Speeches

Mr Commissioner, I reflect on two subjects from your portfolio: Montenegro and the rule of law. As the former leader in accession progress, Montenegro, alongside Serbia, is the only country that did not progress on the EU accession path in the last year. We have witnessed almost two years of political instability and we still do not have a new government in place. Nor is there any decision on the extraordinary elections. What does the Commission plan to do to get the country back on track with progress on EU-related reforms? Another source of political tensions there is the ‘Open Balkan’ initiative. What is the view of the Commission regarding the initiative? Finally, the rule of law should be a crucial precondition for progress in accession, and the main feature of the new methodology. Is this provision formally confirmed in practice? Is the rule of law really a key provision that sets the tone for overall progress of the accession countries?

Dear Chairman, Mr Commissioner, I extend my deepest condolences to the citizens of Turkey and Syria. This is an unimaginable tragedy of immense proportions and endless sadness. I want the survivors to have the strength to rebuild their lives from the ruins, not to be overcome by despair, however difficult it may be. I call on the European Union to provide all possible assistance to alleviate the suffering of people in Turkey and Syria. Many thanks to the rescue teams from all over the world! I also use this opportunity to share the experience gained after the earthquakes in Croatia, Zagreb and Petrinja in 2020. I would like to thank the institutions of the European Union for sending a generous package of assistance to Croatia. Thanks to it, the city of Zagreb managed to renovate a certain number of public buildings: schools, kindergartens and museums. But we also learned some lessons in a very painful way. It is necessary to pool administrative capacity in one institution in order to prevent European Union assistance from being used in a timely manner. Unfortunately, the slow pace of our administration at national level has slowed down the renovation of private buildings to such an extent that it is likely that the opportunity to use most of the allocated European Union funds will be missed.

Madam President, I welcome this initiative to gather in Kyiv to witness the extraordinary courage and resilience of Ukrainians and show our support. Yes, this is the first European Union summit to be held in the country where war is raging, so its historical significance must meet tangible results with clear guidelines and plans for immediate future. The key message of the summit must be that we stand with Ukraine and count on its European Union perspective. Furthermore, I think it’s essential for our citizens to clarify some doubts, fears and even propaganda that Ukraine is rejecting diplomatic solutions. Since the 90s, there have been many diplomatic initiatives, Minsk 1 and 2, the Normandy Format, let alone the Budapest Memorandum, and they were all bluntly disrespected by Russia when it started its aggression. Yes, peace should remain the ultimate goal, but as they pay the highest possible price in this war, true peace for Ukrainians only means their victory over invaders.

Madam President, dear colleagues, we must not stay silent on what is happening in Iran. People are dying fighting for freedom, and the actions of the Iranian regime are twilight of humanity. That punishment and torture are weaponised on people that are exercising their basic rights. The Iranian regime is brutal, cynical and barbaric. In their desperation and increased isolation, the regime is even using technology and facial recognition for repression of its citizens. Moreover, we can only condemn their drone—based partnership with Russian invaders in Ukraine. We have to continue to strongly support the Iranian people. It is crucial to call for decisive EU response, and the Revolutionary Guard must be put on the list of terror organisations. Our message to the regime needs to be loud and clear: stop killing your people.

Madam President, Commissioner, dear colleagues, I wish to start by giving my full support to establishing a tribunal of crime of aggression in Ukraine. In this House, I have been calling for it since May. Last week’s attacks on civilians in Dnipro are the most brutal reminder of why we need to establish this court without delay. The ongoing investigation by the Prosecutor of the ICC into the situation in Ukraine based on war crimes and crimes against humanity is by no means important. But we are also aware of its limitations. It will be crucial that this court has the explicit backing of the United Nations and its establishment is closely coordinated with Ukraine. As the EU, we have to work towards increasing consensus among international partners and organisations to make this possible. It must be imperative that all those responsible for war crimes are held accountable for their actions. Only complete justice can enable the true recovery of Ukraine.

