Speeches

Madam President, I would like to thank all colleagues for tonight’s debate but above all, my colleagues the shadow rapporteurs for their great contribution to this report and for excellent cooperation. Tonight, the European Parliament once again showed its full support for the European future of Montenegro. I am more than convinced that Montenegro has the capacity to overcome the current problems outlined in the report. It knew how to prove it in the past, and I have no doubt Montenegro will be able to do it again in the future. Continuously high support of citizens for EU membership binds political options, and they should be stimulated to cooperate to achieve that trans-party goal. In this context, Mr Commissioner, I would like your prediction to be fulfilled that by the end of your term, our term, at least one country in the Western Balkans will conclude negotiations on EU membership. It would be a common endeavour and an important sign that the European Union remains an open project.

Dear Chair, Honourable Commissioner, Honourable Colleagues, it is honourable to present the report on Montenegro for the second time, this time for 2021. At the beginning, I would like to highlight two key facts. Montenegro is the furthest away on the Eurointegration path and has opened all chapters. And almost 80% of Montenegrin citizens support the country's accession to the European Union. Montenegro is at the forefront of enlargement policy in practice. This fact must not be overlooked in discussions on granting candidate status and accelerating accession to the European Union. The past year, to which this report refers, has been marked by internal political blockages and stagnation along the European path. This year we also mark ten years since the start of negotiations on Montenegro's membership in the European Union, but no chapter has, unfortunately, been closed since 2017. The main political priority should therefore be to close the negotiating chapters, i.e. to meet the interim benchmarks for rule of law chapters 23 and 24. This requires a complete negotiating team, and it is precisely the negotiating structure that has not been operational for a long time. The report highlighted concerns about insufficient progress in judicial reform and the prevalence of corruption, two key sectors seeking legislative support. Progress in the fight against organised crime and in international police cooperation is to be welcomed, while limited progress remains in the area of media freedom. We reiterate the importance of strengthening the protection of journalists, stepping up efforts to fight disinformation, hate speech, online harassment, politically biased reporting and foreign influence in Montenegrin media. Foreign influence in Montenegro is evident. We have witnessed dangerous events in Cetinje. We note the direct influence of the Serbian Orthodox Church on political events in Montenegro. In addition, Russia's continued interest in destabilising the region was underlined, which could also be felt directly in Montenegro. The report condemns the protests against the then unnamed minority government, which were used from some political options to show support for Russia and on the day of the start of the aggression against Ukraine. We have made it clear that the denial of genocide, rhetoric to fuel intolerance or the glorification of war crimes must not be tolerated. For this reason, it is important to welcome Montenegro’s continued and full alignment with the European Union’s Common Foreign and Security Policy, including through European Union sanctions against Russia and its active participation in missions and operations under the European Union’s Common Security and Defence Policy. Problems recorded in the report are primarily obligations that require the dedicated work of all branches of government in Montenegro. Right now we need to speed up the pace of their resolution because too much time as the most precious resource has been spent in vain. We welcome the formation of a new minority government composed of pro-European parties as well as the election of a new speaker of parliament. We also call for the appointment of the co-chair of the EU-Montenegro Stabilisation and Association Parliamentary Committee as soon as possible. Montenegro needs a continuous and engaged dialogue between all parliamentary parties and relevant stakeholders with a view to building a strong pro-European and democratic platform. This would be the optimal way to mitigate political polarisation or possible radicalisation. The aim is to permanently ensure social stability, respect for democratic processes, norms and standards, as well as the pro-European aspirations of the vast majority of Montenegrin citizens. Montenegro in the European Parliament has proven sincere support from all pro-European political groups. There is a consensus on the implementation of the reforms necessary to address the shortcomings of the institutions that are essential for adapting to the standards of the European Union. Russia’s brutal aggression against Ukraine has once again given a strong impetus to the static enlargement policy of the European Union. When it comes to the European Southeast, the EU's enlargement policy needs to demonstrate its credibility by opening blocked negotiations with Albania and North Macedonia. However, I also believe that Montenegro can be a collateral winner in the new situation. Of course, provided that the operational capacity to address the still open issues of the negotiating agenda brings it to the level of stated ambition. In this regard, I wish the most responsible for the process in Montenegro a lot of success so that we can welcome Montenegrins as full citizens of the European Union as soon as possible.

