions already included~~ negotiate favourable conditions for trade with Russia and rules governing mutual protection of investments, and then ensure that the EU introduces procedures enabling the ~~PCA and that are in l~~m to be properly enforced in keepineg with ~~WTO accession~~the terms of Russia’s accession to the WTO; recall that EU’s objective in this area is to improve and stabilise the business environment, a~~s this~~nd make investing safer, which would be beneficial to both parties and further promote the objectives set by the Partnership for Modernisation launched in 2010;

2012/09/11
Committee: AFET

2011/2050(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 – point y a (new)

(ya) stress that the EU must resist the demands of the Russian Government and not agree to exemptions from EU law to facilitate operations within the EU by firms with Russian capital (for example, pressure from the Russian Government to suspend the application of the third energy package to energy firm with links with Russia needs to be resisted);

2012/09/11
Committee: AFET

2011/2050(INI)

Pino ARLACCHI, Krzysztof LISEK, Anneli JÄÄTTEENMÄKI

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 – point y b (new)

(yb) stress that widespread corruption, over-punctilious application of the law and the lack of transparency of business standards applying to foreign firms remain real threats for foreign investors and are a significant brake on economic cooperation between the EU and Russia;

2012/09/11
Committee: AFET

2011/2014(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1

~~1. S~~Outlines the EU's commitment to continue to support Afghanistan; stresses that the overall objectives of EU development assistance to Afghanistan should be to assist in the long term sustainable development of the country, including improvement of socio-economic standards and gender equality; underlines that the aid should further facilitate capacity building in public administration, strengthen the rule of law and reduce corruption, thus facilitating the transfer of security to the GIRoA; recommends that parts of the financial assistance to Afghanistan is allocated for the five years plan to phase out opium cultivation by replacing it with alternative production; stresses the need to facilitate sub-regional cooperation with regards assistance to issues of cross-border nature;

2011/09/29
Committee: AFET

2011/2014(INI)

Pino ARLACCHI, Krzysztof LISEK, Anneli JÄÄTTEENMÄKI

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2

2. Reiterates the urgent need to increase efficiency of aid, as many development indicators still show no significant improvement, and corruption and the long distribution chain of international aid remain~~s a~~ major obstacles to the provision of essential services to the people;

2011/09/29
Committee: AFET

2011/2014(INI)

Pino ARLACCHI, Krzysztof LISEK, Anneli JÄÄTTEENMÄKI

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3

3. ~~Points out the need to make donor coordination work better and to provide~~Notes that the majority of resources for socio-economic development in Afghanistan are channelled through international mechanisms but a significant proportion of this aid does not reach the intended beneficiaries, the people of Afghanistan; points out that the EU and in particular the Commission/EEAS should have a leading role in improving donor coordination in close cooperation with other key donors such as the US and Japan, and calls for detailed evaluations of aid efficiency in order to improve theransparency and donor accountability of the aid;

2011/09/29
Committee: AFET

2011/2014(INI)

Pino ARLACCHI, Krzysztof LISEK, Anneli JÄÄTTEENMÄKI

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4

4. Requires that, when using international organisations as an aid delivery channel, the EEAS and the Commission should pay close attention to eliminating waste, excessive intermediary costs, inefficiency, overbilling and corruption, and should insist on timely and adequate information on results and use of funds;

2011/09/29
Committee: AFET

2011/2008(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11 a (new)

11a. Recognises the importance of the energy cooperation with Kazakhstan and Turkmenistan as it is beneficial for both the aforementioned states and European Union Member States;

2011/09/13
Committee: AFET

2011/2008(INI)