WRITTEN QUESTION E-1480/99 by Lucio Manisco (GUE/NGL) to the Commission. Reconstruction of the Danube bridges destroyed during the war in Kosovo.
20. 6. 2000 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 170 E/21 (2000/C 170 E/021) WRITTEN QUESTION E-1480/99 by Lucio Manisco (GUE/NGL) to the Commission (1 September 1999) Subject: Reconstruction of the Danube bridges destroyed during the war in Kosovo One of the disastrous effects of the NATO war is that the destruction of bridges over the Danube has brought the entire regionís economy to a halt and has had a particularly serious effect on Bulgarian and Romanian trade. 1. What action does the Commission intend to take in order to ensure that reconstruction of the Danube bridges destroyed during the war begins immediately? 2. What type and what amount of aid does the Commission intend to allocate in order to prevent any further damage to the economic relations between the countries in the region and between those countries and the EU Member States? Answer given by Mr Patten on behalf of the Commission (15 October 1999) 1. The Commission is aware of the important economic implications of the destruction of the bridges over the Danube for the riparian countries. It affects not just the bilateral economic relations between Serbia and neighbouring countries but also affects other countries along the river which have traditionally used the Danube as a navigation route between the Rhine and the Black Sea. Concerns have also been expressed recently regarding the potential for flooding upstream. Given the current political regime in Belgrade, and the sanctions against the Republic of Serbia, the Council has ruled out, under the present circumstances, any assistance from the Community, other than of purely humanitarian nature. There is therefore no scope for Commission involvement in reconstructing the bridges. The Honourable Member should be aware that, according to information made available to the Com- mission, the authorities in Belgrade are putting pressure on the international community to lift the sanctions and seeking to gain membership into the international financial institutions, by using the reconstruction of the bridges and the reopening of the Serbian sections of the Danube to navigability as a counterpart. The Commission is aware that the Danube commission is examining possibilities for achieving a solution which addresses the concerns of the Danube states. The Commission is nevertheless very conscious of the fact that any support provided by the international community to this end could be easily manipulated by the Milosevic regime and presented as a successful step towards the lifting of sanctions or recognition of the regime by the international community. This has to be avoided. The Commission is substantially contributing to the transformation process in the region via the 2. Phare and Obnova programmes. In parallel, and following the Kosovo crisis, the Commission has made available an amount of € 392 million in form of humanitarian aid to the whole region. Under the Phare programme, Bulgaria, Hungary, Romania, Slovakia and Slovenia, inter alia, receive support for their preparations for accession while Albania, Bosnia and Herzegovina and the Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia (FYROM) receive support for their transition to democratic reforms and economic transformation. Of particular relevance are the cross border co-operation programmes which, by recognising the specific problems faced by border regions, aim to promote co-operation between countries and regions along the borders of the Community and the Central and Eastern European countries (CEECs), with primary focus on financing infrastructure and environmental projects. The Obnova programme is a Community initiative for the rehabilitation and reconstruction of Bosnia and Herzegovina, Croatia, the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia (FRY) and FYROM. The main focus has been on infrastructure and other regional co-operation and good neighbourliness projects, the rebuilding of C 170 E/22 Official Journal of the European Communities EN 20. 6. 2000 facilities damaged in the conflicts, the consolidation of democracy and civil society, the return of refugees and the preparation for economic recovery. At present, while the FRY is eligible for support under the Obnova programme, Serbia is only, for the reasons mentioned above, receiving humanitarian assistance, democratisation assistance and support for independent media. Of particular relevance has been the action implemented by the Commission to relieve the cost related to the refugee influx in the neighbour countries, where an amount of € 100 million has been made available, in form of budgetary assistance, to Albania (€ 62 million), FYROM (€ 25 million) and the Republic of Montenegro (€ 13 million). (2000/C 170 E/022) WRITTEN QUESTION E-1483/99 by Armando Cossutta (GUE/NGL) to the Council (1 September 1999) Subject: Initiatives intended to bring about the liberation of Cyprus On 20 July 1974, Turkey invaded and occupied the northern part of Cyprus. The last 25 years have witnessed arbitrary occupation based on force and oppression and involving a constant and systematic violation of international law and human rights: thousands of people lost their lives as a consequence of the invasion, the invaders have expelled hundreds of thousands of Greek Cypriots from their territory and the same thing has happened to several thousand Turkish Cypriots as a result of systematic ethnic cleansing (the very same ethnic cleansing which these days, as a response to the tragic events in Kosovo, arouses indignation in so many noble spirits). None of the UN resolutions calling for a peaceful solution to the crisis has had the slightest effect on account of Turkeyís intransigence, an attitude which is backed by the USA. 1. Does the Council not think that it should act independently within any appropriate international organisation in order to help re-establish international legality and restore the human rights which have been violated as a result of the relations between Turkey and Cyprus? 2. Does the Council not consider it both urgent and essential for it to take an active part in the proper preparation of an international conference on the Middle East which would enable a realistic (in both its methods and its timetable) programme to be drawn up, so as to allow ácrisis hot spotsí ü which, if allowed to smoulder, may lead to one huge conflagration ü to be coded in good time? Reply (2 December 1999) The Council believes that the best way forward in the Cyprus question, including the situation of human rights, is to push ahead with the search for a solution on the basis of the UN Security Council Resolutions. The Council welcomes the 9/10 June G-8 Summit conclusions and the UN Security Council Resolutions 1250 and 1251 of 29 June 1999 and considers that the invitation to UN talks this autumn without preconditions, together with the Resolutions, have brought about new momentum. The Presidency will continue supporting, together with other EU partners and international players, the efforts of the UNSG, Mr Annan, to reduce tensions and to contribute to progress towards a negotiated settlement. The Union also considers that progress towards EU accession and towards a just and viable solution to the Cyprus problem should reinforce each other. It believes that Cyprusís accession to the EU should benefit all communities and help bring about civil peace and reconciliation on the island. It regrets that it was not possible to achieve a political solution in time for the start of accession negotiations. The Presidency continues to work (in accordance with the conclusions of the European Council of Luxembourg) for the involvement of representatives of the Turkish-Cypriot community in the EU accession negotiations