МАЙДАН - За вільну людину у вільній країні


Архіви Форумів Майдану

Zachem vrat pro Evroparlament?

12/02/2004 | kolia
Ia ponimaiu chto nado podymat boevoi dukh, no zachem lgat? Tolko chto proveril EC site i site Evroparlamenta. Ne vizhu iz vsekh novostei ni odnogo upominaniya o tom chto Ukrainu tuda primut dazhe, kak Syn govorit, esli “oranzhivye” s “golubymi” ne budut tserimonitsia.

http://www.europarl.eu.int/press/index_en.htm

Iz vsekh poslednikh novostei kotorye tam est, paru tsitat khotiaby otdalenno kosaiushikhsia “ne tserimonitsia” i chelenstva v EC.:

"...Ukraine, she said, had a clear prospect of good future relations with the EU under the Partnership and Cooperation Agreement of 1998. This was part of the European Neighbourhood Policy, which aimed to have a ring of friends around the EU, with tailor-made cooperation with each country, leading to the possibility of partial participation in the internal market. Membership of the EU was not on the table today, she said, but no doors were being closed. The Commission would continue to work closely with Ukraine as the historic process of transformation unfolded....

...As to the way forward, Mr Nicolai stated there would have to be a legal and constitutional answer to the crisis that reflects the will of all the Ukrainian people. As he put it, not all the complaints about the second round of voting could be resolved and we need a new second round of elections in Ukraine; this may be the only way out. These elections must be carried out in a free and fair manner with a free media and free voting without any outside pressure. The EU, he said, did not support one candidate over another but stressed the importance of the territorial integrity of the country..."

"There is fine line between an uprising and a bloodbath and I call for a peaceful resolution to the process."

Відповіді

  • 2004.12.02 | Olena

    Сьогоднішній репорт вже викладено на сайті (лінк)

    Зверніть увагу, про що говорить Тарасюк.


    http://www2.europarl.eu.int/omk/sipade2?PUBREF=-//EP//TEXT+PRESS+NR-20041202-1+0+DOC+XML+V0//EN&LEVEL=2&NAV=S#SECTION1


    New elections in Ukraine would have to meet strict conditions

    The EP Foreign Affairs Committee held a special meeting on Wednesday afternoon to discuss the crisis in Ukraine with Mr TARASHUK, Chairman of the European Affairs Committee of the Ukrainian Parliament. After expressing his gratitude for the EP's solidarity with Ukraine and joking that "orange is also the official colour of the Dutch Presidency" - many MEPs were sporting orange scarves and ties, the colour being worn by Mr Yushchenko's supporters - Mr Tarashuk adopted a more serious note in speaking to MEPs about the situation in his country: "This is not a power struggle but a struggle between two major concepts: EU, Christian values and criminal values", he declared. He described two ways out of the current turmoil: "There is, on the one hand, a legal solution. The Supreme Court can consider the complaints and recommend to the Central Electoral Commission (CEC) that there be a recount of the votes. On the other hand, there is a political solution, that should be led by outgoing President Kuchma".

    The opposition sets out conditions for a re-run

    Mr Tarashuk stressed that, despite the flawed results, the opposition was ready to accept a re-run of the elections "under certain conditions": a new CEC should be set up, the current government should resign in order to create equal conditions for both candidates and new elections would require "heavy supervision by the OSCE" with a major presence of international observers. Several MEPs then asked what more the EU could do, aside from taking part in the electoral observation missions? Mr Tarashuk replied that the EU could provide political and financial support but also offer Ukraine the prospect of EU membership and "impose sanctions on all those who have been involved in falsifying the results, in the same way that the United States has imposed sanctions".

    Prospect of EU membership

    "You have the legitimacy to ask for EU membership", said Marie Anne ISLER-BEGUIN (Greens/EFA, FR). She then asked Mr Tarashuk to comment on the EU's Neighbourhood Policy. "If this policy is a transition to a new stage of relations between Ukraine and the EU, we can accept it", he replied. But if it does not hold out "the prospect of membership", it is not acceptable. "If we had offered the prospect of membership sooner to Ukraine, would this crisis ever have happened?" inquired Thijs BERMAN (PES, NL). "Such a prospect would have forced the ball into Ukraine's court", answered Mr Tarashuk, adding "We had no grounds for speaking about the prospect of membership".

    Is Ukraine's territorial integrity threatened?

    Several MEPs, including José SALAFRANCA (EPP-ED, ES), Monika BENOVA (PES, SK) and Cecilia MALMSTROM (ALDE, SE) asked Mr Tarashuk to comment on the recent talk of secession that seeks to destabilise Ukraine's territorial integrity and lead to partition of the country. To what extent is this a real threat, they wondered. "The separationist statements are speculation and intimidation by Yanukovitch. According to the Constitution, the only legal way of changing the state's territory is through a nation-wide referendum", said Mr Tarashuk. "People appointed by the president are behind this irresponsible behaviour", he added.


Copyleft (C) maidan.org.ua - 2000-2024. Цей сайт підтримує Громадська організація Інформаційний центр "Майдан Моніторинг".