Debate contributions by Tonino PICULA

Mr President, Madam Commissioner, nowadays drones have become the most critical weapons in modern warfare. In the brutal aggression of Russia on Ukraine, they now account for nearly three quarters of recent casualties. Drone warfare is therefore a fundamental transformation of how wars are fought and a challenge for the EU to adapt its defence capabilities. We need to learn lessons from that, and we must strengthen our cooperation with Ukraine to learn best practices. Unfortunately, drones have also been used recently as very dangerous provocations, violating the airspace of several of EU Member States and causing a lot of damage. This method of undermining the EU goes hand in hand with hybrid threats, disinformation and interference. Therefore, it's a must to expand our counter-drone capabilities, particularly by investing in training and operational expertise, as well as adapting to new challenges. The absolute necessity needs to be to protect our critical and vulnerable infrastructure while boosting resilience.

First of all, I stress that Nicolas Maduro does not have the legitimacy of a democratically elected President of Venezuela and that the situation in Venezuela during his reign was dramatically difficult, with serious human rights violations. While I hope that recent events can enable a democratic transition, the way the space for change is open can be crucial. In all circumstances, the principles of international law and the Charter of the United Nations must be respected, including sovereignty, territorial integrity and the prohibition of the use of force. Any unilateral action, including that of the United States, outside the legal framework undermines the validity of international law and undermines the sustainability of the democratic transition. To restore stability and quick access to the country's vast oil reserves, the Trump administration clearly shows that it intends to reach an agreement with the remnants of the Maduro regime instead of supporting the democratic opposition. Venezuela's natural resources belong only to its people. They must serve above all the fight against poverty and the sustainable development of the country.

Mr President, colleagues, unfortunately, Georgia is a prime example of an EU candidate country heavily derailing from the European course, which is deeply regretful. We all remember images of pro-European Georgians with EU flags on the street, to whom I pay tribute, while heavily condemning the use of violence against them, as well as the threats to civil society and the independent media. We should be especially disgusted by the serious accusations of the use of toxic chemicals against protesters. A full and independent investigation on the matter is a must. The overall democratic backsliding and the downfall to the iron-clad fist regime mimicking the Kremlin is deplorable. The Georgian Dream ruling turned into a nightmare for Georgian citizens, who overwhelmingly support EU membership. However, it is not too late to set Georgia on the EU path, which is backed by three quarters of its citizens. They have every right to a better, safer and prosperous European future.

Dear President, Mrs. Commissioner, colleagues, the best way to pay tribute to the victims of the fall of the canopy in Novi Sad is to reveal the root of the problems that led to the tragedy. The tragedy in Novi Sad proves that corruption is not an ordinary crime. Corruption destroys institutions and unfortunately takes lives. This accident reflects some of Serbia's main structural problems - the non-transparent involvement of foreign actors in the project and the lack of controls that would allow the facility to be used because safety standards were not respected, obstructing the investigation and independence of the judiciary after the tragedy, and repression against citizens seeking accountability and change. As the Serbian government repeats that it wants to join the European Union, it increasingly deviates from its fundamental values. Progress is measured through concrete reforms, not through uncovered promises. Independent institutions, free media and citizens should be partners of government, not targets of various conspiracy theories. This debate and resolution, of course, is not an attack on Serbia. Europe has not failed Serbia. The government in Serbia is failing its citizens.

Madam President, Commissioner, colleagues, I strongly condemn the recent Russian provocations that serve only to stir divisions and test our capabilities. I have full understanding for all our Member States affected. I also believe that these innovative methods of provocation are a tool used in the same way as disinformation, started through social media some ten years ago. However, these incidents are also a sign of the times – times in which we, as the EU, need to stand together, being aware of our differences, but primarily taking into account the many issues and aspects that keep us together. Colleagues, we must not over-engage in these provocation games, but at the same time, we cannot stay idle and let them pull all their stunts. We have a commitment to our citizens to respond firmly and decisively. That is the only way Putin's regime can understand and respect our message.

