natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
Jeg har fået at vide, at en polsk borger, der i sin tid blev eksproprieret fra sit hus i Warszawa, i dag gør krav på bygningen. Den ejes nu af den amerikanske ambassade, der naturligvis nægter at give ham den tilbage. Det er kun ét eksempel på, hvad der ville kunne ske, hvis man genåbnede denne diskussion.
I hear that a Polish citizen, who at one time had his Warsaw mansion expropriated, is now reclaiming the building which is now the property of the American embassy, which has naturally refused to hand it over.
Et andet element af aftalememorandummet er D'Amato-lovgivningen.
Another element of the understanding is the D'Amato legislation.
Den fulde gennemførelse af memorandum met ville betyde, at USA over for Den Europæiske Union skulle suspendere den multilaterale ordning i henhold til denne lovgivning, som ikke er omfattet af sagen i WTO, men som dog indgår i aftalememorandummet med USA.
The full implementation of the understanding would call for the United States to grant the European Union a multilateral regime waiver under this legislation, which is not the subject of the case in the WTO but ■ nonetheless is part of our agreement with the United States.
Dette forudsætter fortsat suspension af afsnit 3 i Helms-Burton-loven, og at Kongressen ændrer HelmsBurton-loven, således at præsidenten kan suspendere afsnit 4.
The understanding presupposes the continued waiver of Title 3 of the Helms­Burton Act and also that Congress will amend Helms­Burton to permit a presiden­tial waiver of Title 4.
Endelig, og dette er en grundlæggende præcisering, der som man ville indføre et tilbagevirkende kriterium for Cuba og dele USA's holdning til spørgsmålet om nationaliseringer, ville de nye krav føre til, at der ikke længere ville blive hverken handlet eller investeret på øen. Dette
With regard to the observation that the European Union has committed itself to join the efforts of the United States to promote democracy in Cuba, which is referred to in the text of the oral question, I would remind the honourable Member that the language of the understanding is quite clear.
Med hensyn til den betragtning, at Den Europæiske Union skulle have forpligtet sig til at tilslutte sig USA's bestræ-
It does not contain a commitment on the part of the European Union and the United States to take action jointly.
Begge parter kan frit afgøre, hvordan, hvor og hvornår de hver især ønsker at tage disse emner op med Cuba.
Mr Commissioner, these are the clarifications the Commit­tee on External Economic Relations would like to have.
Hvad angår spørgsmålet om, hvorvidt Kommissionen mener, at sådanne krav ville gøre det umuligt at foretage investeringer i Cuba under hensyntagen til de historiske faktorer, som det ærede medlem nævnte, vil jeg igen klart sige, at dækningen af tidligere ekspropriationer ikke er udelukket ved aftalememorandummets formulering, men at den forudsætter, at der er sket en klar overtrædelse af folkeretten, og, som jeg har omtalt, er Den Europæiske Union ved aftalen kun forpligtet af krav, som tjener til at hindre og modvirke investering, og ikke af krav, der indebærer et forbud mod investering.
Therefore, on the question of whether the Commission considers that such disciplines would make it impossible to invest in Cuba, taking account of the historical factors mentioned by the honourable Member, I would say clearly once again that the coverage of past expropriations is not excluded by the wording of the understanding but that it presupposes that a clear violation of international law has taken place and, as I have indicated, the understanding only commits the European Union to disciplines which would inhibit and deter investments, and not to disciplines which would prohibit investments.
Sidstnævnte ville i alle tilfælde være vanskeligt for Fællesskabet på grund af den stort set frie kapitalbevægelse i Fællesskabet som omhandlet i artikel 73b i EF-traktaten.
The latter would in any case be difficult for the Community owing to our almost complete freedom from capital movement restrictions as set forth by Article 73(b) of the EC Treaty.
Og alle disse aftaler har, hr. formand, udmøntet sig i den fælles forståelse, at hvis en retsakt blev gennemført over for en privatperson, en juridisk eller moralsk person i Den Europæiske Union, hvis de indrømmede ophævelser ikke blev gennemført, eller de blev ændret, forbeholdt Den Europæiske Union sig retten til automatisk igen at påbegynde den almindelige behandling af klagen til Verdens handelsorganisationen.
Without such a dispute settlement mechanism, without those rules, we would have very little ammunition indeed in this contest. I say that because it illustrates very well the importance of the European Union staying loyal to the principles of the World Trade Organization because they enable us to defend our interests.
Det næste spørgsmål vedrører det faktum, at folkeretten omfatter regler om investeringsbeskyttelse, bl.a. regler om ekspropriationers lovlighed.
