Speeches

Madam President, it’s with great concern that we follow the increased military presence of Russia at the Ukrainian border. We can speculate about its reasons, whether they are economic, political or both. Possible interpretations that link Russia’s actions with the Nord Stream 2 approval reflect how complex the relation we, as the EU, have with Russia since the interests of our Member States are not always aligned. We need to work together to coordinate our efforts concerning the Normandy Format cooperation with NATO in defence—related aspects. We have to address the economic dimension of our cooperation and foreign interference into our democratic processes, and lend once more our univocal support and commitment to Ukraine’s independence, sovereignty and territorial integrity within its internationally recognised borders. Ukraine has sovereign right to make its own foreign and security policy choices. As the Council will discuss this topic next week, we expect a swift agreement on further joint action, namely severe economic and financial sanctions that should be closely coordinated with our transatlantic partners. From Belarus and Ukraine to Republika Srpska, many of the challenges at our external borders have a common denominator in Moscow. This is why the Council meeting next week will be a good opportunity to discuss a long called for and much—needed comprehensive EU strategy towards Russia.

Dear Chairman, the deep political crisis in Bosnia and Herzegovina is further aggravated by the increasingly provocative and openly separatist actions of Milorad Dodik. This time it threatens, among other things, the adoption of the budget and the appointment of ambassadors, even the donation of COVID vaccines. His direct violation of the Dayton Peace Treaty, the denial of genocide, the opening of a foundation of convicted war criminals and the threat of secession demand our clear condemnation and a more active role towards Bosnia and Herzegovina in general. The current phase of destabilization of Bosnia and Herzegovina, with the external support of Belgrade, Moscow, but also Budapest, can have serious consequences for the stability of the entire region. Unfortunately, the lack of vision and the stalemate of enlargement policy in the European Union is accompanied by a gradual loss of credibility, which further strengthens various anti-democratic political projects in the Western Balkans. Basically, there is a risk of merging many chronic crises in the 2022 election year. But as we seek respect and a possible upgrade of the Dayton Agreement, we must not ignore some of its key provisions. That is why it is of utmost importance to negotiate a new electoral law that should finally comply with the decisions of the Constitutional Court of Bosnia and Herzegovina itself.

Madam President, it’s been 15 months that the Lukashenko and his regime has continued its systematic oppression towards their people. We must not lose sight of this fact while he’s extending illegal and anti—human matters to our borders. We should not fall into this trap by instrumentalising the precarious humanitarian situation there while addressing its security challenges. This crisis is yet another urgent reminder for the European Union to finally agree on the New Pact on Migration and Asylum and to strengthen our Common Foreign and Security Policy. We need determined and detrimental sanctions towards the Lukashenko regime, as our gradual approach does not yield the desired results. These two arguments would best signal solidarity between and towards Member States at the external borders, who are at the frontline of increasing challenges – solidarity that goes beyond the distribution of common funds, and also serves to respect laws and rights and to protect our democracies.

Mr President, it has been an exciting couple of weeks for transatlantic relations. After a turbulent summer we are picking up on the positive momentum – from lifting the travel ban, joint environment commitments in Glasgow, meetings on the highest level, suspension of the aluminium and steel trade dispute, the Pittsburgh meeting – to name a few. In my capacity as a standing rapporteur for relations with the US, I fully recognise the importance of the TTC for our overall relations. It’s one of the key pillars. We want to see sustainable, ethical and inclusive digital and green transitions that benefit our citizens. I would like to underline the issue of transparency and parliamentary cooperation. Even though the TTC is not negotiating a new comprehensive trade agreement, we learned our lesson from the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership. This is why I join calls to involve parliamentarians from both sides in your work. We are ready to contribute to this positive agenda.

Mr President, we welcome that the Slovenian Presidency organised this summit as one of their priorities, but we cannot hide our dissatisfaction with the overall outcome. When there are no decisions on the dates for concrete actions and when even using the word ‘enlargement’ becomes an issue, we must react. It’s true that some significant steps were taken, such as adopting the IPA free pre-accession financial instrument and substantial financial commitment has been made throughout the region as well. Nevertheless, we need more political engagement and commitment. As a group we particularly insist that all countries in the region uphold fundamental rights and the rule of law, defend freedom of media, fight corruption, and we will not compromise on these issues. What worries us is that we are witnessing unrest across the region. Typical patterns of foreign interference and public support for the EU is falling. As a long-term solution and effective driver of reforms, we propose a credible and reachable European perspective for the Western Balkans countries. We must not shy away from calling out on all of the negative trends and backsliding. Still, we must deliver on our political commitments towards countries that did everything we asked for. The Western Balkans is a real test of the credibility of the European Union’s declared geopolitical ambitions. Therefore, the accession talks with North Macedonia and Albania, but also regarding the visa-free regime for Kosovo should be approved immediately.

