EUR-Lex Access to European Union law

Back to EUR-Lex homepage

This document is an excerpt from the EUR-Lex website

Document 92001E001376

WRITTEN QUESTION E-1376/01 by Michl Ebner (PPE-DE) to the Council. Contacts between Brussels and President Mugabe of Zimbabwe.

UL C 81E, 4.4.2002, p. 22–23 (ES, DA, DE, EL, EN, FR, IT, NL, PT, FI, SV)

European Parliament's website

92001E1376

WRITTEN QUESTION E-1376/01 by Michl Ebner (PPE-DE) to the Council. Contacts between Brussels and President Mugabe of Zimbabwe.

Official Journal 081 E , 04/04/2002 P. 0022 - 0023


WRITTEN QUESTION E-1376/01

by Michl Ebner (PPE-DE) to the Council

(21 May 2001)

Subject: Contacts between Brussels and President Mugabe of Zimbabwe

It is now more than 20 years since Zimbabwe became independent. Current press reports about that country make dismal reading not least with regard to President Mugabe. He supports black occupation of white-owned farms, the fuels racial hatred in order to divert attention away from the extreme social deprivation into which he has led his country. In a television interview to mark his 77th birthday, he said that he would not retire until the whites had been defeated. Draconian campaigns against the independent judiciary and the press, as well as widespread intimidation of the opposition, are everyday occurrences. The current situation in Zimbabwe is the result of long years of misrule, for which President Mugabe and his ZANU-PF party are responsible.

The Belgian Foreign Minister, Mr Louis Michel, and the French President, Mr Jacques Chirac, seem to have no qualms about cosying up to the President of Zimbabwe. Both of them officially welcomed the despot in Brussels and Paris respectively on 6 March 2001. Mr Michel and President Chirac were among the loudest proponents of the policy which led to 14 of the EU Member States imposing sanctions on Austria, making a great show of their concern for democracy and human rights, yet they welcomed President Mugabe with open arms.

Can the Council indicate whether or not:

- the European Union loses more than a little credibility when it adopts such a cavalier attitude towards democracy and human rights,

- it should take measures to avoid such faux pas with a view pursuing a consistent foreign policy,

- sanctions should also be imposed on politicians who manifestly cultivate such chummy relationships with a despotic regime?

Reply

(21 November 2001)

The meeting that took place on 5 March 2001 in Brussels between the Belgian Prime Minister, Mr Guy Verhofstadt, the Belgian Foreign Minister, Mr Louis Michel and President Mugabe of Zimbabwe was organised at the request of President Mugabe.

The private meeting that took place on 6 March 2001 in Paris between the President of the French Republic, Mr Jacques Chirac and President Mugabe of Zimbabwe was requested by President Mugabe. The Council was neither instrumental in the setting up of either of these meetings, nor did it participate in them.

Since the beginning of March this year the EU has decided to enter into a constructive, critical and balanced dialogue with Zimbabwe guided by the spirit of Article 8 of the Cotonou Agreement. The EU started this dialogue with the objective of exchanging information and fostering mutual understanding on issues which the EU considers to be fundamental in the relationship between the parties, and which are also covered by the text of the above Agreement (Article 9).

At its meeting on 25 June 2001, the Council noted the lack of substantial progress in the ongoing political dialogue with the Government of Zimbabwe and expressed its deep concern over recent developments in that country. It stressed that as a first priority the dialogue should yield rapid and tangible results in a number of areas (an end to political violence, full access for the EU, concrete action to protect the freedom of the media, independence of the judiciary and respect for its decisions, and an end to the illegal occupation of properties).

The Council agreed to closely follow developments in these areas, as well as on overall questions regarding the rule of law, economic policies and the land reform, over the following two months, and to take appropriate measures if substantial progress had not been made.

Top