MIL OSI Translation. Government of the Republic of France statements from French to English – Posted on June 30, 2018
Topic : Europe
Ladies and Gentlemen, good morning.
It falls to me to explain in a few words the conclusions of the Council and the two days have gone by and the answer of course to all of your questions.
This Board was first, and I hope that we do not forget, a Council also advanced on many subjects, that France was included on the agenda of the eu and for a Europe that protects more and take action.
In the area of defence first of all, we have released new progress with the agreement on the pilot project of the european Fund for the defence and the launch of the initiative european intervention, on the 25th of June, nine countries, including France and Germany. This is a proposal I made at The Sorbonne in the fall of last year. Europe has thus, by this new advance, of a strategic capability, a true strategic autonomy and intervention. So that in a year, Europe has advanced in the field of defence, as it had never done since the 50’s. Ever. The creation of a structured cooperation, the european fund and now the european initiative for intervention.
This will allow for a concrete cooperation in upstream planning and analysis of the threats, notably between the military of the most committed and efficient in Europe. We were able to exchange on this point yesterday with the secretary general of NATO. All of these initiatives, the european register and are compatible with our commitment in NATO. But Europe has today a force in the material, which did not exist until then. This is, to my eyes, the proper response to the redial geopolitical world, but also a cement of european cohesion policy, where too many countries felt that Europe was not what protected really. Things are now on the point of change.
Secondly, we have also referred to the business case and I am pleased on this point, as we had prepared to Sofia, that Europe proved to be perfectly firm and united in the face of unacceptable, an american attack against its ally the european. We recalled the firmness and engaged Europe, which must not remain passive and suffer the trade tensions, in a reform agenda of the WTO that we push and that we will continue to grow in the coming months, particularly in the context of the G20.
Here, too, we had proposed a few months ago, an in-depth reform of the WTO to respond to current malfunctions in the trade multilateralism, rather than a growing divide, which is today the american proposal. These proposals for reform of the WTO, acceleration of procedures, the reform of the conflict resolution procedure, have been taken at european level and will therefore be brought in the agenda.
We have also, in the digital domain, recalled the necessity of a quick agreement, by the end of the year, as requested by Germany and France, on a fair taxation of large companies, as well as the establishment of a european Agency for the disruptive innovation.
These points are, in my eyes, important advances, because there are in our european political life – I’ll get back to it – crises, moments of tension. But we won’t make Europe forward only if we know also in the long term grow projects that initiatives we are taking and not simply respond to crises. On these subjects, which are essential for our sovereignty, military, economic, financial, Europe continues to move forward, to take useful decisions, and it is the agenda of the French, who is also here pushed.
We also this morning discussed the Brexit, in the presence of Michel BARNIER, whose Twenty-Seven member States that were present acknowledged the excellent work and the commitment to europe. With a simple message : we cannot wait any longer. The withdrawal agreement, which was well-advanced, is confronted with the question of ireland, and must be finalized in a few weeks, by the fall. Michel BARNIER, on behalf of Twenty-Seven, a reasonable proposal in this regard. It is important now to seize it.
The second major topic on which I wanted to obviously come back and that has occupied a good part of the current european situation, it is the one of migration. We live on this subject, as we have experienced on other, a few years ago, troubled times and of those times when Europe needs to find the unity and effectiveness. If we look with lucidity the subject of the great migrations, it has experienced a real crisis, around the year 2015, with massive arrivals of people displaced mainly in the Near and Middle East, strong tension with the arrivals coming by road from the central Mediterranean sea, from Mare Nostrum and the last year and arrived first in Europe, is greatly reduced, if I don’t take the road of the central Mediterranean, it is reduced to 80% this year compared to last year, because there has already been a job, a strong commitment.
I am not degrading the migratory pressure that there is today in Europe, precisely because of all these arrivals and we have a little over a million and a half people who have arrived on european soil since the beginning of this crisis.
