— having regard to preliminary draft amending budget No 6/2005 of the European Union for the finan-
cial year 2005, which the Commission presented on 8 September 2005 (SEC(2005)1083),
— having regard to draft amending budget No 7/2005, which the Council established on 7 November
2005 (13489/2005 —C6-0358/2005),
— having regard to Rule 69 of and Annex IV to its Rules of Procedure,
— having regard to the report of the Committee on Budgets (A6-0321/2005),
A. whereas the European Union should show its solidarity with the population of regions of Member
States affected by natural disasters, which have serious repercussions on living conditions, the naturalenvironment or the economy,
B. whereas the appropriate budgetary resources for the European Union's financial assistance have been
mobilised in accordance with the provisions of the European Union Solidarity Fund and of the Inter-institutional Agreement of 7 November 2002 relating to its financing,
C. whereas the purpose of draft amending budget No 7/2005 is to formally enter these budgetary
resources in the 2005 budget,
1. Welcomes draft amending budget No 7/2005, the purpose of which is to enter without delay the
budgetary resources mobilised from the European Union Solidarity Fund in the 2005 budget so that thoseaffected by these natural disasters can be assisted;
2. Approves draft amending budget No 7/2005 unamended;
3. Instructs its President to forward this resolution to the Council and Commission.
P6_TA(2005)0439
Weapons of mass destruction
European Parliament resolution on non-proliferation of weapons of mass destruction: A role for the
European Parliament (2005/2139(INI))
The European Parliament ,
— having regard to United Nations Security Council Resolution 1540 (2004), describing the proliferation
of weapons of mass destruction (WMD) and their means of delivery as a threat to international peaceand security;
— having regard to the European Security Strategy (ESS), which states that the proliferation of WMD is
potentially the greatest threat to our security;
— having regard to the implementation of the ESS and in particular the European Union Strategy against
the proliferation of WMD (the EU WMD Strategy) adopted by the European Council on 12 December
2003,
— having regard to the fact that all European Union Member States are States Parties to the major multi-
lateral agreements that make up the non-proliferation regime, namely the 1968 Nuclear Non-Prolife-ration Treaty (NPT), the 1972 Biological and Toxin Weapons Convention (BTWC), the 1993 ChemicalWeapons Convention (CWC) and the 1996 Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty (CTBT) and that twoMember States, the UK and France, are nuclear-weapon states as defined in the NPT, and that UStactical weapons are stationed on the territories of many more Member States: Germany, Italy, theUnited Kingdom, Greece, the Netherlands and Belgium and states applying for EU membership, Turkeyin particular;18.11.2006 EN C 280 E/453 Official Journal of the European Union
Thursday 17 November 2005
— having regard to the Member States' commitment to pursue the universalisation of these multilateral
agreements, in particular in Council Common Position 2003/805/CFSP of 17 November 2003 (1),
— having regard to the report of the High-level Panel on Threats, Challenges and Change, set up by the
UN Secretary-General, which states: ‘We are approaching a point at which the erosion of the non-
proliferation regime could become irreversible and result in a cascade of proliferation ’,
— having regard to the response by the UN Secretary-General in the report ‘In larger freedom: towards
development, security and human rights for all ’, underlining the importance of multilateral agreements
in safeguarding international peace and security in the field of nuclear, biological and chemical weaponsas well as recent efforts to supplement shortfalls such as in UN Security Council Resolution 1540(2004),
— having regard to its resolutions expressing concern at the proliferation of WMD and associated
materials and technologies, in particular its resolution on biological and toxin weapons of 14 June2001 (
2), its resolution on nuclear disarmament of 26 February 2004 (3) and its resolution on the
Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty 2005 Review Conference of 10 March 2005 (4),
— having regard to the Advisory Opinion of the International Court of Justice of 8 July 1996 on the
legality of the threat or use of nuclear weapons,
— having regard to Rule 45 of its Rules of Procedure,
— having regard to the report of the Committee on Foreign Affairs on (A6-0297/2005),
A. whereas nuclear non-proliferation issues have always been at the heart of the European Union since the
establishment of the European Atomic Energy Community by the Treaty of Rome,
B. whereas non-proliferation policies remained limited and are only now being seriously addressed within
the ESS, and in particular by the Member States through the EU WMD Strategy and the Commission'swork, under limited existing budget lines, in preparation of the 2007-2013 Financial Perspectives,
C. whereas the EU Council achieved a Common Position (including some 41 separate measures) that was