Madam President, Mr Commissioner, the recent attack against civilians in Dnipro is a stark reminder that the European Union must take decisive action in response. Following that attack, the number of civilian victims surpassed 7 000, and we are still missing the data on missing persons. It’s good that we have this discussion today, and it will be even better if the next package strengthening sanctions against the Putin regime is adopted as soon as possible. I wish mainly to stress how important it is that the already adopted sanctions are being implemented, so we do not see, for example, the confiscated yachts of Russian oligarchs leaving the EU waters in the middle of the night. Ahead of the Ukraine Contact Group meeting in Rammstein at the end of this week, our response must also be that increased military support is needed. We must show our solidarity with Ukraine again and provide them with all the resources they need to protect their people and defend themselves against the aggressors.

Mr President, Mr High Representative, first of all, congratulations to the colleagues who worked on these documents. The brutal war in Ukraine marked the past year and exposed several of our shortcomings that we need to address and in many ways we reacted in a positive, unprecedented way. Despite many challenges and some countries regressing, I am particularly content that the enlargement policy is being mainstreamed again. In the past year, three countries became candidate countries. One was given a European perspective. One applied for the membership and two more finally began their negotiations. This is a good example of recognising political realities and necessities and moving things forward. We should apply this approach further. So my main conclusion would be that in the ever-challenging global environment, including a war on our continent, our answer should be ‘more Europe’. It’s time to reform our common foreign security and defence policies so that they are no longer the weakest link of our integration.

Mr President, together with several colleagues, I visited Kyiv two weeks ago. Horrific numbers we hear about victims, destroyed objects and missiles targeted at civilian targets become truly real once you see it first—hand. Russia did not succeed with its military plans, so it is now targeting critical and civilian infrastructure. Over 65 000 destroyed objects and 17 000 airstrikes Ukraine endured since 24 February. Six million people are without electricity. At a certain moment, Kyiv did not have electricity, water, heating or internet. The situation two weeks ago was alarming and now with even lower temperatures, it’s becoming critical. Ukrainians are fighting bravely and we need to do everything we can to help them win this fight with more humanitarian, financial and military assistance. A significant concrete step would be EUR 18 billion in macro—financial assistance. We committed and approved it. Now we need to deliver it urgently.

Mr President, dear colleagues, our identity is under attack and some wrongdoings will have serious consequences for institutions’ reputations. Probably the most expected outcome of the latest corruption allegations is that the ones who profoundly threaten democracy within the EU, and from outside, will use this case as an alibi. So far, we have been more focused on the pride of holding the torch of democracy globally. Unfortunately, we did not complete secure management of democracy internally. As some Member States and officials within the EU showed, democracy can be effectively suppressed even after it was once established. Besides that, our immediate neighbourhood is in many cases a playground for autocratic regimes. Attacks on our democratic structures often have a foreign imprint. But for it to succeed, they are provided by internal allies. To defend our democratic standards we have to address both urgently. We need to build a resilient system that goes beyond simple codes of conduct, increase transparency regarding our meetings and introduce improved clearance of everyone working at and representing our institutions. Immediate course of action should be to set clear rules on lobbying, as well as strong protection of the whistleblowers. To strengthen the confidence in democracy we have to lead by example.

Madam President, Mr Commissioner, thank you all once again all of you for your remarks and contributions. I want to thank first of all the shadow rapporteurs for our excellent cooperation throughout the process. Of course, thank you all colleagues who took part in the debate with ideas, contributions, hopes and in some cases scepticism. As my introductory remarks were mostly focused on what the EU should do to accelerate the enlargement process, now I wish to focus more on the countries aspiring to become members. The success of the enlargement process also depends on them, as you said Mr Commissioner, it’s true. It is a twofold process and a partnership. Excluding Ukraine, which is fighting for its freedom, we see persistent political crises these days, tensions between the countries, and foreign interference. However, we need good news and positive examples of development and cooperation. We need to see that you follow our principles and values in practice. Moreover, we need to see political consensus in your countries on the EU accession that would be above internal political differences. A European future is what your citizens support and deserve. Europe is where you belong.