The next question relates to the fact that international law provides rules on investment protection, including rules on the legality of expropriations.
Et af kriterierne for, hvorvidt en ekspropriation er lovlig, er, om den eksproprierende stat straks har udbetalt en tilstrækkelig og effektiv kom pensation.
One of the criteria for determining the legality of an expropriation is whether prompt, adequate and effective compensation has been paid by the expropriating state.
Kommissionen og medlemsstaterne har under forhandlingerne til stadighed krævet, at kravene i henhold til aftalememorandummet alene skal kunne finde anvendelse på ekspropriationer, der er foretaget i modstrid med folkeretten.
The Commission and the Member States have consistently in our negotiations in­sisted on the fact that under the understanding, disciplines could only apply to expropriations which have taken place in contravention of international law.
Man har endnu ikke færdigforhandlet de nærmere kriterier for bestemmelsen af, hvornår der er tale om sådanne.
The precise condi­tions for determining when that has happened are still a matter for discussion.
For det andet fordi den indfører et element af ekstraterritorialitet, som frastøder enhver suveræn stats mest frigjorte samvittighed - og dette har jeg haft mulighed for at nævne i dette Parlament. For det tredje fordi den, hr. formand, stiller spørgsmålstegn ved Verdenshandelsorganisationens kompetence som organ, der kan bilægge eller afgøre disse konflikter.
The understanding of 11 April 1997 reached between the European Union and the United States calls for the development of disciplines which 'should inhibit and deter the future acquisition of investments from any state which has expropriated or nationalized such investments in contravention of international law and subsequent dealings in covert investments'.
Hr. Brittan har sagt, at den er den bedste' garanti til at forsvare Den Europæiske Unions teser. Hvis vi holder os til banan- og hormonpanelets seneste resultater, ved jeg ikke, om den er den bedste garanti.
It is clear from that language that the understanding does not necessarily provide for the negotiation of disciplines which would prohibit future investments in expropriative property because it talks
Det vil fremgå af det, jeg har sagt, at forhandlingerne nu er inde i en kompleks og vanskelig fase.
It will be clear from what I have said that the negotiations are currently at a complex and delicate stage.
Det er fortsat Kommissionens mål at opnå en afbalanceret løsning, der både dækker krav for investering i eksproprieret ejendom i den forstand, som jeg har beskrevet dem, og principperne for modstridende krav og sekundære boykotter.
The Com­mission's objective remains to achieve a balanced solution covering both the disciplines for investment in expropri­ated property in the sense that I have described them, and'
FORSÆDE: Antonio CAPUCHO Næstformand
Debates of the European Parliament
Og betingelserne har hr. Brittan mindet os om, men jeg vil gerne gøre opmærksom på de to grundlæggende betingelser: For det første indstillede Den Europæiske Union behandlingen af
Brittan, Sir Leon clear that the European Union has right on its side, but it has nevertheless sought an amicable solution for the time being.
Plooij-Van Gorsel bevæger os ad en farlig vej, og Europa-Kommissionen burde på ny indgive en anmeldelse over for WTO.
These boycott policies which have been going on now for 40 years have not led to the slightest advance in these matters, as mentioned by the European Union in its statement of 2 December.
holdning med hensyn til de eksterritoriale bestemmelser i denne lov er uændret.
Plooij-Van Gorsel (ELDR). - (NL) Mr President, we have debated the Helms-Burton Act here many times and passed resolutions on it, and the position of my group with regard to the extra-territorial provisions in this Act is unchanged.
Det kan ikke være sådan, at den amerikanske Kongres foreskriver vores virksomheder loven, og hvis der er konflikter, så ligger voldgiften i WTO's hænder. Udelukkende WTO.
The American Congress simply cannot lay down the law for our companies and if there are disputes then arbitration is in the hands of the WTO.
Hr. formand, jeg har to spørgsmål til kommissær Brittan.
Mr President, I have two questions for Com missioner Brittan.
Wolf (V). - (DE) Hr. formand, i et demokrati, der virkelig fungerede, ville den debat, vi fører i dag, være fuldstændig overflødig.
Salafranca Sánchez-Neyra (PPE). - (ES) Mr President, I am glad the Commissioner has reminded us of the terms of the agreement which was reached between the Euro pean Commission and the Clinton Administration (and subsequently modified in part by the Council of Ministers of the European Union) because, as the Commissioner has well demonstrated, this is not just any agreement, but is conditional.