presented at the 2005 NPT Review Conference, but failed to persuade the other members of the NPT topursue a like-minded common strategy as set out in the Common Position, notwithstanding that pro-liferation of WMD is to be considered as the most dangerous threat to global security;
D. whereas this highlights the urgency with which the European Union must provide new leadership to
safeguard its interests by reinvigorating the measures in the Common Position and the EU WMD Stra-tegy in order to strengthen the non-proliferation regime,
E. whereas the States Parties will meet in 2006 for the BTWC Review Conference to monitor progress
towards implementation of the Treaty's provisions, and it is therefore essential to find ways of devel-oping verification provisions for the BTWC and to reinforce the norms against biological weapons —
including measures to criminalise the development and possession of biological weapons throughnational legislation,
(1) OJ L 302, 20.11.2003, p. 34.
(2) OJ C 53 E, 28.2.2002, p. 400.
(3) OJ C 98 E, 23.4.2004, p. 152.
(4) Texts Adopted, P6_TA(2005)0075.C 280 E/454 EN 18.11.2006 Official Journal of the European Union
Thursday 17 November 2005
F. whereas the European Parliament remains concerned that the EU WMD Strategy is currently weakened
by inadequate financing for the achievement of its objectives as specified in the list of priorities attachedto the progress report of the Office of the Personal Representative for non-proliferation of WMD (
1)
(‘the OPR ’) and the expected outcomes of the studies run by the Commission under the Pilot Project
2004 entitled ‘Reinforcing EU Cooperative Threat Reduction programmes: Community Action in sup-
port of the European Union Strategy Against the Proliferation of Weapons of Mass Destruction ’,
G. whereas the EU WMD Strategy calls for an increase in the EU's contribution to cooperative threat
reduction in the light of the Financial Perspectives beyond 2006 and envisages the creation of a specific
Community budget line for non-proliferation and disarmament of WMD,
Risk of proliferation of WMD
1. Recognises that the multilateral agreements making up the non-proliferation regime have succeeded in
slowing down the spread of WMD and delivery systems, and that those agreements deserve continued andfull support in the future, but also supports the view expressed in the ESS that we are now entering a newand dangerous period that raises the possibility of a WMD arms race, especially in the Middle East ,North-
East Asia and South Asia;
2. Believes that the proliferation of nuclear weapons seriously increases the danger of nuclear war and,
considering the catastrophic impact that such a war would have upon all mankind, calls on all nation statesto make every effort to build an effective, efficient and equitable system that reduces and progressively
eliminates nuclear threats;
3. Rejects the development of new-generation nuclear weapons (so-called mini-nukes or bunker-busting
bombs) and changes in nuclear doctrines, since these are increasing the military utility of nuclear weapons,rather than reducing their prominence, thereby undermining positive developments such as the UnitedStates-Russia strategic nuclear weapons reductions; once again calls on the US administration to perma-nently stop such developments; therefore welcomes the willingness of the US Senate and Congress not tomake available any further funding for the development of mini-nukes;
4. Calls for immediate action to prevent the further proliferation of ballistic missiles with extended range
and greater accuracy, through the development and extension of the membership of arms control mech-anisms such as the Missile Technology Control Regime (MTCR) and the Hague Code of Conduct;
5. Stresses that, at this moment of heightened awareness of terrorism and homeland security threats, the
security of civilian nuclear, biological and chemical materials, plants and research laboratories, both globallyas well as in and around Europe, is ever more important;
6. Strongly believes that nuclear disarmament activity will contribute significantly to international secur-
ity and reduce the risk of thefts of plutonium by terrorists;
7. Stresses the importance of limiting the risk that sensitive WMD-related materials, equipment and/or
technologies fall into the wrong hands, by developing and enforcing effective export and transit controls,and reinforcing border security management;
8. Underlines that rapid technological development in the biological sciences as well as the non-destruc-
tion and bad storage of biological weapons raise particular concerns about such weapons in the near future;
European Union WMD policy
9. Calls upon the European Union and its Member States to make best use of existing verification
regimes and, where necessary, to propose new verification instruments;
(1) Council of the European Union, OPR, ‘Implementation of the WMD Strategy: six-monthly progress report/List of
priorities ’, 3 December 2004: http://ue.eu.int/uedocs/cmsUpload/st15246.en04.doc18.11.2006 EN C 280 E/455 Official Journal of the European Union
Thursday 17 November 2005