Madam President, Commissioner, dear colleagues, thank you for the opportunity to present recommendations of the House on the new enlargement strategy. Thank you also for entrusting me with this important task at a time when enlargement becomes geopolitically strategic policy after 10 years of fatigue. The Russian aggression in Ukraine has had a tectonic impact on many of our policies. We all agree that a new impetus is needed to re-energise the enlargement process, ensuring its continuity, efficiency, credibility, and impact. Council conclusions, the agreement on the candidacy status for Ukraine and Moldova, and the recognition of the European perspective for Georgia are strong political signs of support. With this decision, the scope of the enlargement policy was officially extended to the Eastern Partnership countries. Therefore our internal administrative structures and external financial instruments will need to be adjusted accordingly. In the context of the before-mentioned conclusions and the expectations from the Western Balkans, I wish to highlight one of the main messages of the draft text. Each enlargement country should be judged on its own merits. As the EU, we should overcome the enlargement gridlock by revamping the accession process both as a political goal and methodology. For that, we believe we need a new EU strategy for enlargement in which we have to define clear and transparent policy objectives and implement the necessary and timely institutional reforms. The reform processes of the enlargement policy and internal reforms of the EU should go hand in hand. In fact, the enlargement process can encourage much-awaited EU reforms. The rule of law should be at the centre of the process. We should strategically apply targeted conditionality based on clear progress benchmarks. That means timely rewarding reforms and reacting on the regression or a persistent lack of progress. In the same context, we must emphasise the alignment of accession countries with the EU’s common foreign and security policy. EU membership means more than just EU funds and transport corridors. Before anything, it represents a set of values and principles to share and respect. I would also like to briefly present several novelties that are proposed in this document. Clear deadlines for concluding negotiations with the accession countries, and these negotiations should finish by the end of this decade. Qualified—majority decision on the start of the negotiations, and opening and closing of individual chapters. The final decision would still be unanimous, but I believe this would be a leap of trust in the process that some issues can be solved through negotiating. We cannot lose time once again, like in the case of North Macedonia and Albania. Chief negotiator from the EU side for each country: this could benefit the transparency of the process, primarily when we communicate with the citizens of candidate countries. Establishing a framework for effective cooperation between the European Public Prosecutor’s Office and the accession countries to facilitate close cooperation and the prosecution of the misuse of EU funds. A formal assessment of accession countries under the EU’s rule—of—law mechanism and report, and the EU Justice Scoreboard, using the same indicators that apply to the Member States to prevent a persistent lack of progress, severe deficiencies and regression. The creation of a special dedicated rule—of—law task force to be entrusted with developing more substantial and effective support to candidate and potential candidate countries. This goes along with the active involvement of judges and prosecutors from the Member States. Phasing-in of candidate countries to respective EU policies, initiatives and the single market, including access to EU funds in the respective areas. This will enable citizens to experience the benefits of accession throughout the process and not only upon its completion to reward sustainable progress. This House was always a prominent supporter of enlargement. With our joint work and by adopting solid recommendations on how the future enlargement policy should be implemented, we can once again set the tone and standards to enable the Union to grow and prosper.

Madam President, Mr Commissioner, after the horrific tragedy of 22-year old Jina Mahsa Amini we are continuously witnessing inhumane actions in the Iranian regime. Iran is trying to suppress the fundamental right to protest in the most brutal way, including by issuing death sentences. More than 400 protesters have been killed and around 17 000 have been arrested by the security forces. News coming from Iran is very disturbing, and unfortunately, the most vulnerable are not spared from the horrors. The fact that about 50 children have already been killed is bloodcurdling and shows the barbarism of this regime. Yesterday we also saw the Iranian football players at the World Cup standing in solidarity with the protesters and refusing to sing the national anthem. The regime’s response was expected – censorship, darkness, and ignoring. Their brutal repression is trying to crush the protests, but it cannot break the spirit of freedom that has inspired many Iranian people to risk their lives for the common good. We as the European Parliament have to send a strong message of support and put forward a decisive EU response to sanction the deeply compromised Iranian regime. It’s our duty to those courageous people looking for their freedom.