Madam President, I welcome this debate as we all followed with great concern recent events when President Saied dismissed the prime minister and suspended the parliament in July. Even though he appointed a new prime minister and government, in practice his power abuse and subordination of the constitution should lead to political reaction from our side. Democracy, the rule of law and respect for human rights are fundamental in order to achieve sustainable and truly inclusive economic growth and prosperity in Tunisia. Tunisia urgently needs a stable government, legitimised by democratic accountability, in order to reinitiate talks with the International Monetary Fund over the disbursement of the much—needed loan, necessary to relaunch the economy of the country. In that sense, particular attention should be focused on the transparent use of EU assistance, also within the new investment package. Finally, as the geopolitical actor we believe we are, we should assist Tunisia to return to a democratic path.

Mr President, first of all, I would like to say that I am grateful to the shadow rapporteurs for their truly constructive cooperation. I also want to thank the Committee on International Trade (INTA) for their opinion work that complemented this report very much. I have just returned from a fact—finding mission to the United States, where I gathered the last information to prepare a report for the final vote tomorrow. The main finding from the visit is that the transatlantic relationship, as known for most of the post-Second World War period, needs reinvention. A combination of Building Back Better at home, a shift towards more foreign policy restraint, US unpredictability due to domestic polarisation, and reorientation to China and Asia confirm that the transatlantic relationship can no longer be taken for granted. We need to redefine and rebalance a relationship that still can, and should, contribute to shaping the world, along with a full—fledged democratic alliance. I have heard many concrete suggestions during the debate today. It’s clear that the US remains our most important strategic partner, but the time for nostalgia is shrinking. The sooner we accept the new reality, the better the chances are to reinvent this critical relationship on a more equal footing. We have to go beyond defence and trade cooperation and work together to reinforce the multilateral system, cooperate on climate change, the global response to the health crisis and the protection of democratic standards and fundamental rights. The European Union is a union of states, whereas the United States is the United States. My main take from today is that the internal cohesion of the European Union is of crucial importance for our position and perception in the multipolar world. Finally, throughout this mandate, we listen to the ambitions of this Commission to be a geopolitical Commission. The relationship with the US is perhaps the best test of that ambition, and we have no time to lose in fulfilling it.

Mr President, this debate could not be timelier. Last November, President Biden’s election provided much relief and optimism in the European Union. I firmly believe, then as well as today, that we need a renewed and strengthened transatlantic partnership to tackle common challenges. Some of them have been well known for decades, but some are part of the newer dynamics of the world. I appreciate the word ‛relations’. It covers all manners of virtues and sins, doesn’t it? My impression is that this has become a more self—aware relationship, with a lot of space for cooperation, and diverging challenges that remain – in trade, data protection and attitudes towards China for example. It is a relationship based on the US primarily doing what fits their national agenda, and sometimes not fully taking into account all those things that matter to the European Union. Take the long overdue lifting of the travel ban, for example. We may be a newer Union, but we are also proud of our national histories and identities. Our diversity unites us. Our democratic, social and human rights standards are the most developed ones. And we should be proud of our lead to fight climate change. It goes without saying that we should not lose the sentiment about the assistance from the United States to Europe’s development, prosperity and successful integration, nor all of the multilateral achievements. During the past 75 years, the transatlantic partnership has stood for freedom, democracy, human rights, the rule of law, trade, economic cooperation and security. The European Union and the US have the largest bilateral trade and investment relationship and enjoy the most integrated economic relationship in the world. We should also praise positive developments like the Trade and Technology Council that took place last week. But we must stress in parallel that the European Union’s strategic autonomy should be pursued, with improved implementation of European Union foreign and defence policy priorities and principles. Also, with the European Union’s ability to act autonomously, when needed, in pursuing its legitimate interests. Moreover, we need to explore areas of convergence and seek to enhance cooperation, better coordination and consultation between the US and the European Union to avoid transatlantic tensions such as those that followed the adoption of the trilateral AUKUS deal or the uncoordinated withdrawal from Afghanistan. These events should remind us that the EU needs to catch up with the new reality and redefine our relationship with the US on a more equal footing. This means standing up for our interests whenever needed, but also taking greater responsibility. We must reinforce both: the European Union’s autonomy of decision and its autonomy of action, from soft power to smart power. In concrete terms, together with the US, we should work to promote multilateral cooperation for a more equitable and healthier world, fight against inequalities, cooperate better in research and technology development, and promote ecological transformation and the peaceful resolution of conflicts. We have to enhance our parliamentary cooperation, rule-based connectivity strategies, protect and promote democracy and human rights, share best practice examples and better include our citizens in decision making. Having said that, without any doubt, the US remains the European Union’s closest and most important strategic partner, and I believe that a strategical autonomous Union would be the best partner for the United States!