Mr President, the summit this week is of historical importance that we cannot miss to use. Enlargement policy should cease to be a side policy but part of the EU’s mainstream again. We have to grant candidacy status to Ukraine and Moldova as a sign of our clear political support and our recognition of their commitment. Georgia deserves the same, but has to follow up on the clearly determined conditions for its candidate status. Granting candidacy status must be accompanied finally with the start of the negotiations for North Macedonia and Albania. The European Union’s recommitment to the Western Balkans is more urgent than ever. It would also be the best message for the people of accession countries to still believe in the European Union and their European future. The enlargement process must remain a merit-based approach. After years of fatigue, let’s fuel new energy into the enlargement process. Everything else would be a strategic and historic mistake that would weaken the credibility of our Union.

Mr President, the Russian invasion of Ukraine caused a reset and tectonic shift in many political attitudes and policy responses. One of the main lessons is that the common foreign, security and defence policies of the Union can no longer be the weakest link in our integration. We all agree to condemn Russian aggression in the strongest possible terms. By defending itself, Ukraine defends us too, and we can no longer avoid responsibility for our security and defence. Taking more significant responsibility also means larger investments from our side. However, being strategically autonomous means that our focus cannot only be on security and defence spending: foreign policy can’t lag behind too. Enlargement policy, for example, one of the most successful policies, must also be at the centre of our action. The credible perspective of enlargement and the merit-based regatta approach must be our political response already at the next Council meeting in two weeks.

Dear Chair, Mr Commissioner, I congratulate the rapporteur, Mr Omarjee, and welcome the debate on this important report. For several years now, in the European Parliament, we have been continuously fighting for European islands and islanders, almost 20 million of them on 2,400 inhabited islands, but we can do more and better at both European and national level. The methodology and all relevant Commission proposals must start to take into account insularity as a factor, and member states must support and implement such proposals in national programmes. We already have a legislative basis for this in Article 174 of the Lisbon Agreement, and we also have an example of good practice – a specific percentage for the islands in the Just Transition Fund. Developing islands lag behind the mainland on average about 20 percent. The availability of public services is significantly lower, the prices of products are higher. Transport and energy are dependent on often inadequate connections with the mainland, and economically mostly on seasonally unsustainable tourism. But we should not only talk about problems, but also about opportunities for development. The pilot project on the energy transition of islands has proven that islands can be at the forefront of the green transition process at European level. A similar innovative model should be applied to other aspects of their development. Cohesion policy, the Fit for 55 package and the Resilience and Development Mechanism should be financial platforms. The islands don't just live in the summer. Islanders deserve a level playing field and availability of services throughout the year. I therefore join the call on the Commission to make 2024 the year of islands and to adopt the European Action Plan for Islands as soon as possible.

Mr President, I would like to congratulate the rapporteur, Mr Waitz, because I believe the report is timely and shows that this House is a leader in topics that will shape our future. The world has changed since 24 February, and so the view of many on our defence. We need more cooperation between our Member States and with our partners, through a set of actions. I believe in importance to prepare for new security challenges affected by the climate change, which could increase threats and have geopolitical consequences. We can already witness that in areas such as the Arctic or the Sahel. I also want to point out the water issue. Due to climate change, water supplies will be affected, while global water demands will rise. Therefore, I believe we produced an ambitious report to respond to some of the biggest challenges of our time. Our response definitely should be both more environmental and without endangering our safety in these unstable times.

Mr President, congratulations to the rapporteur, Mr Kyuchyuk, but it’s another report on North Macedonia where we, unfortunately, cannot welcome an intergovernmental conference and the start of the accession negotiations with the European Union. North Macedonia did everything it was requested to do, and yet we still do not know the date the country deserves. They underwent substantial reforms, including to strengthening its democracy and fighting against corruption, and even changing their name. And contrary to some others, North Macedonia has fully aligned with the European Union sanctions against Russia. There must be no excuses for further delay if we want to preserve our credibility. It is also necessary to keep the pro—European aspiration in North Macedonia and the whole Western Balkans region. Given the changed geopolitical context of the Russian aggression on Ukraine, strengthening the enlargement policy is more important than ever. In June, a positive decision on starting the accession negotiations with North Macedonia and Albania is a must.