Madam President, Mr High Representative, yes, it’s high time we debate our relations with China, which are essential for the European Union, our role as a global actor and our future development. The most essential task is to unite the position of Member States on this, and we continue to see individual actions that affect us all. We should simultaneously work on our industry redeployment as we work on energy independence. Members of this House are still sanctioned for speaking the truth about evident human rights violations. Moreover, we see reports on illegal Chinese policing in the European Union. Russian aggression in Ukraine is also testing our relations. It’s essential to talk, open up a long list of difficult questions and stand firm in defending our stances. But while we can discuss with China global challenges and negotiate the rules on how we trade in goods, we should never trade our values.

–The Honourable Chair, Mr Commissioner, Colleagues and colleagues, the Republic of Croatia fully deserves entry into Schengen as it has fulfilled all the required conditions, both technical and political. Croatia has the longest external land border of the European Union and wants to contribute to greater security on it, and the European Union hereby proves the functionality and attractiveness of its model. Speaking about the future of Schengen, we need to strengthen it as one of Europe's greatest achievements, and new enlargement is one of the best ways, especially in this critical time when war is waged on European soil and when one crisis replaces another, but it is important to continue implementing the Schengen acquis. This strengthens trust between the members of the Schengen area. There is also a need to have confidence in countries that have been working for a long time to meet the Schengen criteria. I look forward to building on our membership of the European Union. Thus, we acquire the same free movement rights for Croatian citizens, who already enjoy 420 million people in 26 countries. This is the equal Europe we stand for.

The European political community must first prove what it is not. It must not in any way slow down the process of further enlargement of the European Union, let alone become an alternative to full membership of the European Union. In the wake of Russia’s aggression against Ukraine and far-reaching geopolitical shifts, we must indeed not water down the renewed interest in enlargement policy after a long time. In addition, it will be very difficult to maintain a structure that would position itself somewhere between the established procedures of the European Union and the looseness of the informal political forum. Also, skepticism is produced by the fact that such a wide network of participants implies an extremely heterogeneous society, according to many characteristics. With so many different interests in the game, there is a growing chance that none will ultimately be satisfied. Finally, I believe that such a community, introducing divergent political values, represents an uncertain benefit to the European project itself. The UK's request to e.g. remove the flags of the European Union from the founding assembly, perhaps best illustrates the depth of the contradiction between the ambitions and realities of the European political community.

Madam President, Mr Commissioner, there are so many evidences of an active role of the Lukashenko regime in the Russian aggression on Ukraine since day one. Belarussian troops may not have been involved in the conflict; still, dozens of thousands of Russian troops were deployed to Belarus. Belarussian airspace was used for launching attacks against Ukraine. The supply of weapons for Russian armed forces in Ukraine was organised over the territory of Belarus. At the same time, Putin and Lukashenko continued holding meetings to discuss even closer cooperation. Therefore, our sanctions on Putin and his regime should be mirrored on Lukashenko and his cronies. It’s evident that Lukashenko is malignant. However, his possibilities to influence geopolitics are lesser than Putin’s. Belarus, the oldest dictatorship in Europe, is a true example of the limited sovereignty theory in practice. Stolen elections and mass protest brought Lukashenko’s regime under pressure. Putin’s aggression against Ukraine might, hopefully, end it.

Madam President, Mr Commissioner, enlargement policy is not only about political and economic unity – it is founded in our values too. Following the common foreign policy might not be defined as key criteria, but it becomes today as one of the critical indicators of the commitment of the candidate countries. It cannot be dismissed or treated as a side issue that will gradually be aligned. Our position is clear. Serbian negotiations can only advance when the sanctions are fully adopted. In Montenegro, persistent political instability affects their front—runner status. On BiH, the new recommendations with the same complex conditions will hopefully bring the country closer to the candidacy status, but we remain cautious. Albania and Macedonia deserve a fast track to compensate for the time lost, and any delay in visa liberalisation for Kosovo is detrimental to our role and perception. We need to build back our credibility by acknowledging the progress and by not ignoring the backsliding when it is obvious.