Dear Chairman, Commissioner, I support the establishment of peace in devastated Gaza because it is a path to be taken without hesitation. Humanity must overcome the transactional cynicism that dominates global politics at this time. Unfortunately, we are living in a period when extremists have strongly strengthened, while the Oslo Accords and the leaders of that time act as a footnote from the distant past. Especially important is the release of all hostages and the negotiation of a lasting and sustainable peace. Hamas is a terrorist organization and must not play any role in the future regulation of relations within Palestine. However, the Israeli government, made up of political extremists, does not even want to hear about a deal that would preserve Palestinian self-government, let alone lead to the creation of an independent Palestinian state. I regret that the European Union has not shown credibility in this important test. Our disunity has once again put into practice those values that we so often invoke. Too bad, because the programmed suffering of the civilian population in Gaza has tightened the political responsibility of each government of a Member State and of the European Union as a whole.

Dear Chairman, this has unfortunately been a summer of untapped opportunities for Europe when it comes to its relationship with Washington. We export more goods to America, but we import more non-taxable services. The trade relationship with America was balanced even before this agreement, in which there are no legal or political guarantees. Trump has consistently imposed his program of selective tax increases, general deregulation and the imposition of tariffs. As the European Union, blocked by internal disagreements, we are trying to reach the least bad agreement. We follow, we do not lead, and the consequences of a missed action can be long-term. By taking responsibility for their own security and defence, investing in their own energy production would certainly strengthen the global negotiating position. Protecting jobs and competitiveness through investment, but in Europe, strengthening European autonomy and defending the rule of law, in particular our European legislation, must be a priority. The European Union is a global symbol of democratic values and environmental standards. The European Union is the largest single market in the world. So let's use our achievements and boldly correct our shortcomings. Together.

Dear Chair, the escalation of violence against protesters, provocative foreign policy moves, the latest attacks on journalists and the project of full control of the media are the reasons for another serious debate on Serbia in the European Parliament. Insults addressed to members of this parliament, President Vucic has been using against his dissenting voices in Serbia for years. Neighbouring countries are also not spared from the consequences of Belgrade's policies. Meanwhile, there is a lack of European commitments and reforms as the phrases on the Commission's serious concerns have been repeated for years with the continuation of the policy of indulging Vučić's Belgrade. It is paradoxical to enforce 19 generations of sanctions against the Russian regime, and to remain silent about a candidate country for membership whose boss publicly refuses to introduce the same to the aggressor regime. In short, Brussels must not offer Vučić carrots in order for him to deliver beatings to his citizens. Dear Commissioner, I hope that your statement of yesterday signals the beginning of a more credible policy towards Belgrade by the Commission. The European Parliament, the institution that most actively supports the continuation of the enlargement policy, but also most vocally criticizes the undemocratic actions in Serbia, will give you full support on this path.

Madam President, Madam Commissioner and colleagues, when our peace efforts are responded to with drones and missile attacks on civilian infrastructure, government buildings and the EU representation office, the conclusion should be clear to all: there is no genuine will from Putin to talk or act towards peace. While discussions on security guarantees are welcomed, there are more concrete actions we can do now: bolder decisions related to immobilised Russian state assets, energy independence from Russia, and to pursue it in general, to work on a genuine and predictable partnership globally to support international law and Ukraine. Apart from military and economic support, we need sufficient assistance for Ukraine to strengthen its judiciary and the rule of law, while fighting corruption, as rightfully underlined by the report. Progress in these areas is vital for Ukraine now. By defending itself, Ukraine is defending Europe. And by strengthening itself, the European Union can better support Ukraine. Slava Ukraini!

This week we are marking the 30th anniversary of the Srebrenica genocide. I express deep reverence for the victims and their families. Only the defense of the truth about the past opens a chance for a better future for generations to come, and that future in Bosnia and Herzegovina remains uncertain. From internal political blockades, threats of secession, contempt of domestic and foreign judgments, to too slow progress on the European path to extremely negative demographic trends. Unfortunately, the dominance of political structures created during the war slows down the true progress of Bosnia and Herzegovina. Thank you to the Rapporteur for the report covering internal diversity in Bosnia and Herzegovina, constituent peoples and minorities and the need to respect all rulings of domestic and international courts. Once again, messages have been sent underlining our commitment to European Bosnia and Herzegovina. That is why we also need to recognise any positive step forward, such as the adoption of the reform agenda. This is proof that, despite all the obstacles, there is a capacity to thrive. Most people demand the same from the government. Bosnia and Herzegovina is a place in the European Union. Any real move on that path will have our full support.

