WRITTEN QUESTION E-0186/01 by Lousewies van der Laan (ELDR) to the Council. Exchange of information concerning health hazards to military personnel.
Date: 2001-02-05
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: Germany, cancer, exchange of information, health risk, military personnel, nuclear weapon

18.9.2001

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 261 E/57

If a direct link is established between the use of this type of munitions and the (cid:145)Balkans(cid:146) and (cid:145)Gulf War(cid:146)
syndromes, could the Council state what priority public health measures it intends to propose to the
Member States as a matter of urgency?

Reply

(31 May 2001)

During its discussions on the occasion of its 22 January 2001 meeting, the Council acknowledged the
great concern of public opinion and expressed its commitment to seek full clarity on the issue of depleted
uranium. There was general agreement that in the first instance it was for NATO, as the institution
organising crisis management in the Balkans, to assemble the information from participants on the use of
depleted uranium, on the locations of troops and on medical data. The Council also called for full
transparency and open exchange of information between the authorities of the Member States, as well as
with other organisations investigating this matter.

The Council also noted that several bodies (UNER, WHO, NATO,
the committee set up by the
Commission) were examining this issue. Conclusions of the report from the Expert Group of article 31
of Euratom Treaty, were issued on 6th March 2001. Other reports are expected to be published shortly.
The Council has agreed to re-examine this issue in the light of those reports in order to assess whether any
specific initiative or measures at EU level are warranted.

(2001/C 261 E/059)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0186/01

by Lousewies van der Laan (ELDR) to the Council

(5 February 2001)

Subject: Exchange of information concerning health hazards to military personnel

It is well known that concern is felt throughout Europe about the possible hazard posed by the toxicity of
the depleted uranium in munitions used by NATO soldiers.

The University of Witten-Herdecke in Germany has studied the health of radar technicians in the German
army who worked with the Hawk and Patriot missile defence systems. Of the 99 former radar technicians
examined, 69 have contracted cancer. 24 of them have now died. This was reported by the German
television station ZDF on 13 January 2001.

1.

Is the Council aware of the latter report?

Does the Council agree that concern about the health of employees in Europe(cid:146)s armies could damage

2.
the common security policy?

If so, does the Council agree that information about the health of European military personnel is
3.
covered by Article 16 of the Treaty and that all information concerning this and other matters should be
shared by the Member States as soon as it becomes available?

4.
Is the available information concerning the possible damaging effects of the Hawk and Patriot missile
defence systems currently being shared by the Member States whose military personnel work with these
systems? How is this information exchange coordinated?

5. Will the Council keep the European Parliament informed about the above and any related matters,
pursuant to Article 21 of the Treaty?

C 261 E/58

Official Journal of the European Communities

EN

18.9.2001

Reply

(31 May 2001)

The report referred to in the Honourable Member(cid:146)s question has never been submitted to the attention of
the Council. Therefore its content has not been discussed.

The health of national troops that Member States may commit to EU-led crisis management operations
will certainly be a concern in the Council when deliberating on crisis management. During its discussions
on the occasion of its 22 January 2001 meeting, the Council acknowledged the great concern of the public
opinion and expressed their commitment to seek full clarity on the issue of depleted uranium, calling, in
line with article 16 of the Treaty for full transparency and open exchange of information between the
authorities of the Member States, as well as with other organisations investigating this matter.

There was general agreement however that in the first instance it was for NATO, as the institution
organising crisis management in Balkans, to assemble the information from participants on the use of
depleted uranium, on the locations of troops and on medical data.

The Council also noted that several bodies (UNEP, WHO, NATO,
the committee set up by the
Commission) were examining this issue. Conclusions of the report from the Expert Group of article 31 of
Euratom Treaty, were issued on 6th March 2001. Other reports are expected to be published shortly. Once
these reports are available, the Council has agreed to re-examine this issue in order to assess whether any
specific initiative or measures at EU level are warranted.

In accordance with Article 21 of the Treaty, the European Parliament is regularly kept informed of the
development of the Union(cid:146)s foreign and security policy. It will certainly be informed of the findings of
these inquiries and the possible follow-up.

(2001/C 261 E/060)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0187/01

by Bart Staes (Verts/ALE) to the Council

(5 February 2001)

Subject: Common foreign policy on Kosovo

The Parliament of the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia very recently adopted an Amnesty Law for those who
refused to serve in the Yugoslav People(cid:146)s Army and for prisoners convicted of crimes against the army or
of (cid:145)activities hostile to the State(cid:146). According to statements by Yugoslavia(cid:146)s Minister of Justice, Moncilo
Grubac, on 9 January 2001, this law does not apply to those convicted of terrorism. This means that the
amnesty does not extend to some 700 Albanian Kosovar prisoners in Serbia because they were convicted
of (cid:145)terrorism(cid:146). This is despite the recent undertaking given by Yugoslavia(cid:146)s Minister of Foreign Affairs,
Goran Svilanovic, in Washington that Albanian prisoners would be released, and despite similar promises
made by President Kostunica to the EU among others.

1.

Is the Council considering expressing its disapproval of these developments? If not, why not?

2. What measures will the Council take to put pressure on the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia to fulfil
the official pledges concerning the release of all Albanian political prisoners?