10. Calls on the EU and its Member States to continue to provide full support to the International
Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) in its efforts to strengthen the nuclear non-proliferation regime, namely bygradually turning the Additional Protocol to the comprehensive safeguards into the new verification stan-dard;
11. Urges the European Union to remain active in tackling the risk of proliferation of Cold War stock-
piles of chemical and nuclear weapons and materials of mass destruction as well as Cold War biologicalmaterials and research facilities;
12. Calls upon the European Union and its Member States to take up the work done under the aegis of
the IAEA looking into fuel assurance initiatives by developing a draft concept that could be promoted as thebasis for a new international consensus on access to nuclear fuel;
13. Is of the view that the European Union should play a more active role in non-proliferation and
disarmament policies, in particular in the framework of the fight against terrorism;
14. Calls upon the EU to develop the necessary coordination mechanisms (the EU's WMD Monitoring
Unit in liaison with the EU Situation Centre) to ensure that intelligence is used to build solidarity andconfidence between the Member States on WMD policy;
15. Remains convinced that the European Union should, in implementing the EU WMD Strategy, attach
importance to concrete disarmament initiatives and above all to non-proliferation actions, in order to per-suade those outside the European Union to engage in a common strategy for mutual security;
16. Acknowledges the work done to fulfil the EU WMD Strategy in the first year and a half of its exist-
ence, and in particular that accomplished by the Personal Representative and the Commission, and stressesthat the priorities for the European Union should be:
(a) continuation of political commitment at the international level to promote implementation of the EU
WMD Strategy;
(b) greater emphasis on disarmament initiatives as well as non-proliferation issues;(c) strengthening of the multilateral treaties making up the non-proliferation regimes;(d) emphasis on non-proliferation and risks associated with the use of WMD by terrorists;
(e) provision of the financial resources needed to implement the EU WMD Strategy;
17. Calls on the Commission and the Council to prepare the programming of the 2007-2013 Financial
Perspectives by setting out a list of priority actions and associated costs for fulfilment of the commitmentsentered into in the framework of the G8 Global Partnership against the spread of WMD, and for theextension of its actions beyond the CIS in order to meet global needs;
18. Calls on the European Union and its Member States to play a more active role in the promotion of
democracy and the resolution of frozen conflicts worldwide, since this activity forms an integral part of asuccessful non-proliferation policy and might substantially contribute to addressing the root causes of theWMD arms race;
19. Invites the EU High Representative for the Common Foreign and Security Policy to provide substance
on the question how to integrate the 1996 Advisory Opinion of the International Court of Justice on the
‘Legality of the Threat or Use of Nuclear Weapons ’in the EU's WMD Strategy;
EU practice of establishing clauses on non-proliferation of WMD
20. Welcomes the inclusion of clauses concerning non-proliferation of WMD in the latest European
Union agreements with third countries and action plans; points out, however, that such measures must bestrictly implemented by all the Union's partners without exception; therefore calls for a speedy revision ofexisting agreements and action plans that lack such a clause;C 280 E/456 EN 18.11.2006 Official Journal of the European Union
Thursday 17 November 2005
21. Calls upon all states which have a cooperation agreement with the EU, and nuclear-weapons states in
particular, not to provide other states, especially states that are not parties to the NPT, with any assistance orencouragement in the acquisition of nuclear weapons or other nuclear devices which they may seek;
22. Recommends to this end that a toolbox of elements be prepared in close collaboration by the Coun-
cil, the Commission and the Parliament to support any third country that requests assistance in this area;
23. Calls on the Council and the Commission to provide plans for technical assistance to any third
country seeking the Union's support in developing its national export control system in order to complywith the clause or their reporting requirements under United Nations Security Council Resolution 1540(2004);
24. Asks the Council and the Commission to provide an estimate of the costs involved in supporting
third countries with the development of WMD non-proliferation legislation and the setting-up of export
control systems;
25. Requests the Council and the Commission to report on those activities carried out in supporting
third countries with the development of WMD non-proliferation legislation and the setting-up of exportcontrol systems;
Rejection of WMD deployment in outer space