Dette Parlaments vilje ville blive respekteret, og der ville blive oprettet et WTO-panel til Helms-Burton.
Sir Leon has reminded us of the conditions, but I would like to stress the two basic ones.
Men De handlede egenmægtigt allerede i maj i år, hr. kommissær, og det har vi kritiseret Dem for.
On the one hand the European Union suspended the World Trade Organization complaint proceedings, and the United States promised to postpone the application of Title 3.
Vi måtte konstatere, at De havde været i privat audiens hos big brother for at gyde olie på vandene.
As I understand it, the second basic condition accepted by the United States authorities was the amendment of Title 4.
Hvorfor har kommissæren optrådt så solistisk i forhandlingerne med amerikanerne om Helms-Burton-loven?
Why did the Commissioner go it alone in the negotiations with the Americans on the Helms-Burton Act?
Denne lov drejer sig kun for 20 procents vedkommende om handelspolitik inden for rammerne af WTO, og den øverste magt med hensyn hertil ligger hos Kommissionen og Parlamentet. Men for 80 procents vedkommende drejer det sig om tredjelandes investeringer på Cuba, og det er i tidligere amerikansk ejendom.
Only 20 % of this act deals with trade policy in the context of the WTO and that is the prime concern of the Commission and Parliament.
Sidstnævnte, når det drejer sig om investeringer, henhører under Rådets øverste magt.
The latter, if we are dealing with investments, is the prime concern of the Council.
Det er derfor ikke overraskende, at kommissærens solistiske optræden fører til irritationer her i Parlamentet, men frem for alt også i Rådet.
It is therefore not surprising that the Commissioner going it alone causes irritation in this Parliament but also and especially in the Council.
Og resultatet var ingen nye beføjelser inden for rammerne af artikel 13 til Parlamentet og Kommissionen i Amsterdamtraktaten, hvilket er taget til efterretning.
And the result was no new powers within the framework of Article 13 for the Parliament and the Commission in the Treaty of Amsterdam.
Hvad skal vi bruge en WTO til, når den omgår sine egne regler i hemmelige aftaler og så kun vil ophøje deres indhold til grundlag for en multilateral investeringskonvention, der angår os alle?
And we have never accepted the extra-territorial principle of the act, which interferes with the trade relations of the European Union and its Member States with third countries such as Cuba.
Mit andet spørgsmål vedrører multilateral agreement on investment, som OECD i øjeblikket forbereder.
My second question concerns the multilateral agreement on investment that is currently being prepared by the OECD..The agreement will be signed in May, if it is good, by 29 countries and the Union.
Konventionen vil vistnok i maj blive undertegnet af 29 lande og Unionen.
It will provide for a ban on investments in illegally expropriated property.
Spørgsmålet er nu: Er der på Cuba tale om illegalt eksproprierede amerikanske ejendomme, for 36 år siden?
The question is whether the American property expropriated in Cuba 36 years ago was illegally expropriated.
For der var dengang ingen international ret på dette område, og amerikanerne afslog i sin tid kategorisk et tilbud om skadeserstatning.
Because there was no international law in that field and at that time the Americans categorically refused an offer for compensation.
Er det så rimeligt at tale om illegal ekspropriation?
Can we reasonably speak of illegal expropriation?
Jeg vil gerne høre kommissærens mening om disse to spørgsmål.
I should like to know the opinion of the Commissioner on these two questions.
Minimum et signifikant antal u-lande skal stemme for, for at en sådan konvention overhovedet kan besluttes.
Sir Leon has told us that it is the best guarantee of defending the basic concepts of the European Union.
Jeg tror, at det spørgsmål, som fru Plooijvan Gorsel stillede, er meget relevant.
Going by the results of the recent banana and hormone panels, I am not sure about that.
González Alvarez (GUE/NGL). - (ES) Hr. formand, sidste gang hr. Brittan var her også for at tale om HelmsBurton-loven, sagde han, som min landsmand Salafranca erindrede, at hvis USA ikke overholdt sin del af aftalen - det vil sige fortsat indefrysning af afsnit III og tilbagekaldelse af afsnit IV - ville Kommissionen forbeholde sig ret til at vende tilbage til WTO-panelet.
González Alvarez (GUE/NGL). - (ES) Mr President, the last time Sir Leon was here it was also to speak about the Helms-Burton Act, and as my compatriot, Mr Salafranca, recalls, he said that if the United States did not keep their side of the agreement, by continuing to postpone Tide 3 and by revoking Title 4, the Commission reserved the right to go back to the WTO panel.