Madam President, Mr Commissioner, Russian aggression against Ukraine and its multiple consequences remains our focal point, as it should. The most urgent remains energy prices. Taxation of excessive profits, joint purchase, and reallocation of unused EU funding are valid proposals. We need fast, innovative, and common solutions. But we should apply the same strategy and decisiveness to our foreign policy. Increased political, economic and military assistance is essential to help Ukraine and to tackle all other crises caused by Russian aggression too. Illegal referenda, annexation, and the latest attacks on civilians require a severe economic and political response with further sanctions. The last point on the agenda is relations with China following the Communist Party Congress. The framework and definition of our relations with China will directly affect our future as it’s the best test of our geopolitical ambitions for a strategically autonomous EU. A strong, resilient, and united Union is always the proper answer.

Mr President, Mr Commissioner, it’s really hard to say what is worse, Russian war of aggression or Kremlin long—term propaganda. There is a clear political agenda to boost disinformation, propaganda, stimulate regional tensions to destabilise, while supporting radical and populist political options all over Europe. Pro—Russian political options come from the extremes, from populist backgrounds, and they serve as Putin’s ‘useful idiots’, often as well—paid ‘useful idiots’. However, sadly one can find them even among some former and current EU prime ministers. I would also say that the EU was keeping its eyes shut on this matter for years, hence the consequences. Putin’s cronies are using dangerous, cynical and manipulative misinterpretations. They are trying to strengthen pro—Russian sentiment by undermining our cohesion, our unity, and by speaking against the sanctions. They are using the rising costs of living, the energy crisis and inflation to speak favourably of Russia and to advocate for the return to business as usual. We cannot return to business as usual and we cannot overlook the vicious Russian war of aggression and their war crimes. Russian attempts to weaponise energy is just a final confirmation of this. We would also add that no one in Europe can now sit on two chairs. Serbia, for example, remains the only European country besides Belarus that has not imposed sanctions on Russia. The recent signing of the agreement with Russia in the UN is a slap in the face for their enlargement perspective, but primarily to their citizens that want to join the EU. We need to continue countering this propaganda, by giving strong support to civil society and fact checkers, not only in the EU, but also in our immediate neighbourhood.

Mr President, more than seven months since the start of its aggression, things are not going as planned for Russia. What was supposed to be a quick special military operation turned into a long battle, where Ukrainian forces showed exceptional bravery and even started to advance. The pipeline that was a significant source of financing for Russian aggression is sabotaged. In desperation the Kremlin began to mobilise. I believe that, once again, this House will confirm a strong-text resolution and this lead the way for future actions. Our demands and suggestions are precise. We want and ask for: another robust package of sanctions targeting anyone involved in these illegal referenda, as we will never recognise their so-called results. Coordinated actions on the visa and asylum applications of the Russian citizens and concrete proposals for advanced military support. I would also like to reflect on the great sense of unity permanently shown by this House since the start of the Russian aggression on Ukraine. One of the most critical tasks is maintaining unity among our governments and citizens as well. We have to be clear and say: the origin of all the problems that our citizens are dealing with – high energy prices, food supply problems, and security threats – are caused by the actions of the Russian regime. The firmer we are with our sanctions, the sooner they will end. And the change in Russia should come from within. Therefore, we should increase our support to those in Russia who raise their voices against the Putin regime and can be the drivers of this change. This war will end Putin’s regime. Slava Ukraini!

