WRITTEN QUESTION E-1205/00 by Bart Staes (Verts/ALE) to the Council. Use of German shell bodies in a chemical attack carried out by the Turkish army.
Date: 2000-04-13
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: Germany, Thuringia, UN convention, application of EU law, application of the law, arms control, chemical weapon, disarmament, military cooperation

13.2.2001

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 46 E/145

Will the Council now seek information from the makers of ZDF(cid:146)s (cid:145)Kennzeichen D(cid:146) programme on the use
of German shell bodies in a chemical attack by the Turkish army on the Kurdish PKK movement on
11 May 1999?

If not, why does the Council refuse to seek information on the use of German shell bodies in a chemical
attack by the Turkish army on the Kurdish PKK movement on 11 May 1999, given that it is a violation of
the Chemical Weapons Convention (CWC)?

If so, will the Council convey to the German and Turkish governments its displeasure at this violation of
the CWC?

(1) OJ C 280 E, 3.10.2000, p. 38.

(2001/C 46 E/167)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-1205/00

by Bart Staes (Verts/ALE) to the Council

(13 April 2000)

Subject: Use of German shell bodies in a chemical attack carried out by the Turkish army

In reply to Written Question E-2386/99 (1),
Honourable Member have not been brought to the attention of the Council(cid:146).

the Council says that

(cid:145)the sources referred to by the

However, the information sources on:

(cid:129) German help in building a chemical weapons laboratory in Turkey,

(cid:129) the use of chemical weapons by the Turkish army against the Kurdish PKK movement, and

(cid:129) the German provenance (Buck and Depyfag) of chemical shell bodies used by the Turkish army

were mentioned in the introduction to the question

The sources are:

(cid:129) the German Ministry of Defence,

(cid:129) The (cid:145)Kennzeichen D(cid:146) programme on the ZDF television channel, and

(cid:129) research carried out by the University of Munich.

Furthermore, Points 3 and 5 of Written Question E-2386/99 literally stated that the Council had been
made aware or had been informed of the facts (i.e. construction of a laboratory for chemical weapons and
the use of chemical weapons).

1. Will the Council now seek information from the German Ministry of Defence on the ministry(cid:146)s help
in constructing a new military chemicals laboratory in Turkey?

(a)

(b)

If not, why does the Council refuse to seek information from the German Ministry of Defence on the
ministry(cid:146)s help in constructing a new military chemicals laboratory in Turkey, given that it may be a
violation of the Chemical Weapons Convention?

If so, does the German aid in constructing a new military chemicals laboratory in Turkey conform
with the CWC which obliges the signatories, including Germany, never, under any circumstances, to
develop, produce, acquire in any other way, stockpile, possess or transfer directly or indirectly
chemical weapons?

C 46 E/146

Official Journal of the European Communities

EN

13.2.2001

2. Will the Council now register its opposition to German aid in constructing a new military chemicals
laboratory in Turkey in the light of the answers to question 1?

(a)

If not, what are the Council(cid:146)s reasons for not registering its opposition to German aid in constructing
a new military chemicals laboratory in Turkey, given that this is a violation of the CWC?

(b)

If so, in what way will the Council make its opposition known to the German government?

(1) OJ C 280 E, 3.10.2000, p. 38.

Joint answer
to Written Questions E-1203/00, E-1204/00 and E-1205/00

(10 July 2000)

All EU Member States are States Parties to the Convention on the Prohibition of the Development,
Production, Stockpiling and Use of Chemical Weapons and on their destruction (CWC).

Article VIII of the Convention established the Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons
(OPCW) (cid:145)to ensure the implementation of its provisions, including those for international verification of
compliance with it(cid:146). All States Parties to the CWC are members of the OPCW. This is the organisation
entrusted with the verification of compliance by States Parties with the provisions of the Convention.

The specific questions referred to by the Honourable Member have not been raised within the Council or
the Council bodies.

(2001/C 46 E/168)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-1211/00

by Glyn Ford (PSE) to the Commission

(14 April 2000)

Subject: Deutsche Post and the German Government

The German Government has granted a legal monopoly to Deutsche Post and fixed stamp prices, resulting
in Deutsche Post gaining a substantially higher income than is necessary to ensure universal service.
Deutsche Post has been able to use this financial advantage to subsidise Deutsche Post(cid:146)s commercial parcel
delivery services (putting competitors of this service at an immediate disadvantage) and also to make
acquisitions throughout the EU (e.g. Deutsche Post has acquired 50 % of Securicor Distribution and has
also purchased Herald International Mailings).

The Commission has already indicated that the support given by the German Government to Deutsche
Post seems to involve state aid. Will the Commission now state clearly whether or not this is actually the
case, and if so what action the Commission intends to take to prevent this infringement of EU legislation?

Answer given by Mr Monti on behalf of the Commission

(26 May 2000)

The Commission decided on 20 July 1999 to initiate the procedure laid down in Article 88 (2)
(ex Article 93) of the EC Treaty in respect of possible state aid granted to Deutsche Post AG.

The procedure covers the whole range of state aid allegations concerning Deutsche Post AG: use of
revenues of monopoly letter service to cover losses of parcel activities, use of such revenues for
acquisitions, use of proceeds from real estate transferred to Deutsche Post AG to finance acquisitions,
state guarantee for debts, and coverage of pension obligations by state.