Mr President, Mr Commissioner, I want to thank the rapporteur on this valuable reflection on the state of play of our relations with Moldova. We acknowledge many of reforms undertaken, and specify the ones that should remain a priority in the upcoming months and, most notably, the strengthening of the state institutions and justice reform. The European Parliament will remain a strong supporter of all of the reform processes, as confirmed by the Memorandum of Understanding with the Parliament of Moldova last year. We cooperate in many areas, but we should do more and we should increase our financial institutions’ assistance for all of the necessary reforms. Lastly, given the changed security context following the Russian invasion of Ukraine and the pro—European geopolitical orientation, Moldovan efforts should be acknowledged politically too. Supporting a swift assessment of Moldova’s readiness and applications for EU membership would be an essential step in the right direction. We support that.

Mr President, Mr Commissioner, given the highly worrying security situation after the Russian aggression on Ukraine, it’s very much timely to discuss the state of cooperation between the European Union and Moldova. Security incidents in the Transnistria region and mandatory military mobilisations clearly show how fragile the security situation in this area is. It’s worth praising the reaction of Moldovan leaders which properly contributed to the de—escalation of the already challenging situation. Russia has an abiding interest in destabilising Moldova and the Kremlin has now chosen the means of external interference in Moldova through propaganda, military presence, energy blackmail and direct interference in political processes. It is important today to oppose these actions and see how we can best support Moldova. Following the signing of the Stabilisation and Association Agreement with Moldova in 2016, the European Union has continued to support Moldova, and we recognise the results already achieved. When it comes to the application for EU membership, we welcome it and call for compliance with the established procedure. We also call on the Commission to assess Moldova’s readiness and application for EU membership and ensure that its opinion is delivered swiftly to the Council. At the same time, political actors in Moldova should contribute to meeting the European aspirations of the people of Moldova, seeking to establish consensus on the most essential and urgent structural reforms. Finally, I would like to emphasise the exemplary solidarity of Moldova and the Moldovan people towards the refugees from Ukraine. Moldova has shown its support for Ukraine and its commitment to European values. We now need to increase our support for Moldova in this challenging situation. The EU stands by Ukraine. The EU should also stand by Moldova.

Mr President, we are all aware that wars are not limited to traditional types of warfare. The Russian invasion on Ukraine is just an evident example. The Kremlin started testing its tactics in Ukraine many years ago, targeting even a power grid. Disinformation examples are well—known, and particularly Russia disseminated 70% of all disinformation and fake news lately. Russian state—sponsored hackers and cybercriminals are still increasing their presence. They are very keen to target critical infrastructure. Those are basically the same actors, with the same intentions, that launched cyberattacks during the COVID pandemic, on hospitals or our Medicines Agency. That’s why it is of utmost importance to be prepared. These attacks may have unimaginable repercussions and our unity is a prerequisite for safety. Therefore, EU cybersecurity needs to be shown in practice. We absolutely have to support our Agency for Cybersecurity to strengthen the capacities of our Member States. With enough efforts and enough resources. Otherwise, we risk too much.

Dear Chairman, more than twenty years after his coming to power, Putin and his forces are trampling the weaker: journalists and opposition politicians, national and sexual minorities, all who dare to be free and different. It ranges from murders and beatings to abolishing the representativeness and autonomy of regions. However, none of this was enough for the European far right to open its eyes. And this attachment was richly aided by Putin, who linked ideological exclusivity and cynical business opportunism. We have no reason to believe that he stopped giving them, despite sanctions, an abundance of money for disinformation campaigns that manipulated voters in Western countries. Let us remember the loans of Russian banks, the disinformation campaigns around Brexit and the elections from the US to France. In doing so, he has kept many of his European Union partners in power or helped them to rise. Putin had his vocal supporters everywhere, from national representative bodies to the European Parliament. Let us not be fooled, in at least two members of the European Union, as well as on its external borders, today we have rulers who inherit values, rhetoric and methods of ruling the far right. With our tolerance of the Kremlin and its proxies, we have led Putin to dare to invade Ukraine, where the Russian army is committing crimes like we have not seen since Vukovar and Srebrenica. The flattened towns of Buča and Mariupol bear witness to this tolerance of the intolerant. It is time for them to finally be clearly politically condemned and defeated in the European Union.

