english french german greek italian lithuanian russian serbian spanish
Haupt arrow newsitems arrow France: Fake News on Polls +Foggy Replies to New Risks on BioEthics =Trend for NO in IVF/LGBT Debate

France: Fake News on Polls +Foggy Replies to New Risks on BioEthics =Trend for NO in IVF/LGBT Debate

Geschrieben von ACM
Freitag, 12 Januar 2018

*Strasbourg/Press Club/Angelo Marcopolo/- The Replies to "Eurofora" and Other Journalists' Questions in a  Press Conference by the "European Forum on BioEthics"' President, Professor Israel Nisand, organized by Strasbourg's Press Club, as well as a closer Analysis on the Facts about Latest Polls, (much Publicized by pro-IVF/LGBTI and even pro-Surrogate Mothers'+Euthanasia's fans), at the Beginning of a Crucial Year for French State's Decisions on Artificial Procreation of Human Beings etc., raise Serious Question-Marks about "Fake News" on such Polls and Vague Responses on New Risks for BioEthics, which might Explain a recent Trend towards More People than in the Past supporting now a "NO" to IVF/Artificial Insemination even to Homosexuals, (while, on the Contrary, some Push the Move even to Surrogate Mothers, Euthanasia/Assisted Suicide, etc)...






First of all, it's an Undeniable Fact that the People are quasi-Unanimous about the "Importance" that have Nowadays, the Topical Issues about "Artificial Procreation" of Human Beings, the "New Genetic Technologies", the "End of Life", the "storage of (Personal) Medical Data", etc.: Polls give about 90% against only some 10% on this point.

But, also an Unquestionable Fact seems to be a Recent Trend, for More People than in the Past, Towards Opposing Now the Artificial Procreation even for Homosexual Couples of Women (Lesbians), Contrary to what some Lobbies had notoriously pushed on 2017 the current Government to consider possibly doing in 2018/2019, on the occasion of a scheduled, regular Review of the Legislation on BioEthics :

- F.ex.,  + 4 % More People than Before, Now Oppose the First Point (IVF/Lesbians), and according also to anOther Polls, (Both by "IFOP", from December 2017, published on January 2018), the Number of Opposed People has Grown even Further, up to + 5% More than what they were on July 2017.  

+ At the Same Time, the Number of those who Were "Absolutely Favorable" to Legalize Artificial Procreation of Children for Lesbian couples Falls Dramatically, from 30% Back on July 2017, Down to Only 22% Now, i.e. a Diminution of - 8 % Less than before ! (And such a Low percentage for that group had Not been seen for Many Years in France : since Back on 2013)...

In consequence, these People appear to have Started Recently to Hesitate, since they seem Transfered among those who would be Merely "RATHER Favorable", (instead of "Absolutely", Contrary to the Past).


=> WHY this Surprizing Recent Trend (which is also Noted by "IFOP" itself (But Scandalously Ommitted by most Establishment Medias who stick to the Artificial Procreation/Lesbian lobbies) ?

It can't be excluded that it might be due to a recently Rising and Higher Awareness and Consciousness of the People about BioEthical Issues, which would be Normal Each Time that the relevant Legislation is Reviewed, as it seems that it had Already happened in the Past :

F.ex., between 2004 and 2013, the Majority of the People had radically Changed, from a Previous Small "YES" with 51% against 48%, Towards a Strong "NO" to previous demands to Legalize Artificial Procreation of Children for Lesbians, with 53% against only 47%, (as the History of IFOP's Polls show in the Past).

>>> But, Today's New Facts clearly Converge towards anOther, much More Probable, (or even Additional) Explanation, as it results from the Replies given to "Eurofora"s and anOther NewsMedias', Different but relevant Questions, which Both point, indirectly but surely, towards People's perception of recently Growing big Risks, mainly due to some Far-Reaching and Controversial New Technologies, which notoriously Pose Huge New Challenges to Humanity  (Comp. Supra) :

- "Eurofora" asked President Nisand, in substance, whether he Believed that possible Risks of various eventual Abuses, IF the Artificial Procreation of Children was Legalized even for numerous Lesbians' couples, Could be Faced with Efficient SafeGuards, or Not. And, on this occasion, we observed also the New US Administration of President Don Trump's recent Decision to Design and Fund a New "Security Strategy", including "BioWarfare" (according also to UNO's International Convention on Biological Weapons) , "Bio-Terrorism", and even possible Abuse of some New Bio-Technologies, including by the Private sector, asking Nisand if he thought that EU should also Develop a relevant Scientific/Technological Research to Invent and produce such Safeguards, (f.ex. in the current Context of EU's Security and Defence Policy "Boom", where Medical Issues were already Included, at a Collective Decision taken by 25 EU Member Countries and endosed by their Heads of State/Govrnment at the Latest EU Summit in Brussels : Comp., f.ex.: ..., etc).