As the world began to change irreversibly on 11 September 2001, the Hamas terrorist attack on Israel on 7 October 2023 triggered a chain of events that radically changed relations in the Middle East. Netanyahu encourages conflicts to transform Israel itself, establishing dominance over the wider space. It accounts for the entire Palestinian people, not just Hamas terrorists. In parallel, the level of internal repression in Iran has strengthened after external intervention, bringing the regime to the brink. But can the European Union even come out of permanent deep concern about the situation in the Middle East because it has not been able to agree on common positions before? The European Union as a ‘soft power’ clearly fails to mediate in the ‘hard powers’ conflict. The European Union is considering available measures, including the possible suspension of the Stabilisation and Association Agreement between the European Union and Israel. The Middle East is at a critical juncture that requires more decisive action. Our role in achieving the JCPOA proves that the European Union, when united, can achieve serious global diplomatic successes.

Until the rules of the functioning of the European Union are changed, there is no need to give up on the solutions we have on the table today. However, the topic of this debate is also the European Union in the future, and I think that we roughly divide ourselves here into those who would update the European Union, so adhere to the continuation of the enlargement policy, but there are also those who would nullify the European Union. Certainly, the future European Union must also take into account the legal achievements on which it is based, and this is, among other things, a policy of consensus, but many times in practice it has proven to be a bottleneck when urgent decisions need to be taken for the benefit of the European Union and its citizens.

The geopolitical situation in the world is a good argument in favour of the continuation of the enlargement policy. However, that does not mean deviating from the ‘Copenhagen criteria’, on the contrary - they must be implemented consistently in practice. The European Union should only support real, not fictitious, reforms and react immediately when the criteria are met. Although enlargement is once again a strategic priority for the European Union, it has dealt with this policy almost transactionally for a long time, guided by the erroneous belief that European money will solve all internal problems of candidate countries. Thus, we put on the list of strategically important projects those that are not supported by citizens or we recommend closing the chapter on public procurement immediately after the conclusion of the contract with a third country that is exempted from these rules. Insisting on the rule of law and European values, but with a coherent geopolitical orientation, must be the basis for the continuation of the enlargement policy. If the enlargement policy is implemented in this way, the internal reform of the European Union institutions should be neither an obstacle nor an alibi to delay the new enlargement of the European Union.

Madam President, High Representative, colleagues, the upcoming NATO summit is happening in much different circumstances than a year ago. Now, more than ever, we must show our commitment and responsibility for the future of this alliance. Within these commitments, we will pursue the new spending target for defence. However, defence is not only about percentages. No other global player currently faces such turmoil on almost all its borders like the European Union. The European Union needs to step up and join forces on a realistic approach. We cannot entrust our security every four years to swing voters in the United States, but establish some guidelines and initiatives to go along with these changing times. In this sense, the upcoming summit is crucial in pioneering an up‑to‑date and realistic EU security approach. I strongly believe we have to reiterate our commitment for international law and the rules‑based international system. That means unwavering support for Ukraine. Russian aggression against Ukraine must be an integrative and not divisive factor. The Russian Federation meddles not only in the European Union Member States, but also in our immediate neighbourhood – the Western Balkans. The NATO summit must address this issue too. In these difficult times, we also need to be focused on the NATO interest in the Arctic and the Baltics and ensure security and stability in these ever‑important regions. Therefore, this NATO summit has crucial importance primarily for us Europeans to define and strengthen our security in upcoming years. It's a task and responsibility our citizens are asking us to take up. Security, for sure, is a key to preserving life in a democracy.

Dear Chairman, Mrs. Commissioner, first of all congratulates our colleague Šarec on creating a good document that we are discussing today. Montenegro has been leading the Euro-integration process for years with the ambition to join the European Union as soon as possible. On this path, internal problems were often more challenging for Montenegro than negotiation chapters. I recall the uneven pace of democratic transition, change of government and politics with strong polarisation of society, which unnecessarily complicated relations with neighbours. Investment projects such as the recent agreement with the United Arab Emirates also contribute to polarisation and dilemmas. The formula for progress in the accession process implies achieving political and social consensus on membership, as well as promoting values, projects and policies that truly consolidate it. At the same time, the list of problems should be shortened over time, not further extended. I want Montenegro to be the next member of the European Union, but on this path it must successfully resist cap Lingus with the concept of the so-called Serbian world, which cannot be competitive with the process of European integration because it is their complete negation.