Madam President, the situation has deteriorated since the Versailles summit. In this debate and our resolution, we welcome the conclusions but we move beyond them. We also welcomed the proposed package of sanctions yesterday, but we need to be stronger and move beyond it. To support their heroic resistance, we need to bolster our military equipment production and delivery to Ukraine. Furthermore, budgetary procedures cannot be an issue when it comes to collecting evidence and prosecution of war crimes. Time is of the essence here, and we have to move now. The Commission and the EU supervisory authorities must closely monitor all Member States’ comprehensive implementation of all sanctions and share these data. We should also introduce secondary sanctions on all entities in the European Union and third countries that will aid the Russian and Belarussian regimes to bypass sanctions. All loopholes must be closed, and all enablers must be sanctioned. The same goes for the countries that aspire to join the EU. Their lack of alignment has to have clear consequences on their integration process. Yes, sanctions cost Russia, and they cost us too. Our citizens also carry the financial burden, so we need a European solidarity mechanism that will address their economic and social consequences and pave the way toward energy independence. We can only do it if we do it together. These brutal actions by Russia show us that we have to do it. During the pandemic, we showed it was possible. Democracy costs, and the Ukrainians know it too well these days as they pay the highest price for it. We cannot escape our responsibility, our commitments and our credibility. This is no time for calculations of economic gains and losses; it is time for decisive action. By defending itself, Ukraine is fighting for us.

Mr President, the EU-China Summit happened last week, and that’s probably the only good news. Members of this House are still sanctioned for speaking out the truth about the evident human rights violations. However, it’s essential to talk, open up difficult questions and stand firm in defending our stances. Russian aggression in Ukraine is a medium to test our challenging – and in many ways problematic – relations with China. Supporting Russia or any form of resistance to the aggression should have clear economic and political consequences. Having said that, we cannot let this decision overshadow a long list of open disputes we have with China. As we work on energy independence, we should at the same time work on our industry redeployment and industrial independence. Moreover, we have to finally end the selling of forced labour products on our market. We can discuss with China the global challenges and negotiate the rules on how we trade with goods, but we should never trade with our values.

Thank you, Mr High Representative, for your answer. Now, I would like to focus more directly on Ukraine. The European Peace Facility is the most prominent instrument of our support to the Ukrainian armed forces. How do you envisage additional and continuous delivery on adequate military equipment to Ukraine? Does this open the way for equipping other third partner countries’ armed forces in the case of need?

Honourable High Representative, our security does not stop at our borders. That’s why we need to be proactive throughout our neighbourhood. I welcome that the document contains a goal to develop a tailored partnership with Western Balkan countries – moreover, to provide well-intentioned messages to foster stability and address political reality and constitutional obligations, particularly regarding Croats in Bosnia and Herzegovina. Nothing can be the same after 24 February. We need to push for a sustainable way to make Europe self-sufficient with food, energy and defence. Those needs should be a crucial part of our security agenda. That’s what our citizens are asking us to push for. In other words, we must walk the talk. That is also why I call for the strengthening of intelligence cooperation among our Member States in order to prevent situations such as the falling of a Soviet-era drone in Zagreb, which went through the airspace of the European Union and NATO member countries. That is absolutely unacceptable. Therefore, Mr High Representative, I would ask you the following: the Strategic Compass is based on the first ever EU threat analysis. That is the gathering of threat analyses from the civil and military intelligence services from the 27 Member States. Regular reviews on this threat analysis are foreseen. When will the next one take place, as our immediate security environment is unfortunately deteriorating rapidly? Has this exercise permitted to launch discussions on deeper EU intelligence cooperation?