Madam President, first of all, congratulations to the rapporteurs for their excellent work. As a shadow rapporteur for the second report, I will focus my intervention on the border regions. The border regions’ importance goes beyond statistics. As the report’s title said, the border regions are living labs of European integration. Given the specificities of their positions and the challenges they face, these regions should also be living labs for European innovation. The fact that the border regions generally perform less well economically than other regions within a Member State is a call for our swift action. We need flexible and feasible programmes that can easily be adapted to the specific needs of the regions. I also join the calls to the Commission and the Council to find a way out of the current blockage of the regulation on a European cross-border mechanism. We need proper implementation and enforcement of relevant EU legislation, the rights of cross-border and frontier workers, improving their employment, working, health and safety conditions. Teleworking too should be recognised. Therefore, we call on the Commission to revise the Regulation on the coordination of social security systems, to put forward legislative proposals for a European social security pass without further delay. I particularly welcome the green dimensions of this report. As recent floods have shown, we must urgently increase our cooperation on disaster risk-management, including improved early warning across border regions. I wish to end my intervention by highlighting the importance of cooperation with border regions at our external borders of the European Union, with their counterparts in the countries that are yet to become members. Our funding programmes should be even more significant too, to promote EU enlargement policy.

Thank you for your response. My second question will be a follow—up related to the Russian influence in the Western Balkans, and its effect evidently and for the long time has surpassed disinformation campaigns. Are there any new ideas and proposals, possible consequences, being considered in the case of the Western Balkans, in particular related to the countries and stakeholders where Russian influence is the most present, where they are not aligned to our sanctions and the majority of citizens does not support European Union accession and support Russian aggressions on Ukraine instead?

Mr High Representative, six months into an unjustified and illegal Russian aggression on Ukraine, we are encouraged very much by the resistance and successful counterattack by the Ukrainian army. Ukrainians pay the highest price of this war and they need, depend on and deserve our support. However, political, economic and social consequences of the war are felt globally. International reactions to Russia’s war and its serious violation of international law have displayed some rifts in the international community. We note with concern that some third countries have been tempted to listen to Russia’s manipulative allegations, according to which EU and Western sanctions were responsible for food shortages and famine in third countries. My questions: do you see the need to adapt EU policies promoting multilateralism and the rules-based global order? If so, in what way? And finally, which main challenges for EU strategic communications does Russia’s war of aggression against Ukraine impose?

–Dear President, first of all, I would like to thank the Council and the Parliament for their support for the introduction of the euro in Croatia. The Council also recognised the changed geopolitical circumstances and finally sent a clear political signal on the readiness of the European Union for further enlargement. The European perspective has been confirmed for the three countries that deserve it, and because of the resistance to Putin's Russia they really need support. However, the Western Balkans can be talked about, unfortunately, with less optimism. The conclusions, except to some extent in the case of Bosnia and Herzegovina, did not register any progress. The European perspective in this region was confirmed 19 years ago. The blockade of the start of negotiations with Albania and North Macedonia undermines European credibility. This only proves that the European Union must be reformed in parallel in order to be able to make more effective decisions like this. Bosnia and Herzegovina has however been given a certain chance in the election year, but the ruling policies must not repeat the old mistakes. Changed geopolitical circumstances should be an incentive to change political relations in the country, certainly for the better. Bosnia and Herzegovina is waiting for a place in the European Union. Any real move on this path will have our support.

Thank you, Mrs. Chairman, the decision of the US Supreme Court to overturn the right to abortion is a dangerous precedent and evidence of ‘trumpism’, unfortunately, has not disappeared with his mandate. That is why we must do everything to prevent similar initiatives in our societies that are inspired by this humiliating decision. In these traumatic and never simple situations, women must be able to independently decide on their own body and reproductive health, without pressure and conditioning, and receive adequate care in their city and their country. Unfortunately, the health system in Croatia is also crossed by the most conservative influence, so in the public health system we have entire hospitals where doctors refuse the right to access abortion. It is time that throughout the European Union, including Croatia, we additionally legally ensure the right to abortion by including it in national constitutions and the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union. A woman's right to choose should not be revoked. It is our duty to ensure and defend this right.