WRITTEN QUESTION E-0772/01 by Juan Naranjo Escobar (PPE-DE) to the Council. Peace in the Great Lakes region.
Date: 2001-03-15
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: Congo, establishment of peace, ethnic conflict, the EU's international role

C 340 E/70

Official Journal of the European Communities

EN

4.12.2001

The situation is urgent since the international press reports that racial clashes have already begun on
a limited scale. If the situation is not brought under control as soon as possible, the spread of these clashes
and the killing of civilians which follows will cause incalculable harm.

Only an embargo on the sale of arms can pressure both sides into showing greater maturity and self-
restraint.

What steps will the Council take to secure compliance with the terms of the Treaty of Lusaka and what
pressure can it exert on the warring factions to hold talks with a view to finding a settlement?

(2001/C 340 E/082)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0772/01

by Juan Naranjo Escobar (PPE-DE) to the Council

(15 March 2001)

Subject: Peace in the Great Lakes region

The war which is afflicting the Great Lakes region, affecting seven countries, has claimed thousands of
victims, with sanguinary clashes between different ethnic groups, tribes and other communities. The region
has been torn apart by these conflicts for years now. However, recent political developments in the
Democratic Republic of Congo since the assassination of Laurent Kabila suggest that the dictator(cid:146)s death
has led to a considerable relaxation of tension in that country.

In the light of these freshly aroused expectations in the RDC following the change of regime, does the
Council consider that the prospects for peace in the region have now improved? Will the EU provide
resources to enable the disarmament plan to succeed and facilitate the reintegration of the rebels? How will
the plan be implemented? Does the Council believe it would be desirable to offer demobilisation incentives
as a core element of the peace process? When does the EU intend to convene a Conference for the
countries of Central Africa with a view to creating the conditions for closer regional cooperation and
constructing new models for cooperation between the developed world and the countries of the region?

Joint answer
to Written Questions E-0691/01 and E-0772/01

(13 July 2001)

The Council has noted with satisfaction the solemn commitments made by the parties in Lusaka on
15 February and in New York on 21 and 22 February, to relaunch the implementation of the Lusaka cease-
fire agreement, which constitutes the consensual basis for peace in the DRC and the region.

The Council has welcomed the adoption of UN Security Council Resolution 1341 approving the updated
concept of operations for MONUC and it has underlined the crucial importance of a rapid deployment of
the MONUC to verify and supervise the disengagement of troops,
in the perspective of a complete,
definitive and unconditional withdrawal of foreign troops from the DRC with the ultimate objective of
restoring sovereignty and territorial integrity of the DRC.

The Council has confirmed the European Union(cid:146)s continued political and material support to the MONUC
and to its contributors.

The Council has underlined the importance of disarming armed groups that operate in and from the
territory of the DRC. It has welcomed the provisions in UN Security Council Resolution 1341, urging the
parties to the conflict to co-operate with the MONUC in the elaboration of a plan for disarmament,
the
demobilisation and reintegration of all armed forces referred to in Annex A, Chapter 9.1 of
Lusaka Agreement. The European Union has expressed its willingness to work with the international
community, in particular the United Nations specialised agencies, on the modalities of such a programme
and it has mandated the European Union(cid:146)s Special Representative to engage in a reflection on how to
pursue this question. Until these reflections have been presented to and discussed by the Council, it is too
early to discuss the implementation and financing of such a programme.

4.12.2001

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 340 E/71

The Council has reiterated the importance it attaches to an early start to the national dialogue, as foreseen
in the Lusaka Agreement and recalled the support that the European Union and its Member States give to
the process of national dialogue as well as its readiness to continue to support its institutional framework.

The Council has expressed its deep concern over the continuing serious human rights violations in the
DRC and reminded the governments concerned of their responsibility and accountability for upholding the
respect for human rights by their own armed forces as well as by the armed forces under their de facto
control.

In the Council Joint Action appointing the European Union(cid:146)s Special Representative, Mr Ajello, reference is
indeed made to an international conference on peace, stability, democracy and development in the African
Great Lakes Region to be held at an appropriate time, but the Council has not pronounced itself on this
question yet.

The Commission has recently indicated its wish to gradually resume development co-operation through
a progressive resumption of aid, cut off since 1992, and by freeing credits from the 7th and 8th European
Development Fund (EDF) namely € 120 million. These funds should act to accompany the peace process
and will be granted in relation to the progress accomplished by the Congolese authorities in the peace
process and in the transition towards democracy.

(2001/C 340 E/083)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0696/01

by Eurig Wyn (Verts/ALE) to the Council

(14 March 2001)

Subject: Suckler cow premiums

Would the Council agree that the recent (cid:145)7 point plan(cid:146) for the UK is unfavourable to beef production in
the UK, and especially for Wales? Given the proposal to reduce the number of productive suckler cows
eligible for the suckler cow premium, the UK will be affected disproportionately (cid:129) with 18 % of the
suckler cows population in the UK compared with only 11 % of total EU beef production.

Does the Council accept that it is unfair that the UK has to introduce these changes when we already have
in place an over thirty month scheme that has removed animals from the market for the last five years?

Does the Council also accept that reducing the number of suckler cows in the market will have a negative
effect on consumers as it will reduce the higher quality beef being produced for the European consumer?

Is it not also illogical to further concentrate beef production from dairy herds where a much higher
incidence of BSE has occurred.

Finally, will the Council look again at the calf slaughter premium scheme? This scheme can be carried out
at lower cost than the other measures being proposed by the Commission such as the change to the
suckler cow scheme. It will remove the lower quality animals from the market and will also have a more
rapid impact in the re-balancing of the market.

Reply

(13 July 2001)

The Council has received a proposal concerning amendments to the CMO for beef and veal, with the aim
of adapting production to the reduction in demand due to a lack of consumer confidence following the
BSE crisis.