26. Recalls the provisions of Article IV of the 1967 Outer Space Treaty, whereby States Parties undertake
not to place in orbit around the Earth or other celestial bodies any nuclear weapons or objects carryingWMD, not to install WMD on celestial bodies, not to station WMD in outer space in any other manner, andnot to establish military bases or installations, test any type of weapons or conduct military exercises on theMoon or other celestial bodies;
27. Calls upon the European Union and the Member States to explore the possibility of negotiating
additional outer space agreements, in order to ensure the peaceful exploration and use of space and toprevent any arms race in outer space;
Responses to infringements of the UN system
28. Calls on the EU Presidency and the Council to provide further substance on ways of achieving the
objective in the EU WMD Strategy to ‘foster the role of the UN Security Council, and enhance expertise in
meeting the challenge of proliferation ’;
29. Calls upon the European Union and its Member States, to that end, to provide the necessary
resources to set up a UN technical assistance unit on verification and compliance;
30. Calls on the European Union to provide technical assistance to those nation states seeking support in
fulfilling their reporting requirements under United Nations Security Council Resolution 1540 (2004);
31. Calls for the further development of activities under Resolution 1540 (2004) to include assessment
teams with the task of examining the veracity of submitted reports and determining the extent to whichmembers of the United Nations are implementing their commitments under that resolution;
32. Calls for the development of principles for a targeted and appropriate sanctions regime, to be applied
against those that fail to fulfil their non-proliferation obligations under UN Security Council Resolution1540 (2004);
33. Calls for the necessary resources to enable the European Union to contribute significantly to any
future UN-sanctioned inspection regime.18.11.2006 EN C 280 E/457 Official Journal of the European Union
Thursday 17 November 2005
Strengthening effective multilateralism
34. Takes note that as stated by Dr Hans Blix the credible threat of the use of force has played an
important role in facilitating the disarmament work of Unscom and Unmovic;
35. Considers it essential that no military strategy becomes detached from the disarmament strategy in
any given crisis, in order to avoid any premature expulsion of international verification teams, which remainone of the most important verification instruments;
36. Considers it essential, in the interests of effective multilateralism, that all timely diplomatic and pol-
itical channels be used to ensure that international law on non-proliferation of weapons of mass destructionis fully implemented in accordance with the UN Charter;
37. Underlines that nuclear weapons are for deterrence purposes; supports the political commitments
made by the nuclear-weapons States not to use nuclear weapons against non-nuclear-weapons States
(‘negative security assurances ’), and reiterates that there would be no winners in a nuclear war;
38. Stresses the importance of the adoption of measures aimed at discouraging States from withdrawal
from the NPT; supports the efforts by some EU Member States which are NPT signatories to examine
Article X on withdrawal from the Treaty and to facilitate referral to the UN Security Council in the eventof withdrawal;
Traditional and emerging nuclear powers
39. Calls on the nuclear-weapons States under the NPT —with particular emphasis on NATO members
UK, France and USA —to pursue timely, progressive and significant steps towards the elimination of their
nuclear arsenals in accordance with the undertakings contained in legally binding treaties and agreements,thereby strengthening their moral authority and credibility;
40. Calls once again on Israel, India and Pakistan to become States Parties to the NPT;41. Emphasises the need for stronger regional and multilateral security arrangements in the Middle East,
the Indian subcontinent and North-East Asia in order to reduce the pressure towards nuclear proliferationand to achieve the abandonment of related programmes;
42. Calls on the European Union to work with its international partners to develop and promote a
WMD-free zone in the Middle East; to that end, supports the related work being undertaken within theBarcelona Process;
43. Recommends that the European Union should attach the utmost importance to effective implemen-
tation of the nuclear non-proliferation regime in the Mediterranean, since security in Europe is inherentlylinked to security in that region;
44. Reminds any future Member State of its obligation to strictly abide by its international commitments,
which prohibit the acquisition and development of weapons and materials of mass destruction, and thetransmission of such weapons, materials or technologies to any third state or non-state actor;
45. Recalls previous resolutions, in particular its resolution of 13 October 2005 on Iran (
1), as well as its
earlier resolutions on Iran of 28 October 2004 (2) and 13 January 2005 (3);
(1) Texts Adopted, P6_TA(2005)0382.