However, this situation will not be resolved overnight. In the long term, we will continue to have a migration pressure, given the inequalities that exist between Europe and Africa, given the demographic dynamics of Africa, given the conflict zones, diverse and varied in Africa, the Near and Middle East.
It must, therefore, on this subject give no promises ephemeral. Nothing. I know on this subject how much emotion can take us. It touches me like you. But the emotion of a day should not guide action, an action that in the long term, we must build.
This action in the long term, in my eyes, she must allow, firstly, a Europe at the height of its History and its values. There are things on which Europe cannot, must not compromise its main principles, those who have made it, who are, for France, in its Constitution, I think in particular the right to asylum, the protection of women and men who are at a life-threatening risk in their country because of their religious or political opinions or on account of the war situation in their country.
The right of asylum, this is not the whole of the migratory phenomenon and it is important to remember. This does not mean to welcome all people, regardless of the circumstances of their arrival. But nothing we do not need to compromise on this principle.
The second element that must guide us, it is the effectiveness. There is a european cohesion to hold and, therefore, a legitimate protection of our borders, a legitimate organization, for national cohesion will not give in and that we do not allow ourselves to climb the fears and the extremes in the different european countries. Therefore, do not assign anything to irénismes podium. We must have an answer that is explainable, acceptable by our people. Finally, it is efficiency that is essential in the long term to prevent these movements and to respond to this challenge.
In the Face of the situation as we know it today, there were several choices. The choice of national policy and nationalist reaction, it was pushed by some. He had to lead mechanically to the absence of an agreement, it was the threat repeated. There was on the other side the choice of the cooperation, of the work of a european, a european agreement to move forward. It is this second approach that has prevailed in this Board, and I am glad of it.
We have not yielded to the fascination of the worst. We returned to facts, the essential elements of responsibility and solidarity that must continue to build our Europe, and we’ve been able to build – I think I can say – an important agreement, which is only one step, based on a full agenda, as we wished.
This agreement is built around three components : the external component, the protection of borders and internal solidarity. The external component was part of the proposals of the presidency and allowed to record the establishment of platforms of landing, that we support collectively, and that we, in fact, already practiced. This is exactly what France, with a few others, was able to perform at the end of last summer in Libya, what we had also practiced with the Niger. This requires the agreement of the countries in question. This implies an important work, on the one hand with the UNHCR and the IOM, but also with the african Union and all stakeholders.
We have been able to do it several times, at the end of last summer, during the crisis last winter, I want to salute here the role that the african Union had been following the terrible images that we had seen the camps in Libya. It is therefore in this context that this proposal is made. These platforms landing have an interest, they help to protect more people, as they avoid taking the risk of crossing in particular the Mediterranean, and they allow, in a structured framework by the UNHCR and the IOM, to go provide protection, and recognize, deal with issues of asylum application that may exist, sending our teams on site.
It is obvious that on this issue, every time it is under the authority of the country concerned that the implementation can be done. On this point, we have also endorsed a strengthening of our actions with the different security forces, I am particularly referring to the coast guard libyans in libyan waters, which continue to intervene and that, for a year, have increased their interventions, which is also an effective way of preventing unseaworthy vessels, and all the risks that are taken by some people, and better protect the common border.
The second axis of our discussions was, of course, the strengthening of the common border in Europe. We have recalled already last Sunday – we have reconfirmed our commitment to, again, accelerate the deployment of Frontex and of the additional forces.
We have treated at length the problem of the country of first arrival. On this topic, for me it is also one of the important points of the agreement that has been found and that is based on a proposal that we had made, with the Spanish, during the visit of the Prime minister SANCHEZ.
What is it ? Since the beginning of the political crisis in italy, the question is raised whether we can clear the country of responsibility. This is not consistent with the Agreements of Dublin. We posted yesterday that the agreements continued to exist and remain, and that the concept of country of first arrival could not be deleted.