Madam President, dear colleagues, the reason for this oral amendment is the need to change a sad fact. Unfortunately, instead of 15 victims of the tragic event in Novi Sad, today we have to count one more: a young man, Vukašin Crnčević, left us in the meantime. So paragraph 23 now reads: 'Expresses its sincere condolences to the families of the 16 victims who lost their lives and to those who were injured following the collapse of the canopy of Novi Sad train station on 1 November 2024; calls for full and transparent legal proceedings following the investigation by the authorities, to bring those responsible to justice; underlines the need to examine more broadly to what extent corruption led to the lowering of safety standards and contributed to this tragedy;'.

Madam President, the European Union has to keep playing an active role in supporting peace in Ukraine, which would be based on fair grounds and not as a quasi solution leading to an unjust frozen conflict. I believe this position is shared also among our like-minded partners. We used to once again stress our respect for international law and for Ukrainian territorial integrity. We must not forget the war crimes done by the aggressor and allow for the aggressor to be rewarded. However, the question is does Russia want peace? With his actions in the past months and his increased aggression, one could only conclude that Putin doesn't want to end the war but to end Ukraine. An additional plan of the Kremlin is the collateral weakening of the European Union in the process of negotiation with Washington. Nevertheless, we must stay committed to defending the values on which the European Union was originally formed. Slava Ukraini!

First of all, thank you to all for your speeches, ideas, support, but also to those who have a completely different opinion. Of course, I would particularly like to thank my fellow shadow rapporteurs and assistants for the excellent cooperation and work they have done to enrich the content of this report. I would just like to point out that Serbia's path towards the European Union is extremely complex because it is a process that cannot be accomplished overnight and without serious changes in the country. But nothing will change without the political will of those most responsible for the current situation in the country, because the long political crisis and polarizations reinforced by the lack of progress in basic criteria such as the fight against corruption, the rule of law, media freedom and electoral reform directly affect Serbia's progress towards membership of the European Union and the stagnation that has been going on for more than three years. For too long, the government in Serbia has tried to use the best of EU funds, while neglecting the fundamental values and geopolitical orientation of the same European Union. Finally, it is important to say that Serbia is a candidate country for membership that has a special weight and influence in the wider area of the Western Balkans, so it is understandable that we will monitor the political situation in Serbia with maximum attention in the future.

