WRITTEN QUESTION E-3532/00 by Ioannis Marínos (PPE-DE) to the Commission. Peace process in the Middle East.
Date: 2000-11-13
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: Palestine question, common foreign and security policy

C 174 E/72

Official Journal of the European Communities

EN

19.6.2001

(2001/C 174 E/072)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-3530/00

by Alexandros Alavanos (GUE/NGL) to the Council

Subject: Contestation of Greek sovereign rights by Turkey

(13 November 2000)

During the NATO exercise (cid:145)Destined Glory(cid:146), Turkey (cid:145)closed(cid:146) its airspace to all NATO aircraft originating
from the Athens FIR (flight information region). This unprecedented action caused Greece to withdraw
from the exercise, since it represented an escalation in Turkey(cid:146)s attempts to contest Greek sovereign rights.
During the conclusion of the European Union-Turkey (cid:145)partnership(cid:146), does the Council intend to set out clear
and explicit preconditions to Turkey regarding respect for EU borders and the implementation of the
provisions of the Helsinki European Council(cid:146)s decision making provision for a peaceful process for settling
the differences between Greece and Turkey?

Reply

(8 March 2001)

On 4 December 2000, the Council reached a political agreement on the partnership for the accession of
Turkey. The question of the peaceful settlement of disputes is included, in accordance with the Helsinki
conclusions and in the context of the political dialogue, amongst the priorities and intermediate objectives,
under the heading of enhanced political dialogue and political criteria.

(2001/C 174 E/073)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-3532/00

by Ioannis Mar(cid:237)nos (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(13 November 2000)

Subject: Peace process in the Middle East

On 5 September 2000 the Speaker of the Knesset, Mr Avram Burg, and Mr Ahmed Qurie, his counterpart
in the Palestinian Legislative Council, spoke at Parliament(cid:146)s plenary session in Strasbourg on the situation
in the Middle East, the future status of Jerusalem and the hopes for definitive peace in this troubled region
of the planet. The speeches by the two Speakers were models of constructive attitudes, they were full of
suggestions and ideas and revealed that at any rate majorities in the legislative bodies of both Israel and the
Palestinian administration wished to advance along the road to reconciliation. A highly significant element
in these speeches was the suggestion that
Jerusalem should become a global capital, a centre for
monotheistic religions (Christianity, Judaism and Islam), so that instead of being a city of hatred it would
become known as a city of love. Paradoxically, the suggestion by the Speakers of the two legislative bodies
of Israel and Palestine did not appear to attract the interest of the Council or the Commission, who could
adopt and promote it in order to eliminate the stalemate on the status of Jerusalem, thus increasing the
European Union(cid:146)s prestige in the area and making a real contribution to consolidating peace.

Since the future of Jerusalem is at the heart of the Palestine issue and is a question that prompts fanatical
acts, and even death, on both sides, is the Commission looking at the possibility of the European Union
promoting the suggestion that Jerusalem should be made into an international city and turned into a
global capital for the three monotheistic religions, along the lines of a suggestion made by the parties
involved in the region which could put a stop to the constant bloodshed which we are unfortunately
witnessing once again in this region? If so, does the EU intend to use a military presence to guarantee
smooth implementation of the proposal?

Answer given by Mr Patten on behalf of the Commission

(15 December 2000)

The constructive interventions of Mr Burg and Mr Qurie at the Parliament on 5 September were a positive
contribution to the process of reconciliation among their peoples, thereby fostering the hope for a swift

19.6.2001

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 174 E/73

end to the long-standing Israeli-Palestinian conflict. The Commission appreciates and supports similar
beneficial interventions from all parties. Against the background of what appeared to be an approaching
negotiated settlement, the current wave of clashes is particularly saddening.

It remains mostly for the parties themselves to negotiate to find workable peaceful solutions. There is no
valid alternative to peace. Thus the Commission is convinced that an agreement that satisfies the vital
needs and legitimate concerns of Israelis and Palestinians can and must be found.

The necessary first step is to restore calm on the ground, allowing for a fruitful resumption of negotiations
in turn leading to a lasting peace agreement. The Commission is ready and willing to support the
implementation of such an agreement through all mechanisms at its disposal.

(2001/C 174 E/074)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-3534/00

by Glyn Ford (PSE) to the Commission

(13 November 2000)

Subject: Aid to countries of South and Central America

Can the Commission detail the financial assistance given to each of the countries in South and Central
America over the last five years? What percentage of this money has been directed towards assistance to
the African communities in each of these countries?

Answer given by Mr Patten on behalf of the Commission

(20 February 2001)

In view of the length of its answer, the Commission is sending it direct to the Honourable Member and to
Parliament(cid:146)s Secretariat.

(2001/C 174 E/075)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-3546/00

by Glenys Kinnock (PSE) to the Commission

(15 November 2000)

Subject: Education

The final declaration of the World Education Forum commits the international community to ensuring
(cid:145)that no countries seriously committed to education for all will be thwarted in their achievement of this
goal by a lack of resources.(cid:146)

As one of the world(cid:146)s major donors to the education sector, how does the Commission plan to work with
southern governments, and other bilateral and multilateral donors, to agree procedures for financing
national Education Action Plans?

Does the Commission agree that a specific (cid:145)sign off(cid:146) process needs to be developed for agreeing to fund
National Plans, and how will it contribute to ensuring that such a process is developed?

Does the Commission agree that the EU budget should include increased earmarked funds for aid to
education, on an annual basis, to demonstrate that the EU will deliver on its commitments? In addition,
will the Commission propose such an increase to the budgetary authorities in the future?