The Honourable Chairman, the Honourable President, has developed life-saving vaccines since your address last year, an agreement has been reached on the Multiannual Financial Framework and the Recovery Fund, and we are also recording better economic indicators. Today I would like to mention three topics that I believe are important for Europe, but also for Croatia. Unfortunately, Croatia was hit by a strong earthquake last year. The damage is great and the restoration is slow. As a result, there are concerns that funds allocated from the Recovery Fund may remain unused, as this is the responsibility of national governments. You're saying we need to remove the barriers between us. So it's about Schengen. I call on you, in line with the previous conclusions of the Commission and the Parliament, to support Croatia’s entry into Schengen, which would make life much easier for our citizens and improve economic cooperation. I would also like to mention the enlargement policy. Too bad you didn't devote more space to the process. You said we shared the same history and the same fate with the Western Balkans. That's why we have to keep our promises, show credibility and remove harmful blockages.

First of all, I would like to thank all those involved for their dedicated work over the past two and a half years. Today's discussion is the last formal step towards implementing a new, better financial instrument for pre-accession assistance IPA III. In short, the new generation of IPA will strengthen the democratic, normative and socio-economic transformation of candidate or potential candidate countries for membership of the European Union. It will provide more rational, better targeted, visible and sustainable support to partner countries on their path towards the European Union in addressing common challenges. Enlargement policy is inextricably linked to the convergence of the values of liberal democracy, respect for human rights and the rule of law, from which we as a Union must not depart. That is why it is good that the new IPA III will particularly insist on this. The new, upgraded instrument puts emphasis on strengthening conditionality related to democracy, human rights and the rule of law, even providing for the suspension of assistance in case of backsliding in these areas. IPA III will strengthen strategic communication, fight disinformation and contribute to cross-cutting climate, environmental, human rights and gender equality objectives. IPA III is a forward-looking instrument, taking into account European Union initiatives and objectives such as the Green Deal. The allocation of funds will be based on an effectiveness-based approach and the principle of fair distribution. This means that the aid will vary in scope and intensity according to the beneficiary’s performance, while applying the fair share principle to ensure that the scope and intensity of funding takes into account not only the beneficiary’s performance but also their actual needs and capacities. We want to avoid a disproportionately low level of help for only some. The progress of all users needs to be ensured. As a Parliament, I think we can be satisfied with what has been achieved, especially in the context of the thematic priorities as the institutional role of the European Parliament. During the negotiations, Parliament ensured improved governance of the instrument through an extended use of the delegated act procedure and an enhanced geopolitical dialogue with the European Commission. These mechanisms will enable Parliament to define the main strategic orientations and to responsibly examine the decisions taken under the instrument. Our goal was to apply the lessons learned from the previous IPA II instrument, and our motive was to provide assistance to those countries, i.e. their predominantly pro-European citizens. While the prospect of European Union membership has partly lost some of its power transformation, it is still the most effective stimulus for comprehensive political, economic and social reforms in the Western Balkans that the European Union has at its disposal. And for all those who are wondering why we allocate this much funding for preparation, I believe future members of the European Union, I would like to put forward a few arguments. Enlargement policy is important because it gives the Union the opportunity to promote and insist on important reforms in candidate countries. It is important because both sides benefit from this process. Data show that thanks to previous enlargements of the European Union, member states have also benefited in terms of economic growth and job creation. Enlargement policy promotes socio-economic cohesion already before accession, thus addressing some of the main concerns of European Union citizens regarding migration and social dumping. Similarly, enlargement guarantees a leading role for the European Union in the region. Currently, Russia, Turkey, Gulf countries as well as China are competing with each other and with the European Union for economic and political influence in the Western Balkans, too often with completely different interests from ours. It is important because it helps prevent and manage potential crises and conflicts, and perhaps the most important benefit is that it enhances the credibility of the European Union and sends a positive message for the prosperity and future of the Union itself. These days, the component of strengthening good neighbourly relations that we have highlighted in the Parliament as one of the priorities seems particularly important, for example recent events in Montenegro are the best indicator that slowing down reforms and, for example, politicising religious events with external support can have a negative effect on the division of society and the security situation in the country. What I want to emphasize is that we often record the highest support for the European Union in particularly polarized societies, since membership of the European Union as a common denominator can also have this cohesive factor. The IPA instrument is in fact financing the long-term interests and fundamental values of the Union. Our financial investments must match our ambitions to be geopolitically relevant in the Western Balkans and Turkey. Over €14 billion is a significant amount of economic aid. However, funding cannot fully replace a credible enlargement policy. I can replenish it, but I can't replace it. North Macedonia and Albania wait unjustifiably long for negotiations to begin, although they have done more than even some of the member states. Kosovo has also fulfilled all visa waiver criteria for a long time. It is time to finally verify their efforts with concrete decisions.