Dear President, Madam Prime Minister, High Representative, Russia's President Putin's war against Ukraine is a turning point in recent European history. The Russian aggression has triggered tectonic changes in the European Union. This is the only positive outcome of the tragic events of the past two weeks. We see that the 27 members can unite positions, can act together as a geopolitical actor on the global stage. The common foreign and security policy must not remain the weakest link of European integration. European security cannot be negotiated without the European Union. The Union finally needs to take greater responsibility for its security and defence, but it also needs to be able to prevent new Vukovars and Srebrenicas on the continent. It is high time to reaffirm the strategic compass, increase investment in collective defence and strengthen strategic autonomy. Europe needs to be at the forefront of setting up a new multilateral agenda. Let's use this political momentum of togetherness and equate ambitions with concrete actions. The expectations of our citizens are clear. Strengthening common defence is a priority for them, and the European Parliament as their direct representative wants and should be involved on an equal footing as a partner.

The increasingly uncertain political situation in Bosnia and Herzegovina has become even more complicated by the Russian aggression against Ukraine. In a country where there is no consensus on fundamental social, economic and political issues, parts of which officially deny both genocide and Putin's aggression, there remains too much room for politicisation and the use of dysfunctional regulation for personal and group interests. Chronic blockages are the best indicator that progress in Bosnia and Herzegovina cannot be without consensus, however, consensus is built with trust, not with poor calculations. Especially not by attaching to policies that condemn and even increasingly sanction the civilized world. On the other hand, the outvoting of the will of one of the constituent peoples is a direct abuse of a system that obviously does not provide protection of constitutional rights for all. It is therefore not sustainable to call on Bosnia and Herzegovina to abide by judgments of European courts such as the Sejdić-Finci judgment without also seeking to abide by judgments of BiH courts. And it was the Constitutional Court of Bosnia and Herzegovina that ruled that the existing electoral practices deviate from the Constitution. Such selectivity serves as an argument for those who question the statehood and territorial integrity of the country. The views of citizens on the future are reflected in demographic statistics. In the past year alone, 170,000 citizens have left Bosnia and Herzegovina, and almost half a million since 2013. These are mostly people in the most productive periods of life. The requested accelerated candidate status also requires an accelerated engagement of Bosnia and Herzegovina to fulfil 14 clearly defined priorities. Bosnia and Herzegovina is certainly a place in the European Union. Every move on this path should be supported, but also respond to dangerous foreign routes.

Madam President, each new day of the Russian invasion brings more suffering to Ukrainians. The humanitarian situation is deteriorating. Almost two million people, mostly women and children, have left the country, but expectations are even more grim. I would like, from the Croatian war experience, to point out that internally displaced people within Ukraine, who are not included in these statistics, also need protection and assistance. In less than two weeks, numerous attacks on civilian infrastructure, schools and hospitals took place, jeopardising the most vulnerable groups. Moreover, attempts to organise humanitarian corridors, where civilians seek a way out of the hell of war, have failed due to Russian shelling and blockades. But the suffering of Ukraine has caused a tsunami of solidarity in the EU. The activation of the Temporary Protection Directive hopefully can turn the tide. It may eventually create momentum to be used for the long—awaited adoption of the Pact on Migration and Asylum.

The Honourable Chairman, Madam Commissioner, currently connects about half of the world's population to the Internet. The internet has long been central to international communication and commerce. However, only 58% of European citizens have basic digital skills, although they are increasingly important for action in modern societies. 2017. fake news have been declared the term of the year. Two years later, the material damage caused by the direct and indirect consequences of disinformation amounted to nearly $80 billion. It also revealed that 67% of fake news came from Russia. The Russian aggression against Ukraine is therefore also a war by other means, especially disinformation campaigns. The Kremlin's narrative is as toxic as its military aggression, but we also follow the heroic resistance of Ukrainians on social media. The powerful messages of President Zelenskyy and the Ukrainian leadership are extremely effective in responding to Russian lies. That is why the Kremlin stops the same social networks that it previously used for its Gebels propaganda. In addition to the tragic situation in Ukraine, I also warn about our immediate neighbourhood. The Western Balkans must not become a platform for interference from geopolitical rivals who want to undo the core values of our Union. There is a clear political agenda disinformation and interference, manipulation of citizens, destabilisation of institutions and discrediting undesirable governments. Disinformation is used here. cyber attacks, fuel regional tensions and support radical political options. These tools undermine our partnership with neighbouring countries, influence public opinion and strengthen regimes with authoritarian tendencies. Our reaction must be continuous and decisive, because only in this way can we preserve the future of our democratic societies.