(2) OJ C 174 E, 14.7.2005, p. 190.
(3) OJ C 247 E, 6.10.2005, p. 159.C 280 E/458 EN 18.11.2006 Official Journal of the European Union
Thursday 17 November 2005
46. Considering the mistrust aroused by Iranian activities over a sustained period of more than 17 years,
as stated in the resolution adopted on 24 September 2005 by the IAEA, calls on Iran to take all necessarysteps to restore the international community's confidence and trusts that Iran can responsibly and trans-parently develop a civilian nuclear energy programme by:
— meeting in full its commitments, notwithstanding its rights, under the NPT,
— fully cooperating with the IAEA,
— continuing to cooperate with IAEA inspectors as it has done since 2003,
— ratifying, without delay, the IAEA Additional Protocol,
— returning to its commitments under the Paris Agreement,
— re-establishing full and sustained suspension of all aspects of its uranium enrichment-related activities,
including tests and production at the uranium conversion facility at Isfahan,
— and subject to the above, a full return to negotiations with the EU aimed at the successful conclusion of
a Trade and Cooperation Agreement;
47. Expresses extremely deep concern that on 10 February 2005 North Korea declared its possession of
nuclear weapons; welcomes the recent breakthrough in the six-party talks and specifically North Korea'scommitment to abandoning nuclear weapons and rejoining the NPT; supports the statement of 19 Sept-ember 2005 by the Director-General of the IAEA, Dr El-Baradei, on the return of IAEA inspectors to NorthKorea; reiterates the importance of the European Union having a seat in the on-going negotiating processand playing a meaningful role in the implementation of the recent agreement;
48. Therefore urges North Korea to rejoin the NPT, to revoke its decision to withdraw from the six-party
talks and to allow the resumption of negotiations in order to find a peaceful solution to the current crisis;
49. Similarly urges both North Korea and the United States to seek a speedy resolution of the current
crisis, the first step being a United States offer to recommence heavy fuel oil supplies in exchange for theverified freezing of the Yongbyon plant;
50. Reminds the Council that the Korean Peninsula Energy Development Organization initiative has
played a significant role in the recent past and could well serve a useful purpose as regards future conven-tional energy supplies;
Results and development of 2005 NPT Review Conference
51. Reiterates that the NPT remains the cornerstone of the multilateral non-proliferation regime, that it
should be preserved in its integrity and that non-compliance with its provisions should be pursued throughthe UN Security Council; recalls that there should be no double standards where the application of the NPT
is concerned;
52. Expresses disappointment and deep concern over the failure to reach by consensus useful recom-
mendations to be addressed to the next NPT Review Conference and regrets that the European Union didnot take up the initiative of the Mayor of Hiroshima for a nuclear-free world by 2020;
53. Expresses disappointment over both the outcome of, and the role played by the Member States at,
the 2005 NPT Review Conference; calls however on the Member States, the Council and the Commission topursue in good faith the 41 measures contained in the Common Position; in this connection, calls on theUnited States to abandon its negative attitude to the NPT;
54. Calls in particular on France and the United Kingdom to reinvigorate their pursuit of the 13 dis-
armament steps and to engage with the United States, Russia and China, who also committed themselves tothe process at the end of the 2000 NPT Review Conference;18.11.2006 EN C 280 E/459 Official Journal of the European Union
Thursday 17 November 2005
55. Calls on the Council and the Member States to effectively implement the provisions of the Final
Document of the 2000 NPT Review Conference aimed at the conclusion of a treaty effectively banningthe production of all weapons making use of fissile materials; stresses that, in the absence of a final docu-ment at the 2005 Review Conference, these provisions remain in force as a political and legal obligationbinding on NPT States Parties;
56. In so doing, reiterates its support for the conclusion of a non-discriminatory, multilateral and inter-
nationally and effectively verifiable fissile material cut-off treaty;
57. Calls equally upon all states that have not already done so to now sign and ratify the CTBT; under-