Mr President, it’s nothing new if we say that our relations with Russia are at a very low point, in short: energy over-dependence, divergent policies of the Member States’, direct interference in political processes and Russia’s very active role in disinformation campaigns. So we need to increase the resilience of the EU and its partners in the Eastern Neighbourhood against Russian disinformation and interference; ensure that Russia is implementing the Minsk Agreement; engage with Russian civil society more strategically, despite the regime’s evermore determined efforts to undermine any such engagement; besides carefully used selective engagement on urgent global challenges to generate progress on the other objectives. But we also must be realistic in our ambitions of democratising Russia as implied in this document. We should rather not keep falling into a political trap, further narrowing space for our political actions. Instead, we need a new, comprehensive, more strategic EU joint strategy towards Russia that will finally enable us for a more proactive approach.

Madam President, the catastrophic blast in the port of Beirut has only speeded up the deep and widespread crisis that has been crushing Lebanon’s political and economic life for years. During our visit last week, we witnessed dramatic images from across the country with thousands of people forced to live in dire conditions with shortages of fuel and energy supplies and terrible consequences for the national health care system. We need to reformulate the strategy and the recovery plan for Lebanon in the framework of the EU—Lebanon partnership priorities under the new Global Europe Instrument. We also still expect the new Government to address the macroeconomic and fiscal crisis and take credible anti-corruption actions for the immediate benefit of the Lebanese people. The measures implemented in recent years were not even close to matching the purpose. In this kind of social, economic and political meltdown, no one must be left behind, especially the most vulnerable in society.

Madam President, the speedy collapse of the Afghan Government and seizure of power by the Taliban sent shockwaves throughout Europe. It prompted intense debates on the future of rules-based international order, transatlantic relations, European strategic autonomy and relations with adversarial states. Humanitarian assistance, human rights protection, especially of women and girls, assistance to NGOs on the ground, must be our absolute priority. This unfortunate situation should also be an impetus to finally agree on the new pact on migration and asylum. As the European Parliament, we should establish a formal mechanism in this House on the scrutiny of the EU policy on Afghanistan since 2001. The task at hand would be not just to establish what went wrong, but crucially to draw lessons for present and future EU missions. Following the recent events in Afghanistan, it became evident that EU strategic autonomy becomes a necessity, not a choice.

Dear Chair, I thank the Rapporteur for her excellent report – this is a summary of the implementation of free movement in the Schengen area with recommendations on what needs to be improved. In recent years, the failure of Schengen has become one of the first consequences of current European political difficulties, starting from the migrant crisis to the pandemic crisis. We have also witnessed the erection of barbed wires between the members. Despite the provisions of Article 3 of the Lisbon Agreement, some Member States are trying to nationalise freedom of movement by using this issue for day-to-day political purposes. The Commission should consistently initiate infringement procedures in such situations. In case of ambiguity over border control, political campaigns should step down before independent oversight mechanisms. Speaking about the future of Schengen, we need to preserve and strengthen it as one of Europe's greatest common achievements, and new enlargement is one of the best ways. The Commission has confirmed that Croatia fulfils the conditions for the application of the Schengen acquis. It welcomed the establishment of an independent border control mechanism. I hope that the Council will take these facts into account as soon as possible and approve our accession.

Mr President, with great concern and sadness, we follow the ongoing tragic events in Tigray and elsewhere in Ethiopia. The situation in Tigray has seriously escalated, but the crimes against human rights are happening in other regions and towards different ethnicities. Our first and foremost priority is to help civilians who have no access to medical assistance, are dying of famine and are often victims of sexual violence. Furthermore, the exclusion of Tigray from general elections and communication disruptions makes this horrible situation even worse. We need to do everything to support a ceasefire that all would respect. That way, they can ensure that the humanitarian aid is delivered on the ground to the ones in need urgently. We also need concrete EU measures, including an arms embargo and targeted sanctions against all perpetrators. Tigray is without doubt one of the urgent, if not the most pressing, humanitarian situations we should work on to the full extent of our capabilities and powers.