Dear Chair, Honourable Commissioner, Colleagues, I am pleased to welcome you at the end of the months-long process of drafting the European Parliament's annual report on Serbia, which I present for the first time as a standing rapporteur. On the personal side, I must say that this was a very challenging duty, which, unfortunately, included non-diplomatic practices, unfounded accusations, manipulations and personal attacks. Nevertheless, I approached this job professionally, with the best intentions, firmly believing in the openness of the common European project, transforming the potential of joining the European Union and the benefits it brings to the citizens of the Member States, but also the candidate countries. The report we are discussing tonight is the result of work with colleagues in Parliament, contact with various stakeholders who wanted to talk, evaluation of the Commission's progress report on Serbia, interpretation of various expert documents, but also visits to Serbia. All this has contributed to the analysis of the current political reality in the country, and this political reality has been extremely complex for a long time, especially in the last six months. The fall of the canopy at the station building in Novi Sad, when 16 citizens lost their lives, became a tragic symbol of systemic corruption, nepotism and inadequate control mechanisms that would have to protect citizens. Today we are discussing the situation in a country where electoral legislation has serious shortcomings, the media are generally not free or accessible to all, where the media regulator does not work, justice is selectively shared by the judiciary, and those who point to problems are exposed to public attacks. Likewise, the personal data of protesters is made public, unidentified illegal means are used against them, which is then investigated by Russian services, European Union citizens are detained and expelled from the country for their social media status, and European Union member states and their officials are accused of being behind the so-called color revolution. In addition, Serbia consistently refuses to align with the geopolitical commitment of the European Union and impose sanctions on Russia, while voting in the United Nations is justified as a mistake. Despite some progress, notably in the area of competitiveness and inclusive growth clusters, Serbia still faces major obstacles that must be overcome: improving internal political dialogue, the rule of law and the fight against corruption, reaching a comprehensive normalisation agreement with Kosovo and full alignment with the European Union’s foreign policy. Ensuring the independence of key institutions, including the regulator for electronic media, and the full implementation of all OSCE/ODIHR and Council of Europe recommendations on electoral reform in a transparent and inclusive process are missing. Certainly before the new elections, which would be crucial. All this is highlighted by the Commission in its reform plan. Economic data, although improved, cannot be the only measure of success, as the European Union is not just a common market either. In the last decade, the EU has invested billions of euros in Serbia, but the public perception and communication of the leaders of Serbia, for the most part, does not reflect this. Often, economic growth is also based on non-transparent contracts that are excluded from the application of public procurement law. Such agreements, in addition to economic ones, also have direct political influence. For this situation, the European Union must also assume its own, certainly smaller, share of responsibility. From the top political messages on progress in the rule of law, to bilateral trade agreements between the largest members, to the extremely low rate of investment of European money where it brings the greatest transformational benefit – in strengthening the judiciary and fighting corruption. Commissioner Kos, I followed with interest your visit to Serbia last week. I think some very important messages have been sent from your side and I hope that you will have the support of the Commission's leadership for them. At the same time, the statements of the Serbian leaders on the formal commitment to European integration sound really inconclusive, while this week he is planning a trip to Moscow and new energy agreements with Russia, and there are no necessary reforms in sight that are crucial for a successful European path. After all, accession to the Union is primarily the responsibility of a member state, not an alibi that avoids its own responsibility for problems in the state. Finally, I would like to mention students who plan to run to Strasbourg to convey their messages. I appreciate their sacrifice and their struggle. I have heard their messages clearly from the very beginning and in the report I highlight the same goals that they are committed to. Since they as young people represent the future of their country, the attitude of the authorities towards them speaks much more than any party programs about the future. The European Parliament, as the institution that votes on the accession agreement at the end of the process, will remain the most vocal proponent of enlargement, but we want this process to be based on merit, real reforms and clear alignment with European values and the geopolitical positions of the European Union.

Madam President, Madam High Representative, dear colleagues, the sound of the US walking away from the long-term partnership is loud and clear. These provocative statements about Greenland coming from the Trump administration are not part of the summer ranting at a rally. On the contrary, these problematic messages reach global audiences. Some say disregard the rhetoric, just look at executive orders, but rhetoric is important too. After all, is a rule-based order just some buzzword that decorates speeches? Just opposite. It's a clear system of values, something that brings us together and forms the European Union as we know it. It's a legacy of the Europe built from ashes, as these days we remember 80 years from the end of the Second World War. The rules-based order is now under threat due to aggressive leaders getting space after different crises, bringing a crisis of its own. Greenland serves as an example. That's why this threat must be an opportunity for the European Union to evolve and proceed stronger. There is no other way.

Mr President, as the global order is under serious pressure, relations with our key ally are becoming one of the most important challenges we must address. It is clear that President Trump is using tariffs as a tool for blackmail. We must be prepared to respond to them equally. If he backs off, we can de-escalate, respecting our trade and digital services laws. It's not just about the trade in goods: when we add the exchange of services to the overall trade relationship, we almost reach an equilibrium. While politics on the other side of the Atlantic is currently arbitrary and transactional, the European Union must be a factor of global stability that conducts politics clearly and in a way that is based on facts. Moreover, this situation is an opportunity for the EU to take political responsibility, attract experts who share our values, and assume the global role because it has the democratic strength and economic capacity.

Madam President, Madam High Representative, colleagues, both documents are a complex reflection of a very challenging, uncertain and changing international environment, requiring constant updates as we wake up every morning with the new uncertainties. The indispensable importance of transatlantic partnership should be enhanced with the more realistic approach after all the threats and offensive statements from the new Trump administration. There is also the fundamental dilemma on how to redefine our relationship with China in this new environment. Enhanced cooperation and coordination with like-minded partners is essential too. The grave state of the world can be also a chance for Europe to take the lead in fighting for democracy, security and the rules-based order. In that sense, we must not forget about our immediate neighbourhood and the fragility of many candidate countries. Lastly, the common security and defence policy should finally become a reality not only through ReArm Europe, but also by coordinating better.