Mr President, the historic enlargement of the Union and, perhaps to an even greater extent, the new situation created by the occupation of Iraq and the imperialist pretensions of the United States, mean that we need to think about the role the European Union wishes to play in the future and, in particular, its role with regard to its future neighbours. This is urgent. The logic of force is persisting after the war. By helping itself to the resources and monopolising all of the levers of power, the Bush administration is continuing to both impose the fait accompli against the interests of the Iraqi people and disregard the UN and thus respect for international law. To line up another view of the world against this veritable doctrine, the European Union now needs political courage, initiative and dialogue. In my view, forging new relations with our future neighbours could be a first decisive step, particularly as regards the Arab Muslim world. The virtually constant condemnation and humiliation it is suffering, combined with the economic and social gap, can only serve to fuel religious fundamentalism and the use of terrorism by increasingly dangerous groups, as a result of which the extreme right here hopes to prosper. To combat all of these perils effectively, I feel that priority should be given to objectives and means other than those set out in the Commission communication. There is no doubt that, in theory, as regards the idea of new momentum, for example, there is the goal of closer relations. However, there will be no common area without common construction. We are far from that, listening to Romano Prodi talk about political rapprochement and gradual integration into the European Union’s economic and social structures. Would the word ‘neighbours’ then be replaced with the word ‘partnership’? Does the composition of the enlarged meeting of 40 European countries, held in Athens on 17 April, which you have discussed, prefigure a type of multi-speed integration, with second-zone countries, the so-called Wider Europe, and others in a third zone, the southern Mediterranean countries? Above all, however, mere alignment with the market approach that governs the current process of European integration does little to meet our needs or achieve any effectiveness in this area. A genuine cooperation policy cannot equate to the sacrosanct transposition of the Community acquis, because that is what we are talking about, especially when no equivalent is mentioned as regards aid. The initiative of launching specific action programmes may be interesting given the rigidity, for example, of the overall Barcelona process. Nevertheless, while the negotiations conducted with the candidate countries have left a bitter taste in the mouth and resulted in a great deal of frustration, as we are quite aware, the Commission has not proposed any review of the matter. What is worse, a bonus is offered for the best reform students. As regards the conflicts, and I am ending now, the Commission has spent very little time on this aspect although a common area can only be built on the principle of international law and on a much more active role for the Union. Finally, the fact that the entire Commission document focuses almost exclusively on the security aspect of relations... (The President cut off the speaker)

Political group: GUE-NGL