Address by the Ambassador and the Head of the EU Delegation to Pakistan Mr Lars-Gunnar Wigemark

Transcription

1 Address by the Ambassador and the Head of the EU Delegation to Pakistan Mr Lars-Gunnar Wigemark On EU Nobel Peace Prize and Human Rights Day 10 December 2012 Mr Minister, Your Excellencies, Ladies and Gentlemen, Friends and Colleagues, Salamaat Malekum, Good afternoon. On behalf of the European Union and all the EU Member States represented here today, allow me to thank you all for taking time out of your busy schedules to attend this joint celebration of the international Human Rights Day and the European Union receiving the Nobel Peace Prize. The two occasions are very much linked, since peace and the absence of war is a precondition for maintaining and fully respecting human rights. History teaches us how in times of conflict and war human rights are trampled on. Europeans suffered horribly during centuries from intractable conflicts between their nations. Wars were fought in the name of religion and sectarianism, even when the real aim was territorial conquest or sheer greed. Although sharing the same origins, Catholics, Protestants and Orthodox Christians were often at each other s throats and the leaders of European countries used religion, ethnicity and common prejudice among nations to incite mothers and fathers to send their sons and daughters to the front lines. Anyone who has read the American historian Barbara Tuchman s Guns of August will know how the Austrian-Hungarian diplomat Metternich s balance of power concept maintaining stability through a military equilibrium and a web of bilateral security treaties, came crashing down on the eve of the 20 th Century amidst a cynical leadership across Europe. One of the lessons of the First World War was how these sovereign elites many of them related to one another were ready to put their national pride before saving millions of their young citizens being slaughtered in trenches across Europe.

2 Yet, twenty years later in the run up to a very different and even more brutal conflict some of the same fatal decisions were again taken by sovereign leaders in many cases elected with a popular mandate and, at least, a semblance of democracy. Without reconciliation and a shared respect for human right even democratically elected governments cannot avoid conflict and war. Indeed, history shows us that leaders elected in popular elections are not always champions of peace and may ultimately cause as much harm as leaders having assumed power by force, especially if they are ready to sacrifice the respect for human rights at the altar of national interests. Reconciliation between former archenemies, such as Germany and France but also between, for instance, Germany and Poland or more recently in the Balkans, lies at the heart of the European Union. While the EU is recognized as the world s largest trading block and single market, this economic cooperation is only underpinning a much broader political and humanistic objective: the pooling and sharing of sovereignty, respect for democratic values and a strong adherence to human rights by all of the European Union s 500 million citizens. This is why the EU will talk first and not last about human rights also when it comes to foreign relations with its international partners, including with Pakistan. No European country can become a member of the European Union without fully committing itself to these shared human rights values. You may have a growing economy, abundant energy resources and democratically elected government. But if you are not able to sign up to and prove that you are fully committed to meeting all of the European Union democratic and human rights standards, you will not be able to gain full membership. For the same reasons, the EU will not trade fully or at all with countries that do not respect human rights or pose a threat to international peace and security. And many such regimes are the one and the same. But even when our own Member States transgress our internal standards concerning, for instance, corruption and organized crime, the EU has sanctions, withholding parts of the shared resources until there is an improvement.

3 The founding fathers of the European Union may not have planned for the EU becoming an international entity with far flung relations across the globe. Theirs was a more narrow ambition focused on making sure that no major conflict would arise again between traditional enemies. They started modestly with a European Coal and Steel Community, which was later extended to other areas, including nuclear energy and trade. While this may have seemed mundane, or even hum-drum, any sharing of sovereignty was an audacious proposition on a continent in ruins after one of the most atrocious conflicts in the history of mankind. And the evolution of European integration during the past six decades demonstrates how this gradual approach, slowly breaking down national boundaries and facilitating the freedom of movement of goods, services, capital and people, does yield results. The granting of Nobel Peace Prize should serve as a reminder of the fundamental reasons for the European Union s establishment. It is a call for all current European leaders meeting in seemingly endless sessions over the future shape of the euro and common budgets that the European project is ultimately based on an agenda for peace and reconciliation and based on shared respect for fundamental human rights. The EU never was and should not be about whether or not to stand by or abandon Member States experiencing financial or other difficulties. Such solidarity goes without saying, a fact that is rarely understood outside the Union. When I first joined the EU in 1984 at the European Commission s Press and Information Office in West-Berlin as a young intern from a country that was not even member of the EU, the European project was saddled with controversies over agricultural policies creating mountains of surplus butter and literal lakes of table wine. Eurosclerosis was often used by the media to describe the stalemate and lack of vision in Brussels and among Member State. And Margret Thatcher was swinging her hand bag, asking for money back from the EU s joint budget. You may say that not much has changed. But Europe in the 1980s was also in throes of the Cold War and Berlin was divided by an ugly and dangerous wall covered by graffiti. And in this part of the world, the

