WRITTEN QUESTION E-3608/02 by Cristiana Muscardini (UEN) to the Commission. NATO enlargement and EU defence policy.
Date: 2002-12-16
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: NATO, Western European Union, common security and defence policy, competence of the institution, defence policy, operation of the Institutions, public safety

C 65 E/18

Official Journal of the European Union

EN

13.3.2004

Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission

(5 February 2003)

The Community has implemented rural development measures to assist the Azores region for the 2000-
2006 period under Regulation (EC) No 1257/1999 (1). They include a multi-fund operational programme
part-financed from the Structural Funds, inter alia by the EAGGF Guidance Section (EUR 133 554 million)
and a rural development plan part-funded by the EAGGF Guarantee Section (EUR 122 206 millions).

The rural development support granted under those programmes is intended inter alia for improving
productive structures, conversion and reorientation of agricultural production, improvement of product
quality, sustainable development, diversification of activity, etc. Some of the programmes’ measures have
already been the subject of specific derogations of a structural nature provided for in Regulation (EC)
No 1453/2001 (2).

Rural development measures must in any case be coordinated with other common agricultural policy
measures, including measures taken under the common organisation of markets.

More specifically as regards dairy production Article 26 of Regulation (EC) No 1453/2001 provides for the
Azores to receive aid for implementing, during the period 2002-2006, a comprehensive programme to
support the production and marketing of
local produce in the livestock and milk products sector.
The authorities responsible are to present draft programmes for approval by the Commission, but to date
they have not presented any under this provision.

Milk production in the Azores currently exceeds 500 000 tonnes a year, an increase of almost 60 % in
10 years; such a percentage increase has not been achieved in any other region of Europe. The almost
inevitable consequence of this growth, however, is that the price paid to milk producers in the Azores is
among the lowest in Europe. Cheese (cid:1) the main derivative (cid:1) also sells with difficulty and at prices well
below those of comparable continental products, for lack of a sufficient market outside the islands and
concerted efforts to develop one, for example under Article 26 of Regulation (EC) No 1453/2001.

The Portuguese authorities have sent the Commission a request to extend Article 23 of Regulation (EC)
No 1453/2001, which concerns the setting of milk quotas in the context of determining additional levies.
The request is substantiated by reference to the specific characteristics of production in the most remote
regions, and in particular of milk production in the Azores.

The Commission is examining the request in the light of the Azores’ special situation as a most remote
region, while ensuring consistency and respect for the integrity of Community law in the context of the
rules applicable, in particular Regulation (EC) No 1453/2001.

(1) Council Regulation (EC) No 1257/1999 of 17 May 1999 on support for rural development from the European
Agricultural Guidance and Guarantee Fund (EAGGF) and amending and repealing certain Regulations, OJ L 160,
26.6.1999.

(2) Council Regulation (EC) No 1453/2001 of 28 June 2001 introducing specific measures for certain agricultural
products for the Azores and Madeira and repealing Regulation (EEC) No 1600/92 (Poseima), OJ L 198, 21.7.2001.

(2004/C 65 E/019)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-3608/02

by Cristiana Muscardini (UEN) to the Commission

(16 December 2002)

Subject: NATO enlargement and EU defence policy

The summit of the 19 NATO heads of state and government, held in Prague on 21/22 November in the
the Atlantic Alliance and meeting in the
presence of

the 27 associate countries of

the leaders of

13.3.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 65 E/19

Euro-Atlantic Partnership Council, tackled two fundamental issues among others: the updating of NATO’s
strategic capacity and its enlargement, three years before the entry of the first three former Soviet bloc
countries.

The Alliance’s political and strategic profile had to be redefined as a result of the diversification of the
sources of instability and insecurity (rather than the previous predominant Soviet threat) and the extension
of the tasks entrusted to NATO by the 1991 and 1999 Strategic Concept, which envisaged opposition to
the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction and the fight against
terrorism and
organised crime. The results achieved in Prague seem to suggest that the Alliance is still the political and
military lynchpin of the new European security framework, even though the summit did not manage to
resolve all the Alliance’s political and institutional problems.

international

Can the Commission say:

1. whether it still considers NATO to be an alliance in the traditional sense of the word, or as the

beginning of a new and more efficient collective security system;

2.

3.

in what sense relations between the European Union and the United States are established and
developed within it;

in the military context, what the position of the Union’s Rapid Reaction Force will be vis-à-vis the
NATO Reaction Force, since 17 of the 19 NATO countries are European;

4. what role is played by the WEU in this context;

5. whether

it

is conceivable that

the ‘enhanced cooperation’

formula may provide the required

effectiveness for the member countries and ensure an autonomous defence policy?

Answer given by Mr Patten on behalf of the Commission

(17 January 2003)

The questions asked by the Honourable Member fall outside the Commission’s competence and it would
therefore be inappropriate for the Commission to reply.

(2004/C 65 E/020)

WRITTEN QUESTION P-0025/03

by Dirk Sterckx (ELDR) to the Commission

(13 January 2003)

Subject: List of products for which countermeasures can be taken in the context of the American Foreign

Sales Corporation

On 13 September 2003 the Commission published a draft list of products for which countermeasures
could be taken as a reaction against fiscal treatment by the United States under the Foreign Sales
Corporation law. A number of importers of American products who are on the list are dissatisfied with
this measure.
this measure could do serious damage to certain European
companies? Does the Commission already have an idea of the reaction of those concerned? Will the
Commission change the list
the
Commission reach a final decision?

those concerned? When will

Is there not a risk that

to take account of

the reactions of

Answer given by Mr Lamy on behalf of the Commission

(7 February 2003)

The Honourable Member raises the concern of Community importers on the negative effect that any
eventual imposition of sanctions on American products would have on their business.