lines that under no circumstances should any state start or resume explosive nuclear testing; reiterates itsconviction that everything possible must be done by the EU and by NATO to persuade the US adminis-tration to give up its resistance on this issue;
58. Calls on the Council and the Commission to submit additional proposals aimed at convincing those
Third States that have not already done so to now sign and ratify the IAEA Additional Protocols;
Joint action in the framework of US-EU transatlantic relations
59. Urges the European Union and the United States to continue their positive dialogue in the fields of
non-proliferation and the fight against terrorism, in accordance with the European Union-United StatesDeclarations on combating terrorism and on the non-proliferation of WMDs adopted at the EU-US Summiton 26 June 2004 and reaffirmed on 20 June 2005;
60. Reaffirms the importance of stronger cooperation with the United States in order to strengthen the
international system of treaties and regimes against the spread of WMDs, to ensure strict implementationand compliance, to support non-routine inspections and to recognise that other measures in accordancewith international law may be needed to combat proliferation;
61. Stresses the urgency of signature and ratification of the CTBT without delay, unconditionally and in
accordance with the institutional processes of that treaty, so as to ensure its entry into force at the earliestpossible moment;
62. Calls on the Council and the Commission to insist on the urgency of such signature and ratification
in dialogue with the United States and all other partner states that have not yet ratified the CTBT and/or theNPT;
63. Calls on the United States to clarify the situation as regards the quantity and strategic objectives of its
tactical nuclear arsenals stationed on European bases;
Non-state actors
64. Calls on the European Union to work with its international partners, the UN, the IAEA, OSCE and
NATO, to develop and promote mechanisms to prevent terrorist organisations, or countries harbouringterrorists, from gaining access to weapons and materials of mass destruction;
65. Considers that every effort should be made to prevent any state or non-state actor from acquiring,
developing or profiting from the development, diversion or use of weapons and materials of mass destruc-tion;
66. Is of the view that the Proliferation Security Initiative is an important instrument to tackle the pro-
liferation of WMD and should complement UN Security Council Resolution 1540 (2004) and the existingnon-proliferation regimes;C 280 E/460 EN 18.11.2006 Official Journal of the European Union
Thursday 17 November 2005
G8 Global Partnership
67. Underlines the importance of programmes for, inter alia, the security and disposition of weapons-
related materials, physical protection of facilities and laboratories, detection and deterrence of illicit traffick-ing in WMD materials, strengthening of export controls and redeployment of former weapons scientists asdefined under the G8 Global Partnership;
68. Encourages the establishment of joint international nuclear research and industrial projects as con-
fidence-building steps;
69. Supports further financial commitment in the framework of the Financial Perspectives 2007-2013 to
the G8 Global Partnership against the spread of WMD and related materials; this should support, inter alia,further effective and definitive disarmament measures by contributing to the chemical weapons destructionand multilateral plutonium disposition efforts in Russia; calls upon Russia to make a greater financial con-tribution to both programmes;
70. Calls on the Commission and the Council to present an annual progress report on the realisation of
the commitment made in Kananaskis in 2002 on behalf of the EU to the G8 Global Partnership;
71. Points out that history has demonstrated that far too many states, including EU Member States, have
irresponsibly exported materials and technology from which nuclear weapons can be fabricated and thatthis has greatly contributed to current problems of uncontrolled proliferation; underlines therefore that
national and multilateral control systems should operate hand in hand to prevent any undesirable prolife-
ration of WMD;
Export control of nuclear materials
72. Emphasises that the European Union should be a leading cooperative player in the export control