 - Professor Nisand's Reply to the above-mentioned Question by "Eurofora", was, in Substance, to -Clearly, but Simply- "Ensure" us that, in such a case, "Everything Will be Done" in order to Prevent and/or Face any such eventual Risks.  

 + When Asked by "Eurofora" if he "Firmly Believed that this would be Technically Feasible", Nisand, briefly but Clearly Replied with a Positive - "Yes !".

- However, he did Not Mention, on this occasion, Anyone of those "Measures" which might Safeguard Human Rights' of all involved, as well as Humankind as such, from possible relevant Abuses. Neither did he gave Any Concrete Example which might have Illustrated his claim, on such a Topical and Serious Issue.

+ Moreover, after a relevant Question raised Afterwards by a Collegue Journalist from a Local French Media (specialized on Medical Science/Technology Issues), about What could be done in order to Alleviate Concerns of several People about the Risks of Abuse, in this area of Artificial Procreation of Children,  by some New Bio-Technologies such as the "Gene-Editing" "CRISP-cas9", (where natural Human Genes can be easily "Cut" and "Replaced" by Other, Different Genes), things much became Foggy :

 - Indeed, Professor Nisand, (who is, personally, an Experienced Specialist in Gynecology), in his subsequent Reply to that Question, apparently trying to be as Honest as possible on the Main Facts, added that, as a matter also of General Principle, in cases of so Radical Technological Innovations in the History of Humankind, "We shall probably see Both the Best, and the Worse !", from that New Gene-Editing Technology... - "However, in the End, we shall Manage, as we did, until now, even for the Nuclear" Bombs and Energy...

 >>> But, precisely, many People, it seems, do Not Want more Dangerous "Nuclear Proliferations", with such Risky "Bombs" interfering even inside Human Beings' Procreation by Artificial Techniques eventually Abusing of Controversial methods, which could Threaten to put all Humankind in serious and Irreversible Jeopardy, able to provoke even Racial and Social Catastrophes...

=> Therefore, the Cause for that Recently Growing Trend towards More "NO" and/or Hesitations vis a vis Attempts to Legalize in France the In Vitro Fertilisations/Artificial Inseminations even for Homosexual Couples of Lesbians, that was Revealed by the Latest Polls (Comp. Supra), could, Probably, be Legitimate Fears or Concerns about that New "Gene Editing" Technology, (CRISP/Cas9+), facilitating Genetic Manipulations of Human Embryos, even on Germ-line, i.e. Risking to provoke Various Separate Races of Beings, (with natural Humans being, as a result, Irreversibly Discriminated and Downgraded) ?  

Many "Classic", World-Famous Intellectuals in the Past (particularly since the Beginning of the 20th Century), as well as, Recently, several Scientists, Politicians, Journalists, Legal Experts, Writers, and other Civil Society Actors, but, particularly, a lot of Simple People, have Notoriously Raised various such Critical Questions, which, Nowadays, (given the Fast-Growing Power of Bio-Technologies, which have Reached a Crucial Level for all Society and Humankind), obviously Need Urgent, Clear and Convincing Answers, responsible Guarantees.

CoE, the PanEuropean Organisation for Human Rights, Democracy and Rule of Law, (including BioEthics), has Already Warned about "the Need to PROTECT the Identity of the HUMAN Being", and "to Preserve the ... NATURAL GENETIC Combination, that gives it its Freedom and Uniqueness, and to Prevent its Exploitation", as it stressed in the Official Texts of "the 1st and Only International Legal instrument" developed on BioEthics, on the occasion of the "Prohibition of Human Cloning", which has just Celebrated its 20th Anniversary (1998-2018) Last Week in Strasbourg.

