Parliamentary questions
8 June 2011 E-005466/2011
Question for written answer
to the Commission
Rule 117
Marietje Schaake (ALDE) , Kristiina Ojuland (ALDE) , Johannes Cornelis van Baalen (ALDE) and Ivo Vajgl (ALDE)
Subject: World War II landmines in Egypt blocking socioeconomic development
Today 25 May 2011 the Commission published a communication on the review of the European neighbourhood policy (ENP). This review was heavily influenced by the recent revolts in the Arab region, in particular in Egypt and Tunisia. As both countries are now in transition towards democracy, on the basis of the rule of law, respect for human rights and socioeconomic reforms and recovery, the EU has committed itself to becoming a structural supporter and partner of both countries. In doing so the EU has promised more than EUR 1.2 billion in extra financial support. The revolts in both countries have exposed the failed past policies of the EU (in the entire region). The new ENP needs to mark a new start for cooperation.
Regarding Egypt, the Commission has failed to address an even longer-standing problem which is still preventing a large part of the country from achieving true development and socioeconomic improvement. This concerns the problem of landmines remaining from the Second World War. The EU, and in particular the Member States responsible, must act.
1. Is the Commission aware of the UN mission to Egypt in 2000 which aimed to diagnose the problem caused by the existence on a large scale in the country's north-western coastal region of remnants of explosives mostly put there by the British (the APL company included) during World War II? If not, why not?
2. Can it provide an overview of the action taken by the EU or the Member States to address this problem in Egypt and how successful or unsuccessful these actions were? If not, why not?
3. Does the Commission agree that explosive remnants, in addition to causing loss of human life, pose a serious obstacle to the exploration of natural resources in the region, blocking its potential socioeconomic development by forbidding access to an area amounting to approximately 22 % of the total territory of the country? If not, why not?
4. Does the Commission agree that developing Egypt's north-west coast and its desert hinterland would reflect positively on the country's macroeconomic indicators and would contribute to improving living and socioeconomic conditions, particularly in the currently overcrowded Nile Valley and Delta? If not, why not?
5. Will the Commission push for increased clearance operations in the region and ask the Member States concerned, especially the UK, to step up their efforts in terms of demining, victim assistance and mine-risk education? If not, why not? Should the answer be affirmative, what concrete steps will the Commission take?
Please find the answer here.
