WRITTEN QUESTION E-2762/99 by Lucio Manisco (GUE/NGL) to the Commission. The Russian Federation's ultimatum to the city of Grozny.
Date: 2000-01-18
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: Russia, common foreign and security policy, international sanctions, suspension of aid, war of independence

C 374 E/12

Official Journal of the European Communities

EN

28.12.2000

(2000/C 374 E/014)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-2743/99

by Emilia M(cid:252)ller (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(18 January 2000)

Subject: Special aid for France

On the accession of Spain and Portugal, France received special regional development aid for the area
adjacent to Spain by virtue of Council Regulation (EEC) No 2615/80 (1).

What was the total amount of the aid, in respect of what period was it granted, and for which areas was it
intended?

(1) OJ L 271, 15.10.1980, p. 1.

Answer given by Mr Barnier on behalf of the Commission

(3 February 2000)

Council Regulation (EEC) No 2615/80 of 7 October 1980 instituting a specific Community regional
development measure contributing to the development of certain French and Italian regions in the context
of Community enlargement (1) provides for a special programme to be presented to the Commission by
each of the Member States concerned. To implement this Community measure, the Council adopted
Regulation (EEC) No 2088/85 of 23 July 1985 concerning the integrated Mediterranean programmes
(IMPs) (2). This contains provisions on the programming period,
the financial assistance from the
Community budget and the geographical scope of the IMPs among others.

The financial assistance from the Community budget for the implementation of the IMPs from 1986 to
1992 was fixed at an overall total of EUR 4 100 million, including EUR 844 million for France.

As regards geographical scope,
in France the IMPs programme relates to the regions of Languedoc-
Roussillon, Corsica, Provence-Alpes-C(cid:244)te d(cid:146)Azur, Aquitaine and Midi-PyrØnØes, and the departments of
Dr(cid:244)me and ArdŁche, with the exception of the conurbations of Marseille, Bordeaux and Toulouse and the
built-up coastal strip with all-year-round tourist activity.

(1) OJ L 271, 15.10.1980, p. 1.
(2) OJ L 197, 27.7.1985, p. 1.

(2000/C 374 E/015)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-2762/99

by Lucio Manisco (GUE/NGL) to the Commission

(18 January 2000)

Subject: The Russian Federation(cid:146)s ultimatum to the city of Grozny

The whole world has condemned the ruthless ultimatum given by the Russian Federation(cid:146)s political and
military authorities to the 50 000 inhabitants and the resistance groups in the city of Grozny. However,
the only reactions to this ultimatum on the part of the Presidency, the High Representative for the CFSP
and the Commission have been verbal condemnations and expressions of concern, warnings and the
(cid:145)studying(cid:146) of possible counter-measures.

The changes to the terms of the ultimatum made on 7 December by the Russian authorities do not affect
the threat of extermination faced by tens of thousands of civilians because it is virtually impossible to
evacuate them under the bombardments.

Does not the Commission believe that actions speak louder than words and that it should suspend,
temporarily but immediately, the partnership and cooperation agreements entered into with Moscow as
well as any form of direct or indirect aid to the Russian Federation?

28.12.2000

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 374 E/13

Answer given by Mr Patten on behalf of the Commission

(25 February 2000)

Against the background of the situation in Chechnya and the declaration by the European Council at
last December, the General Affairs Council of 24/25 January 2000 adopted conclusions on
Helsinki
concrete follow up measures.

These include strict application of trade provisions in cases where Russia has violated the partnership and
cooperation agreement or related sectoral agreements. In this context on 26 January 2000, the Com-
mission submitted a proposal to the Council for a 20 % reduction in the import quota for certain Russian
steel products.

In addition, preparation of the Tacis indicative programme for Russia for 2000-2003 has been suspended.
Meanwhile, work is going ahead to identify possible components of a core programme covering
promotion of democratic values, and the rule of law as the Council requested. The Commission will keep
the situation under review over the coming months in order to assess whether programming of Tacis
2000 should go beyond this core programme.

On humanitarian assistance, the Commission in 1999 already committed € 2,4 million for actions in the
North Caucasus region. This is being delivered through international relief organisations on the spot.
In January 2000, the Commission has earmarked a further € 5 million for the Northern Caucasus, of which
€ 1,32 million have already been allocated to further aid projects. For the remaining funds to be disbursed
quickly and effectively, we need to work with the Russian authorities to improve security conditions on
the ground to enable relief agencies adequately to distribute and monitor humanitarian aid. In this regard,
the recent visit to the region by the Member of the Commission in charge of humanitarian aid was a
valuable opportunity to raise the needs expressed by international relief agencies directly with the
competent authorities.

(2000/C 374 E/016)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-2766/99

by Jas Gawronski (PPE-DE) to the Council

(13 January 2000)

Subject: Measures to resolve the conflict between Ethiopia and Eritrea

Can the Council indicate what measures it intends to take with regard to the conflict between Eritrea and
Ethiopia?

At the Joint Assembly with representatives of the ACP countries last October in Nassau the Members of
the European Parliament requested the Council to take all the necessary measures to ensure that Ethiopia
accepts and implements the peace plan proposed by the OAU. Up to now, Ethiopia has still not
committed itself to the agreement and is still violating the fundamental rights of the Eritrean citizens
resident on its territory.

Article 5 of the LomØ Convention provides for the suspension of cooperation between the European
Union and the ACP States in cases of violation of human rights. Can the Council indicate the reasons why
it continues to cooperate with Ethiopia?

Reply

(16/17 May 2000)

Since fighting between Eritrea and Ethiopia first broke out in May 1998, the European Union has
repeatedly urged both countries to cease hostilities immediately on all fronts, to refrain from any further
use of violence and to cooperate with the OAU(cid:146)s efforts to mediate a peaceful negotiated solution to the
conflict. The EU therefore welcomed on 21 July 1999 the decision by the Assembly of the Heads of State
and Government of the OAU, meeting in Algiers from 12 to 14 July, to approve the arrangements for the
implementation of the OAU framework agreement concerning the settlement of this conflict. In addition,
technical arrangements were worked out in August which represent the third instrument of the OAU
peacemaking effort with regard to this conflict.