20 Years Later, the Risks Threatening, precisely, those "Natural Genetics" of the "Human Beings", have obviously Increased at Worrying proportions (Comp. Supra), particulary when it comes to New "Gene Editing" Technologies emerging, by a "Coincidence", at the Same Moment that some Lobbies Push to Legalize Many Thousands or Millions of "Artificial Procreations" of Human Embryos, etc., even at the Orders of Homosexuals' Choices, (i.e. withOut any Vital Necessity)....


 => Despite this New, seriously Dangerous Context, it's Astonishing to observe, on the Contrary, the scandalously Superficial, Misleading, almost "Fake News" and Irresponsible way, with which a lot of Establishement's Medias at least misregarded or even abused of that Latest Polls on BioEthics, published by "IFOP" at the Beginning of January 2018, i.e. practically at the Eve of the Opening of crucial Public Debates on "Hot" BioEthical Issues (as IVF evenn for Lesbians, Surrogate Mothers etc, Euthanasia, Assistes Suicide, etc), due to be, almost Immediately, Followed by Political Decisions :

- Most of those French Médias, (including, f.ex., from "Liberation", "La-Croix" and other Left-leaning Establishment's Newspapers, to several "LGBTI" and/or Technocratic Lobbies' Groups, etc.), have just designed an overall Picture of almost ...Triomphal and UnHindered, quasi-Linear and Steadily Rising, Super-Winning Big Trend towards a Fast Growing, Massive Popular Support to Opening all Articificial Procreation Techniques ("PMA" in French) even to Lesbian Couples, added to "Surrogate Mothers", etc., not to mention Euthanasia and/or Assisted Suicide, etc...

- According to their overall Presentations, It's as if nothing else happened in this area during the Last Decades, but only a Constant Growth of so-called Popular "Majorities" wishing more and more to Legalize all Artificial Procreation Technologies, even for Lesbians, even withOut any Safeguard against the Obvious Risks of New "Gene Editing" Techniques (Comp. Supra)...

And, in their view, (i.e. as those Establishment's Medias -especially of the Left-present things), the Facts would have been Clearly and Unquestionably Established, in this regard, mainly by a Series of Polls asked to, and made by "IFOP", between 1990 and 12/2017.


>>> However, in fact, all these Claims depend from some Too  "Shaky" and UnCertain Bases, blatant MisRepresentations, UnTrustworthy Sources, full of various Contradictions, obvious Risks of Abuse, too open to possible Manipulations, and quite UnConvincing, so that they seem UnFit in order to definitively Judge on so Serious and Far-Reaching, Big BioEthical Issues, as those cited above.



Among Others :




- The very Large Majority (6 out of 8 !) among the Funders, who Asked and Paid for those Polls by "IFOP", between 1990 - 12/2017, are from Big "Pharma" Lobbies, various "Leftist" outlets, (such as Globalist "Fashion", an NGO headed by Technocrats and Funded by "Socialist" Politicians, etc.), and even ..."LGBTI" Associations !

F.ex., the Biggest Funder, Buyer and User of those "IFOP" Polls is "ADFH" : an Association explicitly claiming to serve  the Interests of ..."Homosexual" couples ! (3 Times in a Row : on 10/2014, 8/2016 and 6/2017, i.e., practically, when the Program of the New President + Government of France had been Prepared).  It was Preceded by Globalist "Fashion", notoriously superficial Magazine "Elle", only for Women, (4/2004), and Followed by a "Pharma" outlet (on 9/2017), together with a Local  NGO Headed by a Gynecologist and a Genetician,  (recently dealing with "BioEThics"), which is Funded by a "Socialist" Municipality (12/2017)...

-- Only Two (2) (out of a Total of Eight : 8) Funders of "IFOP" Polls on BioEhics, seem to be something Else. (F.ex. 1990's Poll, for an UnSpecified Group, and a 2013 Poll, for Christian Magazine "Pelerin").

=> +By a "Coincidence", it's, precisely, Those 2 Polls (of 1990 + 2013) which are the ONLY ones to Find a Majority of People OPPOSED to attempts to legalize Artificial Procreation of Human Beings even for Lesbians !

- On the Contrary, ... ALL the Other 6 relevant IFOP's Polls, Funded by Leftists, Big "Pharma", and/or mainly "LGBTI" Lobbies, (Both Before and After those 2 Different Funders : Comp. Supra), Routinely Claim that a Popular Majority would have, Suddenly, Changed its Mind, and reportedly Started to Always Ask to ALLOW Massive Artificial Procreations of Human Beings at the order of Lesbian couples, etc.