regimes, as underlined by the EU WMD Strategy, in particular by improving the efficiency of export controlsinside the EU, under the ‘Dual-Use ’Regulation (
1) and by setting up an assistance programme to those states
which need technical knowledge in the field of export control;
73. Calls for more pro-active EU and national approaches to the control of exports of dual-use items in
order to avoid the risk of possible access to sensitive items by terrorists and other undesirable end-users inthird countries;
74. Welcomes the development by the Commission, as the first of a series of actions supporting the
possible setting-up of a longer-term EU export control cooperation initiative, of the TACIS project in Russia,the Pilot Project 2004 in the Balkans, and the Pilot Project 2005 in four additional countries or regions;
75. Calls on the Council to provide a report on the political dialogue with partners on export controls
and calls on the Commission to report on the progress of well-monitored implementing of the Dual UseExport Control projects; also calls for an analysis, with cost estimates, in the framework of the FinancialPerspective 2007-2013, by both the Council and the Commission on how such projects could be expanded
to other regions and countries;
Chemical and biological weapons
76. Calls for proper implementation of the CWC and adequate funding for the Organisation for the
Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW); is of the view that challenge inspections should be conductedon those suspected of violating the terms of the treaty;
77. Urges the Member States, the Council and the Commission to elaborate a clear and persuasive Euro-
pean Union position at the BTWC meeting of States Parties on 5 to 9 December 2005 in order that acomprehensive Common Position may be presented at the 2006 BTWC Review Conference;
(1) Council Regulation (EC) No 1334/2000 setting up a Community regime for the control of exports of dual-use items
and technology (OJ L 159, 30.6.2000, p. 1). Regulation as last amended by Regulation (EC) No 1504/2004
(OJ L 281, 31.8.2004, p. 1).18.11.2006 EN C 280 E/461 Official Journal of the European Union
Thursday 17 November 2005
78. Calls on the European Union to provide for technical assistance for developing countries with regard
to disease surveillance (in accordance with Article X of the BTWC);
79. Urges the Member States concerned to withdraw their reservation to the 1925 Geneva Protocol, since
a policy of retaliation in kind with chemical and/or biological weapons runs counter to the BTWC obli-gations;
80. Within the framework of the forthcoming Financial Perspectives, calls on the Commission to evaluate
the feasibility of cooperative assistance programmes with third states to strengthen the security of biologicalmaterials, laboratories and facilities;
A role for the European Parliament
81. Recalls the positive contribution that can be made by the European Parliament in addressing com-
mon security concerns on non-proliferation and disarmament in its capacity as a budgetary authority, as
already shown in its support for nuclear safety and nuclear security programmes under TACIS;
82. Reiterates its call for a moratorium —with a view to the introduction of a total ban —on the use of
so-called ‘depleted uranium munitions ’;
83. Recalls equally the positive contribution that the European Parliament has continued to make in the
case of the second Pilot Project (2005), whereby EUR 1,5 million has been allocated for use by the Com-mission to launch an EU Export Control Cooperation Initiative; recalls its decision to continue supportingsuch actions with the financing in 2006 of a third Preparatory Action enabling the Commission to furtherprepare the ground for future Community-funded programmes under the new Financial Perspectives 2007-2013;
84. Recalls the role that Parliament plays in its codecision legislative capacity and as a budgetary auth-
ority in issues such as the proposed Stability Instrument, which should include export controls and border
security, support for chemical weapons destruction and weapons-grade fissile material elimination, radio-
active and nuclear material management and control, bio-security, conversion of former weapons expertise,etc., in coordination with a Nuclear Safety Instrument, export controls, etc.;
85. Further recalls its involvement via assent in the Union's most important international agreements