Dear Chairman, yes, Russia's aggression against Ukraine can be a prelude to the twilight of humanity, but also to a new, fairer international order. The main reason for the war is the authoritarian nature of the regime under the absolutism of the Russian president. It is not known what is worse, Putin's military aggression or his narrative justifying bullying. Putin was counting on the passivity of Ukrainians and the division of the West. He overestimated his strength, underestimated the strength of Ukrainian resistance and the West's ability to unite. This war also evokes memories of the war of aggression against my country, Croatia, thirty years ago. Attacks on children's hospitals, civilian facilities, demolition of cities, many refugees. Putin, like Milosevic, must be held accountable for his actions before a war crimes tribunal. It will be very difficult for him to get out of this war. The Russian version of Majdan could happen to the Kremlin. History has shown that dictators can be defeated, but it is equally important to eliminate the circumstances that led to the emergence of dictators. Ukraine is bleeding, but Putin's regime will bleed out. Long live European Ukraine, glory to Ukraine!

Dear Chairman, colleague and colleague, I come from Dalmatia where prošek has been traditionally produced for centuries. This old name was used long before it was protected in the European Union. The reputation of prosecco derives primarily from the quality that is the result of a specific local production technique. There are important differences between Prosecco and Prosecca they are not and cannot be direct competitors. These two drinks are easy to distinguish by color, taste, grape variety, method and region of production, size and shape of the bottle, as well as by price. Prosecco it is produced in large quantities, while prošek is sold in small quantities, and mostly on the local market. A reasonably well-informed consumer, as the regulations state, cannot be confused. In the present case, incomplete and incorrect interpretations and accusations of abuse, imitation or evocation must be dismissed. Prošek is not a new product labelled as prošek just to evoke associations on prosecco. The similarities in the name stem from the rich historical and linguistic heritage that our two countries share. Legacy to be celebrated, not belittled and abused. Prosecco is an aperitif served at the beginning of the meal, while prošek, as a dessert wine, is served at the end. Accordingly, let every good dish begin proseccomAnd it ends in prosecco. I would like to thank the Commission for its work so far and for responding swiftly to my letter regarding unfounded attempts to obstruct the protection of the name ‘prošek’. I would point out that Commissioner Wojciechowski, in answer to a question put by a Member of Parliament, states that coexistence of products is possible, even in the case of two homonymous terms. The recognition of traditional prosecco cannot in any way weaken the existing system of protection, it can only strengthen it. This would also be an acknowledgement of the contribution of the indigenous products of the newer Member States, as the principle of being united in diversity needs to be respected. Croatia and its producers cannot and must not be discriminated against due to cases of linguistic similarities, even less due to the fact that Croatia is the newest member of the European Union. We fight for equality, fairness and impartiality. This is proven in practice in such cases. This is why the European Union must protect small traditional producers of indigenous products from large ones, who are trying to abuse their dominant market position. Without such equality, there is no common future.