>>> I.e. an Astonishing, almost 100% "Coincidence" (on Both Sides) between the obvious Interests served by Funders, and Polls' Results...
=> How could, Anyone, seriously Trust such Polls, mainly Paid by "Homosexuals"', Leftists and "Pharma" Lobbies, and Always Reflecting, in their "Results", the Interests of their Funders, (See blatant Facts cited Above), concerning so Critical "BioEthical" Issues, of Crucial Importance for all Humanity (Comp. Supra) ?

+ Controversial "Methods"...

+ Moreover, even the Technical "Methodology" of Each one among those Polls by "IFOP" on BioEthics, looks rather Fishy, and, at least, Controversial :

- F.ex., the Only 2 Polls by "IFOP" on BioEthics which were made according to the Traditional, well-known and Tested Methods "BY PHONE", (i.e. with a Clear Choice of the Individuals who are Interviewed, under the Exlusive Responsibility of the Pollster), have resulted Either at THE STRONGEST MAJORITY of People OPPOSED to Artificial Procreations of Children, even for Lesbians : Up to 70% Against Only 24% (!), OR at just a Small, Tiny, almost INSIGNIFICANT Difference between those supposed too be "in Favour", and those who Refuse : Only 51 % versus 48 %, i.e. Near to the "Statistical Error"'s Margin : About 2%. (Polls of 1990 and 2004, respectively).

- On the Contrary, almost ALL Other such Polls, which were made with a Completely DIFFERENT and Controversial METHOD, that of "On-Line, AUTO-ADMINISTRATED (sic !) Questionaire", gave Radically OPPOSITE Results : With 1 Only Exception (that of 2013/"Pelerin" Christian Magazine : 53% Opposed), in their Quasi-TOTALITY, 6 out of 7 Such Polls, suddenly started to give, for the 1st Time, several UnUsually BIG  MAJORITIES for supposed Fans of Artificial Procreations of Human Beings, (f.ex.: 53%, 59%, 60%, 64%, and again 60%, on 10/2014, 8/2016, 6/2017, 9/2017 and -less- 12/2017, respectively)...

It is Well Known that this Different, "Auto-Administrated", "On-Line Questionaire" Method, is mainly used by some Because it's ... "CHEAPER", (Not Better) !

But it's also UnClear and Controversial, How Pollsters could "ATTRACT" a Sufficient Number of the Right Persons in order to be Interviewed in such a way : Some even speak of ...Commercial "PUBLICITY", Various Other ways to "MOTIVATE" them, and/or Paid AWARDS, etc !

 I.e., the Real Conditions, under which is operated the Choice of those whose Views are Counted, or not, in in such "Auto-Administrated" On-Line Questionaires, obviously appear much More UNCLEAR, UNCERTAIN, and/or Controversial, than what it's in the Traditional, Well-Tested Methods, as "By Phone" etc. under the Direct Responsibility of the Pollster. (F.ex., it's easy to imagine what Falsifications might result from a Poll Asked and Paid by a LGBTI, "Pharma" and/or "Socialist" Lobby, if it was conducted Only by such an "Auto-Administrated" Method, in Only 1 of 2 Days, When it's mainly the Fans of that Lobby who were Timely Informed about the Existence and the Importance of such an "On-LIne Questionaire", while its Adversaries and/or Various Other People with Different, Critical Beliefs, knew Nothing !)...

+ And it would be FALSE to eventually Claim that those "Auto-Administrative" Polls, might, perhaps, be more "MODERN", than those traditionaly made "By Phone", according to Well-Tested Methods, under the Direct Responsibility of the Pollster , (Comp. Supra), so that the First might have Succeeded, Recently, to the Latter, almost Everywhere.

Indeed, recent Facts reveal that even "IFOP" Continues to use Nowadays such Traditional "By Phone" Methods, also in its Newest Polls, (on various Other Issues), as, f.ex., even on January 2018 !  (i.e., for "Paris-Match" and "Sud Radio", on some "Political" matters)...      

Why, then, some, suddenly, Started to use Exclusively Contradictory, Uncertain Methods, Only for Topical BioEthical Issues (Comp. Supra) ?

* DOUBTS, inevitably, Grow, when observers Examine also the Precise Content of the Questions raised by those Controversial "IFOP"'s Polls on BioEthics :

- F.ex., Initially that Question concerned, Explicitly, all "Artificial Procreation Techniques", (currently "PMA" in French) i.e. Both In Vitro Fertilisation (IVF), and Artificial Insemination, etc.