4 Cold War spilled over into a proxy conflict whose consequences are still posing a serious threat to peace and security across South Asia. Nobody was expecting the Berlin wall to crumble just five years later; that is, no one except a former actor from California turned President of the United States and my dear poet wife who is sitting in the audience here. As a result the EU has evolved from twelve Member States to 27 soon to be 28. Yet, even in these trying times bold European leaders still maintained a vision for a united Europe and launched ambitions projects, such as the single European market and the first steps towards a common currency. Less than a decade later the bloody conflict in the former Yugoslavia served as a wake-up call for the EU Member States that without a common foreign and security policy Europe would not be able to avoid a repetition of genocidal conflicts on its own door step. Today more than ever the EU s foreign relations is not just about trade and aid. Yet we are not a military alliance and are unlikely to become one in the foreseeable future. Nor are we a nation state, or even a federation with a common government and a single capital. But we do stand for something more intangible a Union of countries sharing a fundamental respect for human rights and democratic standards. The EU is not a flawless entity and we need to constantly remind ourselves of our humble origins and how the Union was conceived as a peace and reconciliation project. This is especially relevant when extremism and violations of human rights are again rearing their ugly heads in parts of Europe. They are provided a fertile ground in times of economic hardship and mass unemployment. However, we should resist attempts to divide and conquer a peaceful entity that has been carefully crafted during decades of negotiations between Member States and the EU institutions such as the European Commission and the European Parliament. The EU defies comparisons and is constantly redefining itself. It is "a real time experiment" in bringing together nations who once saw war as the ultimate means to resolve disputes and autarchy as the best way to protect their economic interests.

5 And though it in many ways is a uniquely European project, it can be a source of inspiration also for other important regions with a history of war and a need for reconciliations such as South Asia. The stand-off between Pakistan and India is not unlike the traditional enmity between France and Germany. Shortly after arriving in Pakistan I recall spending at least half an hour at the Islamabad Club trying to convince a retired Pakistani general that there really was not a risk anymore of a new war between Germany and France. He remained unconvinced. How could two nations having fought such fierce wars decide to bury the hatchet and live peacefully together? Surely, he said, there must be people on both sides of the Rhein, who would want to rekindle the old animosities? Yes, it is difficult to translate the process of reconciliation from one region to another. Afghanistan is another example where peace and reconciliation is much in demand, although outside models may not apply very well. To begin with, I think the very term sovereignty needs to be examined in a broader regional context and in a forward-looking manner. In a more global environment, the cross-border, sharing of common resources such as water and energy will become increasingly important as all countries on the Sub-continent continue to grow and develop. The EU experience shows that clinging to sovereignty is not the answer especially in a region where historical border may have drawn by straight ruler on a map which does not reflect the ethnic or language barriers. Also, if everyone agrees to adhere to a common standard on human rights, a significant source of conflict will be reduced on both sides of the border. You may recall how the human rights of citizens in disputed territories on both sides of the Rhein River were used as a reason to go to war. Respecting human rights and democratic values across borders is a positive sum game not a negative one. It also increases the prospects for peace and stability. In conclusion, the Peace Prize is a first and foremost a reminder for the EU to return to its basics, in particular how we have managed to develop

6 a model of cooperation where conflict and war is now unthinkable for our next generation of leaders. It is for this reason that EU leaders have decided to donate the price money to projects for children affected by conflict and war. The needs are enormous, but the leadership and vision of young people, like Malala Yousafzai here in Pakistan, show us how each individual s ability to act courageously and with wisdom can inspire thousands to do more. So on behalf of all the EU Member States represented here today, I dedicate this year s Peace Prize to all the girls and young women here in Pakistan, striving to fulfill their basic human right of education and being treated as equal human beings with dreams and ideals for a better tomorrow. Thank you for your attention.