Mr President, Mr High Representative, Commissioner, our relations with Russia have been at a low point for a while. Most political challenges at our external borders have directly or indirectly Russia as a common denominator. The list of open issues is long: disinformation, hybrid threats, funding of anti-democratic forces in the EU, and foreign interference. But today, our primary focus should be Ukraine. After an eight-year war with 14 000 victims, situation in and around Ukraine evolved into a global threat. Russia is also actively undermining Ukraine’s democratic and socio-economic development for years through political and economic means, as well as through disinformation. So how can we best help Ukraine in this crisis? Despite the lack of progress, there is no alternative to continued talks. Diplomacy is still the only credible way to avoid doomsday scenarios. Meanwhile, the European Union has to continue supporting Ukraine, building deterrence, boosting Ukraine’s economy and defence, and supporting reform processes as well. We should also work to increase the potential costs of Russian aggressions by introducing sanctions against individuals, banks and companies involved in plans to attack Ukraine. Halting Nord Stream 2, in case of aggression, would increase our leverage while doing all of the above. Ukraine is a sovereign country with internationally recognised borders that has a full right to decide on its geopolitical orientation. The ongoing crisis has shown once again that any local crisis in Europe can turn into a global threat with possible deteriorating consequences. This should be an urgent call for the EU to enhance our own ability to respond quickly and in a unified way. While awaiting a much-needed comprehensive EU strategy towards Russia, we stand with Ukraine.

Madam President, 2022 was declared by Charles Michel as the year of European defence. I hope that it will advance our geopolitical ambitions with the adoption of the EU’s Strategic Compass and making a new cyber defence policy a reality. Another great step forward would be considering qualified-majority decision making for some aspects of our common foreign and security policy. This cannot remain the weakest link of our integration, often misused by our global competitors with different values. I appreciate the particular focus on the Western Balkans in both reports. EU-related reforms and a clear enlargement perspective for these countries should be our foreign policy priority and not a side policy. To conclude, it’s time for the EU to use its economic and diplomatic leverage to move from soft to smart power. Only a strong and united EU can be a geopolitical actor for peace, human security, sustainable development, and lead by example globally.

Dear Chairman, it is not often the case that we discuss a candidate country for membership of the European Union as a human rights emergency. However, the current situation with human and labour rights in Serbia fully justifies this precedent. In Serbia, there are no lone cases of external influences through dubious investments that are not in line with European standards and values. And such results in forced labour. And all this with the direct support of the ruling structures, which compare environmental protesters to fascists, while hooligans, with the protection of the police, defend murals of convicted war criminals. Yesterday, an intergovernmental conference was held to open a new cluster of negotiating chapters with Serbia. Ironically, a cluster for the environment is open. A few days after the mass protests in Serbia, it is against the government's legislative proposal that would dangerously endanger the environment and damage the health of citizens. Civil resistance managed to lead to the withdrawal of the contested law, but Brussels' resistance to such government policies, unfortunately, was absent. The message we send here is that only Serbia, a country that shows signs of backsliding in the area of the rule of law, is rewarded by opening new chapters. While Albania and North Macedonia, which have fulfilled all the conditions for the start of negotiations, are still in the waiting room, and the citizens of Kosovo still only need a visa for the European Union. Such decisions will not restore the credibility of the enlargement policy.

Dear Chair, Mr Commissioner, I welcome this report as it addresses one of the key and most serious problems facing the Western Balkan countries on their path towards the European Union. The European Commission's recently presented reports explain in detail the importance of delivering tangible results in judicial reforms and the fight against organised crime, especially in those countries where there is no particular progress. Stopping organised crime and corruption is key to joining the European Union. Unfortunately, the pandemic has not slowed down organised crime either. On the contrary, we have brazen examples of corrupt actions in public procurements for medical equipment, such as the ventilator affair in Bosnia and Herzegovina. There is a lot of evidence that the organised crime virus knows no borders. Coupled with corruption, organised crime poses a huge threat in an already troubled region. It threatens security, social cohesion, and forces young people to leave these countries. It is good that the new Instrument for Pre-Accession Assistance IPA III, for which I was co-rapporteur of the European Parliament, contains guidelines on strengthening the judiciary and developing more effective tools in the service of countering organised crime. I stress that we from the European Parliament must constantly send strong messages of support to civil society organisations, investigative journalism, all the hardworking and courageous people who work hard and risk making their countries better. Let's stand by them while they fight organised crime. Let's encourage stronger police and judicial cooperation between the Western Balkan countries and Kosovo's membership of Interpol would be a good step in that direction.