=> Indeed, that was the case at that "IFOP"'s Poll which Scored ...THE BIGGEST "NO", with 70% of People OPPOSED ! (f.ex. on 1990).

- But, Later-on, "IFOP" started to raise Only a Question mentioning Simply "Artificial Insemination" for Lesbian couples, with Nothing Else...

=> Such a Move coincided with absolutely Different Results in its Polls : With only 1  Exception (of 2013), ...ALL Other such Polls gave various Majorities of "YES", more or less, (f.ex. on 2004, 2014, 2016, 6/2017, 9/2017, and -Less- on 12/2017).

>>> A Point is that "IVF", (which was Ommitted to be mentioned in those Controversial recent "IFOP"s Polls), is, notoriously, the Most Exposed to various Risks of eventual Abuse by "GENE EDITING" Recent Techniques, (as, f.ex., that of "CRISP-cas9", etc.: Comp. Supra).
In Consequence, that strange and unexplained Ommission to even mention it, in those "IFOP"s Polls, inevitably Affects their Credibility, with even More Question Marks...


+ Moreover, Recent "IFOP"s Polls made also AnOther Strange OMMISSION : They curiously ERASED the Mention of "a DONOR EXTERNAL to the Couple" (or Taken "OUT of the Couple") :

- A Polls which had INCLUDED an Explicit Mention of that Fact, has Resulted in the Biggest Majority of "NO", with 70% of the People OPPOSED  to such "Artificial Procreation Techniques" against Only 24% "For", (1990). On the Contrary, Recent "IFOP"s Polls on similar BioEthical Issues EXCLUDE Any Mention of that, and (with 1 Exception) Result in various Majorities of "YES", (47% to 60% at the Latest : Comp. Supra).

>>> The Point is that, Among Various Other Factors, In Addition to the Core of Christian People, several Jewish, Most of the Right side of the Political Spectrum, Real "Greens", Real "Humanists", Real "Progressive", "Anti-Establishment" People, some Enlightened/Conscious "Intellectuals", etc., it's Also a Large part of MUSLIMS, who should, normally, be Opposed at least to those Artificial Techniques which threaten to Introduce +Third Individuals (i.e. Strangers) inside a Couple in case of Artificical Procreation, (f.ex. a "Sperm Donor" with Gametes External to the Family, a "Surrogate Mother" who Lends her own Body, etc). Some sources already spole about Eminent Islamologues' relevant "Opinions", and/or of a "Fatwa", etc. But, by Ommitting Any Mention of that Fact, "IFOP"s Recent Polls, obviously Hinder them to Realize what is really going on, on such delicate BioEthical Issues...


=> All that, Taken Together, when, according to some Polls (f.ex. by "OpinionWay" for a Disident NGO, on 2017), while a Large Number of People : 47% or 45%, Expect from the French Government to "Fight against UnEmployment" and "against Terrorism", on the Contrary, just a Tiny Minority of ... Only 2% is Interested on "Opening the Debate" on Artificial Procreation for Lesbians, (i.e., at the LAST Level, near the "Reform of Transport policies" !), naturally Diminishes the "Triomphal" Boasting of some Establishment's Medias on those Controversial "IFOP"'s Polls, (that Others have also Found to be Grossly Abused by some, almost to a level of "Fake News")...


More could and should be Added, sooner or later, But, Already, at least One Conclusion clearly Results from All Facts and Logical Arguments that are Published here:

Too Many Legitimate Question-Marks are raised on those Misleading Claims about some recent Polls with which some Technocratic Lobbies obviously Seek to "Burry" any Real Democratic Debate, even Before it Starts in France, from the 18th of January 2018, in view of Final Political Decisions Later this Year...


(NDLR : Graphic on CRISP-cas9 from "QUANTA" Magazine, specialized on Science/Technology news)
+ (In Part : Fast Translation from Original in French)



Besucher: 26313015


Login Form

Daten merken

Passwort vergessen?
Noch keinen Account? Account anlegen


RSS 0.91
RSS 1.0
RSS 2.0
ATOM 0.3

Other Menu


    The incoming Swedish EU Presidency (July-December 2009) may still remain in favour of Turkey's controversial EU bid, despite June 2009 EU Elections' results, but it has "very strong demands on Turkey"'s obligation to respect EU Rules, said the Head of Swedish Foreign Ministry's Press Service, Cecilia Julin, to "EuroFora", reacting to critical Press reports.

