WRITTEN QUESTION E-0655/01 by Bart Staes (Verts/ALE) to the Commission. German chemical weapons in Turkey.
Date: 2001-03-06
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: Germany, Kurdistan question, Türkiye, arms supply, chemical weapon, competence of the Member States, export monitoring

3.7.2001

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 187 E/231

(2001/C 187 E/260)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0618/01

by Lord Inglewood (PPE-DE) to the Commission

Subject: Defence budgets of European NATO countries

(1 March 2001)

What are the national defence budgets of the European countries assigned to NATO for the years 1998,
1999, 2000 and 2001?

Answer given by Mr Patten on behalf of the Commission

(30 March 2001)

The matter in question does not come within its jurisdiction of the Commission.

(2001/C 187 E/261)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0655/01

by Bart Staes (Verts/ALE) to the Commission

(6 March 2001)

Subject: German chemical weapons in Turkey

In December 1999, the German Defence Ministry admitted that it was prepared to help with the
construction of a military chemicals laboratory in Turkey. The project would have a (cid:145)purely defensive
function(cid:146). However, the German TV programme (cid:145)Kennzeichen D(cid:146) (broadcast by the second public channel
ZDF) has quoted military sources which claim that, on 11 May 1999, the Turkish army used chemical
weapons against the Kurdish PKK movement. Research carried out by the University of Munich shows that
the heads for the chemical shells used by the Turkish army were supplied by two German companies,
Buck and Depyfag. It is now fourteen months since questions were tabled to the Commission about these
two issues. In its answer to Written Question E-3876/00 (1), the Commission stated that the implementa-
tion (of Regulation (EC) No 1334/2000 (2)) was the responsibility of the Member States. According to
Commissioner Patten, it was, therefore, the task of the Member State in which the exporter had his/her
registered office to take a decision on requests for authorisation and to ensure the execution thereof.

There is nothing in that answer to suggest that there is any obstacle to the Commission taking an initiative
under Article 22 of the EU Treaty. On the contrary, Article 22 lays down expressly that (cid:145)Any Member
State or the Commission may refer to the Council any question relating to the common foreign and
security policy and may submit proposals to the Council.(cid:146)

1. Will the Commission (cid:145)submit proposals to the Council(cid:146) pursuant to Article 22 of the EU Treaty in
order to secure information from the University of Munich on the German provenance (Buck and Depyfag)
of the mortar heads used by the Turkish army in a chemical weapons attack on the Kurdish PKK
in
movement on 11 May 1999? If not, why would the Commission refuse to submit a proposal
accordance with Article 22 of the EU Treaty?

2. Will the Commission (cid:145)submit proposals to the Council(cid:146) pursuant to Article 22 of the EU Treaty in
order to secure information from the German Defence Ministry about that Ministry(cid:146)s help with the
construction of a military chemicals laboratory in Turkey? If not, why would the Commission refuse to
submit a proposal in accordance with Article 22 of the EU Treaty?

(1) See p. 75.
(2) OJ L 159, 30.6.2000, p. 1.

C 187 E/232

Official Journal of the European Communities

EN

3.7.2001

Answer given by Mr Patten on behalf of the Commission

(19 April 2001)

The Commission would refer the Honourable Member to its answer to his Written Question E-3876/00 (1).

That answer is still valid.

(1) See p. 75.

(2001/C 187 E/262)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0675/01

by Daniel Varela Suanzes-Carpegna (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(6 March 2001)

Subject: Fishing-licence fees in the EU(cid:146)s international fisheries agreements

1.
Could the Commission provide information regarding the amount of funding allocated to develop-
ment cooperation under each of the fisheries agreements concluded between the EU and third countries
and currently in force?

2.
Could the Commission provide information regarding the finanical contribution made by Commu-
nity shipowners in the form of payments for fishing-licence fees under each of the fisheries agreements
concluded between the EU and third countries and currently in force?

Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission

(27 April 2001)

The Commission is sending direct to the Honourable Member and to Parliament(cid:146)s Secretariat a table
containing the information requested.

(2001/C 187 E/263)

WRITTEN QUESTION P-0750/01

by Hiltrud Breyer (Verts/ALE) to the Commission

Subject: Intervention buying of beef and the BSE crisis

(7 March 2001)

What view does the Commission take of the fact that the taxpayer has had to foot the entire bill for the
BSE crisis, even though it is well documented that producers of meat meal and animal feedingstuffs are
guilty of serious negligence?

Has it examined whether the industry may be held liable and be open to claims for compensation? If not,
why not?

Does the it intend, at least in cases in which there have been clear breaches of the law, for example in
Bavaria, where the temperature was not high enough in the production process, to recommend to the
Member States to make claims for liability?