The resistance of the Member States will have overwhelmed the European Parliament's efforts regarding the legislative dossier, aimed at modernising the export regime for dual-use goods. At a meeting of the European Parliament's Committee on International Trade on Monday 4 February, MEPs expressed their frustration at the Council's inaction, which will result in the matter being referred back to the next assembly.
In addition to their peaceful applications, the use of dual-use goods and technologies can be diverted for repression, the creation of weapons of mass destruction, or terrorism.
In September 2016, the European Commission proposed a new, stricter Community regime intended to modernise and strengthen controls on the export of dual-use goods (see EUROPE 11634).
In January 2017, Parliament adopted its position in order to negotiate the Commission's proposal with the Member States (see EUROPE 11911). However, the legislative course of the proposal ended there, as the Council was unable to adopt a common position with a view to entering into negotiations with Parliament. Bernd Lange (S&D, Germany), chairman of the parliamentary committee, emphasised his disbelief at this impasse: “It is incredible that the Council has not been able to generate a mandate to start negotiations”. »
MEPs were unanimous in their disappointment at the Council's resistance. “We have done everything we could, but we will not be able to complete our work in this parliamentary term”, said the rapporteur, German MEP Klaus Buchner (Greens/EFA). He sees this situation as being “harmful to our common values”, and something that prolongs uncertainty for companies and hinders the establishment of a uniform regime in the EU.
Christofer Fjellner (EPP, Sweden) also raised the question of the European Commission's strategy, suggesting that an individual proposal could be drawn up regarding checks on cybersurveillance exports.
The representative of the European Commission, Myrto Zambarta, did acknowledge to MEPs that the case could not be concluded during this parliamentary term, despite the context of tensions between the United States and China. “The differences that we see are not so much on the substance, but on the process [...] hope we will be able with the help of the Romanian presidency to see them through”. (Original version in French by Hermine Donceel)