    - "I know (that) the link is often made also to Sweden's position on Turkey"'s controversial EU bid. Indeed, "we (Swedish EU Presidency) are very much engaged in the future membership of Turkey, but not without fullfiling all the Criteria".

    - "It's very clear that we (Swedish EU Presidecny) have very Strong Demands on Turkey, in a sort of concept for Future membership of the Union, ...which will be a Long Process...", she stressed.

    This means, in particular, "the Copenhagen Criteria (on Human Rights, Democracy and Rule of Law), and also the adaptation to the Acquis of the European Union".

     - "If you listen to what Mr. Bildt (the Swedish Foreign Minister) says on Turkey at different occasions, it's very clear : We want Turkey to become part of the Union, in the Future. But we want it to fullfil all the Criteria : The Acquis of the European Union. That's very clear", she concluded.

    The Senior Official of the Swedish Foreign Ministry was reacting to critical Press Reports, from Brussels' Journalists invited by EU Commission's secretariat to Stockholm, who claimed that Bildt was abusing of a ..."Whip" (sic !) against Cyprus, by "threatening" the presence of UNO's Peace-keeping force at the "Green line" which separates the island's Government-controlled areas from the territories occupied by Ankara's army, if Nicosia didn't accept any political solution, regardless of Turkey's demands, before the end of 2009.

        Governing AKEL Party's new Secretary General, Andros Kyprianou, reacted by declaring that no-one can threat the People of Cyprus : -"We shall decide for our Future, and nobody else",  he reportedly said, asking to "keep calm". "In order to find a Solution soon, certain basic Principles must be respected", he stressed, calling those who feel an urgency to use their influence on Turkey. Other Political Parties were more critical.

    This was a reference to recently reported statements by Turkish Minister Bagis, Prime Minister Tayip Erdogan and Turkey's National Security Council (a Military-Political body), accused to push towards a partitionist "2 States" solution, contrary to UNO SC Resolutions for Cyprus' reunification.

    December 2009 is a crucial moment for EU's appraisal of Turkey's controversial EU bid, because EU Council has decided to review then Ankara's compliance with the European position on the recognition of Cyprus' Government, which was clearly set out by an EU reply of 21 September 2005 to Turkish Prime Minister Tayip Erdogan's claims, refusing to recognize even the existence of EU Member Cyprus, in controversial statements he made to London (former EU chair) on July 29, 2005.

    EU Parliament's latest Resolution on Turkey, adopted on March 2009 in Strasbourg, warned Ankara that "the non-fulfillment of Turkey's commitments... by December 2009, may further seriously affect the process of Negotiations" with the EU.

    In practice, the issue boils down to Ankara's "embargo" against Ships and Airplanes using Cyprus' seaports or airports at the strategic EU island, which traditionaly hosts one of the World's biggest Shipping flags. EU has already "freezed" 6 relevant Chapters in EU - Turkey Negotiations since December 2006, after Ankara refused to fullfil a commitment it had undertaken when EU had decided to open controversial "accession" negotiations with Turkey, back on December 2005.

    - "As far as EU - Turkey relations are concerned, it's clear that Turkey needs to fullfil its obligation of full, non-discriminatory implementation of the additional Protocol (to "EC-Turkey Association Agreement"),  This is an important issue....and should be addresseed as soon as possible as it clearly affects the pace of the accession negotiations.Issues covered by the Declaration of September 2005 will continue to be followed up, and progress is urgently awaited", warned earlier in Strasbourg the out-going Czech EU Presidency (former vice-Prime Minister Alexander Vodra).

    But the Head of the Swedish Foreign Ministry's Press Service, Cecilia Julin, dismissed "interpretations" by "some" that Foreign Minister Carl Bildt was reportedly "threatening" Cyprus with consequences on the UNFICYP, if it doesn't accept any solution until December 2009, while Turkey is reportedly delaying in an attempt to impose a partitionist "2 States" solution.

    On the contrary, Julin, stressed that "Sweden has strong demands on Turkey'"s respect of "Copenhagen Criteria and EU Acquis".

    Meanwhile, Sweden  is "concerned" about the risk of "Stalemate" in Cyprus' Talks, but is well aware that "the main responsibilities lie with the two leaders and the UNO", Europe playing only a role of "facilitator".