For at komme tilbage til Cuba: EU må ikke længere bare parere ordre, men skal belægge budgetposterne fornuftigt i stedet for at afskaffe dem.
To return to the matter of Cuba. The EU must not continue to knuckle under, but must sensibly fund the existing budget items, instead of deleting them.
Og EU skal langt om længe bane vejen for en samarbejdsaftale med Cuba.
It must at long last introduce a treaty of cooperation with Cuba.
Den investeringsbeskyttelse, som USA sætter så højt, er overhovedet ikke noget aktuelt problem for Europa. Jeg vil bare erindre om Cubas aftale om investeringsbeskyttelse med lande som Frankrig eller Tyskland.
The invest ment protection that the USA has set at such a high level is no current problem at all for Europe.
Det er virkelig ikke vores opgave at lege Miami Vice!
Miami vice is really not our business!
Vi mener, at afsnit IV ikke kun blev tilbagekaldt - selvom afsnit III blev indefrosset i yderligere seks måneder - men at USA's Kongres med otte ændringsforslag forværrede Helms-Burton-loven ved at kræve streng overholdelse heraf.
Although Title 3 may have been postponed for a further six months, it seems to us that not only has Tide 4 not been revoked, but the United States Congress has made the Helms-Burton Act worse with eight amendments demanding strict compliance with it.
Det vil sige, at den amerikanske Kongres' ønsker står i modstrid med, hvad hr. Brittan sagde.
In other words, the wishes of the United States Congress lead in completely the opposite direction to what Sir Leon told us.
Endvidere siger hr. Brittan: Investeringerne vil ikke blive forbudt, de vil blive dæmpet.
Further more, Sir Leon says that investments are not going to be prohibited, but inhibited.
Og jeg spørger mig selv: Hvad er formlen for denne dæmpelse?
I wonder what the formula for this inhibition is.
Dette er altså et fænomen, som jeg ikke kender inden for international ret, og jeg ville gerne vide, hvad »dæmpelse« består i, især om der er taget hensyn til, at Den Europæiske Union indtil for ikke så længe siden havde opretholdt visse samtaler med den cubanske regering med henblik på at nå til en handels- og samarbejdsaftale, da jeg her husker, at Cuba er det eneste land, med hvilket vi ikke har en samarbejds- og handels aftale.
This is a concept which I have never heard mentioned in international law and I would like to know what it consists of, especially in view of the fact that until not long ago the European Union had been holding talks with the Cuban Government in order to reach an agreement on trade and cooperation since, as I should like to remind you, Cuba is the only country with which we do not have such an agreement.
Og dette finder vi urimeligt.
We think this is unfair.
Den EuropæisTce Unions medlemsstater og Amerikas For enede Stater deler fuldt ud det mål, der går ud på at gøre Cuba demokratisk, selvom Castros romantiske opfattelse stadig lader til at høste tilhængere inden for denne forsamling, på en underligt forskudt måde.
Souchet (I-EDN). - (FR) Mr President, Mr Commissioner, relationships between the United States and Europe are studded with misunderstanding and divergences in approach, even in fields where the objectives sought are in reality identical.
Men Den Europæiske Union forsøger at fremme denne udvikling af demokratiet på Cuba ved udbygge den menneskelige, økonomiske og politiske udveksling.
The case of the Helms-Burton legislation is a supreme example of this type of transatlantic misunderstanding. derstanding.
Vi mener, at samtalerne inden for WTO's rammer gør fremskridt med hensyn til at acceptere USA's betingelser og garanterer ikke Den Europæiske Unions interesser og unionslandenes suverænitet. Når man taler om at straffe investeringer, tænker man naturligvis - og det ved De lige så godt som jeg, hr. Brittan - på Cuba og investeringer, som udføres af bestemte EU-lande i Cuba. Vi finder, at vi
It seems to us that the discussions at the WTO are resulting in greater acceptance of the premises put forward by the United States, and do not safeguard the interests of the European Union - the sovereignty of the countries of the European Union.
Europa-Parlamentets forhandlinger
It seems to us that we are going down a dangerous path, and the European Commission should re-register its objection with the WTO.
Souchet handlemåde er den, der hedder fasthed og sanktioner.
But the European Union is seeking to promote democratic change in Cuba by a proliferation of human, economic and political exchanges and trade.
Målet er det samme og opfattelserne er radikalt forskel lige, men det drejer sig om to indfaldsvinkler, hvor den ene i sig selv er lige så legitim som den anden.
The goal sought is the same, but the orientations are radically different. There are two approaches, each of which is as legitimate as the other.