with third countries, and in particular those agreements which include a non-proliferation clause; recalls inthat connection the support required from Parliament for all those initiatives designed to counter prolife-ration in certain countries by offering cooperation in return, and for any other kind of international agree-ment or partnership;
86. Asks therefore that the European Parliament be fully associated with all initiatives aimed at imple-
menting the EU WMD Strategy;
87. Recommends that an official Parliament delegation attend the next NPT Review Conference as well as
the BTWC Review Conference;
88. Calls on the Member States and the Council to include Members of the European Parliament in the
Union's delegation at any future peer review on export controls; also calls on the Council and the Commis-sion to keep Parliament regularly informed about the EU's role at the Australia Group, the MTCR, theWassenaar Arrangement and the Nuclear Suppliers Group (NSG);
89. Proposes to adopt annually a report on the status of non-proliferation activities of the European
Union containing relevant policy recommendations;
Financial aspects of the European Union strategy against the proliferation of WMD
90. Calls on the Member States to assign adequate financial resources to implement the priorities listed in
the progress report by the OPR;C 280 E/462 EN 18.11.2006 Official Journal of the European Union
Thursday 17 November 2005
91. Calls on the Commission to set out in a transparent and clear manner the resources it has already
committed for both ‘nuclear safety ’and ‘WMD non-proliferation ’;
92. Calls on the Commission to present in a transparent and clear manner the resources needed for the
necessary Community contribution to the EU WMD Strategy during 2006 and under the new FinancialPerspectives 2007-2013, making a clear distinction between ‘nuclear safety ’and ‘WMD non-proliferation ’
headings;
93. To that end, calls on the Commission to set out a list of priorities and estimated costs for the actions
necessary to meet its commitment in the framework of the G8 Global Partnership, and for extending itsaction beyond the CIS to meet global needs;
94. Calls on the Council, the Commission and the Member States to support specific projects conducted
by multilateral institutions, such as the IAEA and the OPCW, and to provide financing where appropriate;
95. Calls in particular on the Member States to provide finance regarding the list of priorities of the OPR
for export controls and technical assistance programmes;
96. Is of the view that conflict prevention and crisis management should not be financed at the expense
of the WMD prevention budget, and that the high-level ambitions expressed in the WMD Strategy andsupported by all the European institutions and Member States require an adequate level of financing; recallsin this connection the increasing difficulties in funding recent initiatives (specifically the renewal of the JointAction with the OPCW and a new Joint Action in support of the BTWC) from the CFSP budget or Com-munity instruments;
97. In the framework of the discussions on the Financial Perspectives 2007-2013, proposes therefore a
review of the existing Interinstitutional Agreement of 6 May 1999 and the establishment of a specificbudget line within the Union's budget to finance all activities regarding WMD issues, irrespective of whetherthey fall within the Community or CFSP framework, whilst respecting their respective decision-makingprocesses as well as the competences of the Council, the Commission and the Personal Representative;
*
**
98. Instructs its President to forward this resolution to the Presidency-in-office of the Council, the Coun-
cil, the Commission, the governments and parliaments of the Member States, the UN Secretary-General, thegovernments and parliaments of the United States, Russia, China, Israel, India, Pakistan, Iran and NorthKorea, and all other States party to the NPT and members of the IAEA.
P6_TA(2005)0440
Defence procurement
European Parliament resolution on the Green Paper on defence procurement (2005/2030(INI))
The European Parliament ,
— having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community, and in particular Articles 95 and
296 thereof,
— having regard to Directive 2004/18/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 31 March
2004 on the coordination of procedures for the award of public works contracts, public supply con-tracts and public service contracts (
1), and in particular Article 10 thereof,
(1) OJ L 134, 30.4.2004, p. 114.18.11.2006 EN C 280 E/463 Official Journal of the European Union
Thursday 17 November 2005