Nevertheless, we provide a response in terms of solidarity, this responsibility is reaffirmed through the centres monitored in Europe. These centres have an interest in helping the countries of first arrival to organize, with funding, a european organization, the reception of migrants, the instruction folders, and the deportation to their country of origin persons who are not admitted to the protection of asylum. Today, the burden, in fact, is the responsibility of the country at large.
The Greek Prime minister has expressed on this subject very clearly to say – I think he will repeat itself with even more clarity – that he was in favor of this device and that he was going to apply it. When one sees what Greece precisely organizes, carries, these centers respond to a solidarity that is necessary, without changing the rules of collective responsibility.
It is a response, in my eyes, to the Italian request, it is a compromise that we have found : we don’t change the rules of the international law maritime, we do not change the rules of liability which prevail in our law. But we bring more solidarity and, through these centres, controlled and also more effective for the return to the country of origin.
Finally, we re-launched the work on the Dublin system, by reinforcing the responsibility of countries of entry and european solidarity, by accepting, again, at the time of the registration rules on the one hand and flexibility on the terms and conditions, while being firm on the principle. But especially in reaffirming an agenda to finalize quickly the guidelines which are now almost ready and in the best time the seven guidelines that we must conclude. It is, in our view, a priority, if we want to finalize all of the issues that are ours, this will be the most effective response.
This agreement, you see, on the one hand allows Europe not to come out or his role or the story. Would we have failed to find an agreement or to prefer national solutions, or decide to betray our principles with technical arrangements that are incompatible with these, it would have been unacceptable to France.
We have reached an agreement that is consistent with our values, which brings elements of answer in terms of responsibility and solidarity, and that allows us to move forward.
This agreement is an agreement to build, it does nothing to him only the crisis that we are experiencing and which has components largely political, but it allows you to meet, continue to meet in acts of the crisis that we live in.
And because it tackles a full agenda, external protective boundaries and internal, and it allows you to bring elements of response to the political crises that we live : in Italy, compared to the movement primary, or in Germany as in other countries relative to the secondary movement.
Can I come back on this point in detail in response to your questions if you want, but I consider that this agreement is an important step and our action, since it is now the most important thing, may in this context be both effective and consistent with our principles.
Finally, we had a discussion this morning very important on the reform of the euro area. We have identified in the conclusions of the lines of work which are based precisely on the franco-German agreement of Meseberg
This work is going to shatter during the next few months and we have asked the president TUSK to propose precisely to the Council a schedule of work up to the end of the year, to finalize these discussions.
These discussions will allow us to make concrete progress with already of the first decisions of principle as a result of the franco-German agreement, on the one hand to finalise the banking union and deepening, with inter alia the establishment of a safety net that will protect companies and investors, and will enable a better functioning of the financial system and european banking, which is essential for better growth.
But on the other hand also, with a new roadmap and a capacity of european stabilization, a true budget of the euro zone with precisely this function of convergence and investment on the basis of the franco-German proposal of Meseberg.
We will now, in the weeks and months to come, at the level of ministers of Economy and Finance and at the level of heads of State and government of the discussions which will be of technical characters, but which are eminently political, to conclude by the end of the year this process
Here I want to conclude by commending the excellent work of Jean-Claude JUNCKER and Donald TUSK in this political moment to be difficult, and also congratulate the commitment of Boyko BORISOV led the Bulgarian chairmanship in preserving our unity, enabling concrete progress on the work posted, copyright, defence, and wish the same commitment and the same success in the Chancellor KURZ who takes over on Sunday.
And I finally want to acknowledge also the commitment of chancellor MERKEL, with whom we have built historic strides in Meseberg on June 19, which allowed to move forward and to structure the discussion on the euro zone and with that, we have prepared each and every moment of this summit in the same european spirit.
I thank you and I will now answer all of your questions.
EDITOR’S NOTE: This article is a translation. Please accept our apologies should the grammar and/or sentence structure is not be perfect.