Men: Det er USA's interne anliggender.
But in May this year, Mr Commissioner, you proceeded independently and we reprimanded you.
Det er dog stadig sådan, at anvendelsen af en lovgivning, der har sådanne eksterritoriale følgevirkninger, er totalt uacceptabel.
It nevertheless remains true that the use of legislation which has such extra-territorial repercussions is totally unacceptable.
Det forlig, som Kommissionen i dag gør gældende, ligner dog i højere grad en pragmatisk handling, efter at man har givet afkald på at opnå nogle principielle resultater.
Now, the Commission's compromise is closer to an exercise in pure pragmatism, since the Commission has given up on getting results by sticking to principle.
Den kan ikke skjule den totale mangel på grundlæggende indrømmelser fra amerikansk side.
This is a poor figleaf for the total absence of concessions on the American side.
Det forekommer mig, at vi næppe har grund til at rose os af den undtagelse, som de virksomheder, der er hjemmehørende i Den Europæiske Union, vil nyde godt af, når vi samtidig lader vores partnere fra tredjelandene stå alene over for det magtfulde Amerika.
We have hardly any thing to be proud of, in my view, as regards the exemption which will be made in respect of companies belonging to the European Union, when we leave our partners in the third countries to face the power of America alone.
Dette princip-nederlag ansporer tværtimod til flere af sådanne lovgivninger, og det er et forkert signal.
What do we need a WTO for, if it gets round its own rules in secret negotiations, and then even proposes to use the results of these as the basis for a multilateral investment agreement affecting us all?
Man beklager allerede, at byer eller stater har vedtaget bestemmelser med eksterritoriale konsekvenser, uden at Clintons regering har mulighed for at sætte sig imod dette.
It is already deplorable that towns or cities have made enactments whose consequences are extra-territorial, with out Mr Clinton's government having the resources to oppose them.
Og denne udbredelse er så meget mere foruroligende, fordi den ofte fremhæver det politisk korrekte i kampen for menneskerettigheder eller miljøbeskyttelse for i virke ligheden at fortrænge udenlandske firmaer og forhindre dem i at konkurrere om de amerikanske offentlige ind købskontrakter.
Proliferation is of all the more concern in that it very often advances the politically correct concern to fight for human rights or the protection of the environment, in. order, in reality, to winkle out foreign firms and prevent their competition in tenders for American govern ment contracts.
Amerikanerne søgte kun konfrontation i Cuba-sagen og ligger langt tilbage i forhold til Europa.
At least a significant number of developing nations must vote for it, in order for such an agreement to
Jeg frygter, at det ikke vil spare os for nye ærgelser.
It will not, I fear, prevent there being further discomfiture.
Formanden. - Jeg kan meddele, at jeg har modtaget seks beslutningsforslag, jf. forretningsordenens artikel 40, stk. 5. (')
President. - I have received six motions for resolutions under Rule 40(5) of the Rules of Procedure. (')
Det vil jeg udtrykkeligt beskytte Dem imod, for der var ikke blot tale om en retorisk overdrivelse, men det tjente frem for alt ikke formålet.
I want to leap immediately to your defence, because it was not merely rhetorical overstate ment, but above all did no service to the subject.
Brittan, Sir Leon, næstformand i Kommissionen. - (EN) Jeg vil gerne kort svare på nogle af de punkter, der er blevet fremført, og sætte sagen i perspektiv.
Brittan, Sir Leon, Vice-President of the Commission. - I would like to reply briefly to some of the points that have been made and put the matter in perspective.
Hvis jeg må være så fri, vil jeg gerne sige, at de synspunkter, som hr. Riibig og hr. Kittelmann har givet udtryk for, er tættere på virkeligheden end andre, vi har hørt.
If I may say so, the views put forward by Mr Rübig and Mr Kittelmann are closer to reality than some that we have heard.
Situationen er jo den følgende: Cuba er ikke noget demokratisk land, men USA's anstrengelser er folkeretsstridige, idet de går i den forkerte retning og straffer demokratiske lande som f.eks. lande i Den Europæiske Union.
The situation is as follows. Cuba is a democratic country, but the USA is trying, contrary to human rights, to penalize democratic countries such as those united in the European Union, because they are on the wrong road.
Vi har alle anset det for rigtigt at hidkalde WTO, ikke for at statuere et eksempel af hensyn til WTO's handledygtighed, men for at gennemføre vores ret.
We all considered it right to call in the WTO, not in order to make an example in the interests of the WTO's negotiating freedom and free international trade, but in order to enforce our legal rights.