    After carefully verifying, the Head of Swedish Foreign Ministry's Press Service, stressed to "EuroFora" that Bildt's reference to UNFICYP "was not linked to a Threat", and dismissed those who "interpreted" it so.

    On the contrary, the Swedish EU Presidency acknowledged the fact that Peace Talks are mainly for the UN and the leaders of the Cypriot communities, EU's role being limited into that of a "facilitator".

    As for Turkey's reported attempts to impose a "2 States' solution", the Head of the Swedish Foreign Ministry's Press Service sharply replied by stressing that Turkey must respect the "EU Acquis" rules.

    In particular :

    - "Basically he (Bildt) underlined that it's the leaders of the two communities in Cyprus and the UN that have the main responsibilities for solving the problem", started to say the Swedish Senior Official to "EuroFora", referring to the above-mentioned "briefing".

    - "But the EU had a role in sort of pointing out the benefits and facilitating a little bit the outcome for the settlement of the whole Cyprus' issue", she added.

    - "And he did state the Fact, that the rest of the World (i.e. USA, etc) will, of course, look at the differend issues which are at the table, and the future of the UN Peace keeping force is part of what is at the table", she admitted.

    - "I understand that some have interpreted that as a Threat, by the Swedish Minister" "But", in reality, "it's a statement of a Fact, that, when we'll look at the differend issues, one of the issues on which we shall have to take a stand on, is the future of the UN Peace keeping force in Cyprus".

    Indeed, one of the questions usually raised for a Solution of Cyprus' issue is what International and/or European or other Guarantees, by a Peace-keeping force, might be needed afterwards, eventually for a transitory period.

    Questioned anew by "EuroFora" whether (according to critical Press Reports) this could be taken as a veiled warning that, if Cyprus didn't accept any Turkish demand for any solution whatever, it might be left alone to face Ankara's Military Invasion/Occupation, she denied :

    - "He (Bildt) didn't say it in that way"... "It was not linked to a threat, or anything like that", the Head of the Swedish Foreign Ministry's Press Service stressed.

    On the contrary, "he (Bildt) underlined that the main responsibility lies with the parties concerned on the island". "The EU can try to facilitate and show the benefits of reaching a settlement. But also, when the EU and the rest of the World (i.e. USA) will have to look at it, they will look at all the Facts on the table, and the presence of the UN Peace-keeping force is one".

    And "he (Bildt) didn't speak about that at all", she replied to "EuroFora" question on Turkey's reported attemps to impose, in one way of another, a partitionist "2 States solution".

    Asked whether Bildt's aim was to incite both parties to move forward efficiently, she agreed :

    - In fact, "the EU is really very concerned with the Stalemate in the situation. Yes !", the Head of Sweden's Foreign Ministry's Press Service anounced. That's why Bildt "was hoping for the two parties (i.e. for Turkey's also) to engage and break, a little-bit, the present stalemate, come to a solution of the issue" of Cyprus.

    But, replying  to a "EuroFora"s question on the risk, denounced by several politicians in case of strict Time Deadlines, for Turkey to provoke a stalemate and wait for the time to come to impose a partitionist "2 States' solution", she reacted by pointing at Turkey's obligation to respect "EU Acquis" :

    - "Turkey must fullfil the EU Acquis : That's clear !", the Swedish Senior Official stressed.

    More details are expected when Swedish Prime Minister Reinfeldt will debate his Programme with new MEPs at EU Parliament's plenary mid-July in Strasbourg, that he has visited already in 2008.

    Foreign Minister Carl Bildt became familiar with Strasbourg's CoE last year, when Sweden chaired the PanEuropean organization of Human Rights. As EU chairman-in-office, he will also chair the 27-member States strong EU Group inside the 47-member States strong CoE.

    Minister for EU affairs, Cecilia Malmstrom is well known at EU Parliament, where she has been an active MEP of the Liberal Group for many years, following also Press Freedom issues.

    Both have already made various statements at "EuroFora", on differend topical matters.



2009 EU Elections were won by Parties against Technocracy and Turkey's controversial EU bid, while the 1999-2004 Majority Abstention trend decelerated. What should be done in 2009-2014 ?


SMF Recent Topics SA

Copyright (c) 2007-2009 EIW/SENAS - EuroFora.net. All rights reserved. ISSN 1969-6361.
Powered by Elxis - Open Source CMS.