Debate contributions by Urmas PAET

Madam President, dear colleagues, a couple of examples of Russia's activities in EU countries over the past few weeks: the EU and NATO central hub, Brussels Airport, had to halt operations on several evenings due to drones; there was an explosion on one of Poland's busy railway lines; Vilnius Airport has been repeatedly closed because of balloons and so on and so on. Russia is consistently endangering the security of Europeans and is becoming increasingly brazen. But what is Europe's response to the violation of its Member States' sovereignty? Essentially silence. And even more – there is still no courage to decide on using frozen Russian assets to support Ukraine. The only message this endless hesitation sends to Russia is that it can push even further in its hostility towards Europe. It is time to put an end to this. EU leaders must find the courage to make decisions – from the use of frozen Russian assets to giving a clear response to the harassment of Brussels and other European airports and attacks on Poland's railway.

Madam President, we all remember how quickly the things may change – also in the northern part of Europe, when, for instance, Finland and Sweden decided to join NATO, although for decades and decades, the majority of these societies said that it was not necessary. But then the events happened – Russia attacked once again Ukraine and public opinion changed dramatically. One of the aims – why we need a new and very clear and concrete EU Arctic strategy – is to try to be a bit more ahead of or in front of real possible dramatic new developments, so that is why I am also very happy that in this House, the European Parliament, we are actually very united, clear and strong as regards what the European Union has to do in the Arctic and what the EU's Arctic policy should be. We all understand here the importance of this part of the world, the Arctic, and of course also Arctic developments and influence on Europe. So that is why, once again, I really hope that the European Commission will come out pretty soon with the new Arctic policy document, with the new Arctic strategy, and also the new financial framework of the EU also should clearly reflect our needs and policies vis-à-vis the northern part of Europe and the Arctic as such. Once again, dear colleagues from all political groups, thank you for your excellent cooperation in preparing this report. And I really hope that tomorrow the majority of this House can support this recommendation about the EU's Arctic policy.

Madam President, today we are discussing Europe's role in the Arctic – a region that is no longer distant, no longer abstract, and certainly no longer frozen in time. It is home to more than four million people, vibrant cultures, and ecosystems that are among the most fragile on Earth. And today, the Arctic is also where climate change, authoritarian aggression, and global power competition collide. What happens in the High North will shape Europe's security, our economy, and our climate future. For decades, the Arctic has been a region of peace and cooperation. But that reality is changing fast. Russia's brutal war of aggression against Ukraine and its hybrid war against Europe has shattered the foundations of international law, and its militarisation of the Arctic is accelerating. New bases, expanded nuclear-related infrastructure, construction of nuclear icebreakers and the militarisation of the Northern Sea Route are turning the Arctic into a theatre of strategic pressure. China, declaring itself a 'near-Arctic state', is joining this push: investing in dual-use research stations, attempting to buy sensitive infrastructure, and launching joint patrols with Russia. Together, they are attempting to reshape the rules of the High North. Europe must not be naive. The Arctic is directly linked to our security. The GIUK gap is essential for our maritime access to the North Atlantic. Arctic undersea cables and pipelines are lifelines of our digital and energy connectivity. And we have already seen hybrid attacks, GPS jamming, and shadow-fleet incidents that threaten both our infrastructure and our sovereignty. But security is not the only dimension. Climate change is transforming the Arctic three times faster than the rest of the world. Melting permafrost, disappearing sea ice, methane emissions, shifting ecosystems – these are not abstract threats. Faced with these challenges, the European Union must step up. We must reinforce cooperation with our NATO allies and strengthen deterrence and resilience in the High North. We must protect our critical infrastructure – especially submarine cables and pipelines – and build common standards for cybersecurity and maritime surveillance. We must ensure freedom of navigation, defend UNCLOS, and resist unilateral attempts to control Arctic routes. We must invest in energy independence and connections. The best and safest energy for Europe is energy produced in Europe, and the European Arctic has much to offer in this regard. At the same time, the EU must lead in science, sustainability, and diplomacy. We welcome the opening of the EU Office in Nuuk and Greenland's upcoming chairmanship of the Arctic Council. We must deepen partnerships with Indigenous communities, support Arctic universities, and expand research that integrates traditional knowledge with cutting-edge science. We should also keep the door open to the possible future EU accession of Iceland, Norway and Greenland, should their democratic choices lead them in that direction. Their geography, their strategic relevance in the North Atlantic, and their deep alignment with European values would significantly strengthen the Union's presence and influence in the Arctic and will also open up different opportunities for these countries in this unstable world. It is important for the Commission to adopt a new EU Arctic strategy as the current one is outdated. Colleagues, the Arctic is not a geopolitical playground. It is a region whose stability is essential for Europe's future. The EU must be a principled, reliable and engaged Arctic actor – defending international law, supporting our partners, strengthening our security, and protecting one of the most vulnerable ecosystems on the planet.

Madam President, colleagues, perhaps a decision will finally be made to use the frozen Russian assets to support Ukraine's reconstruction. It has taken far too long to reach this point. It has been sad to hear arguments claiming that such a step cannot be taken because it would undermine the European Union's credibility as a trusted guardian of criminals' money. In reality, what damages the EU's credibility is when it fails to provide Ukraine with adequate support, allowing the aggressor state to continue unpunished and unbothered. History also offers perspective: after the Second World War, Germany was required to pay reparations. Lots of European countries, including Belgium, received substantial reparations from Germany to compensate war damages. On what basis do some now wish to apply a different logic to Russia? The aggressor must pay for the destruction it has caused. EU Member States should finally show resolve and make that decision.

Mr President, dear colleagues, Europe faces unprecedented strategic challenges. Our security and resilience depend not only on political will, but on the ability to make funds quickly and efficiently available for defence, training and critical industries. Bureaucracy cannot slow down Europe's response to evolving threats. The amendment to the ESF+ provides exactly this flexibility. It allows resources to be redirected swiftly to strategic priorities, supporting defence‑related skills, innovation and resilience across the Union. In particular, the report foresees that the security of our eastern borders should benefit from these measures. The aim is to ensure that resources are deployed where they are most needed, reinforcing Europe's preparedness and resilience in a rapidly changing geopolitical environment. The credibility and security of Europe depend on making our funds work as fast and flexibly as our ambitions and needs demand.

Madam President, dear colleagues, I will move the following oral amendment to paragraph 16, so that the last sentence of the paragraph will be: 'Reiterates its call for the immediate and unconditional release of Mzia Amaglobeli and the withdrawal of all charges against her, which are politically motivated, expressing deep concern over her critical eyesight deterioration in detention and urging urgent access to trusted medical care.'

Dear President, Dear colleagues, Greenland is a unique and very important part of Europe. The debate on Greenland reflects the changed situation in international relations, as well as the rapid changes taking place in the Arctic. All of a sudden, all of the world's major powers have become interested in the Arctic. However, decisions on the future of Greenland are first and foremost made by the people of Greenland themselves and must not be a choice made as a result of external pressure or threats. For its part, however, the European Union can offer new opportunities to Greenland. The European Union finally opened a representation in Nuuk last year, but the door must also be kept open for the possible reunification of Greenland with the European Union. In times of despair, it's safer to have other like-minded, like-minded countries with you. However, the European Union also needs to pay much more attention to the changes, opportunities and risks taking place in the wider Arctic. And certainly the European Union would be significantly strengthened if one day Greenland, Iceland and Norway wished to join the European Union. This must be done in good faith and with good will.

Madam President, dear High Representative Kaja Kallas, we have Russian war against Ukraine, hybrid war against Europe, strong turbulence in the relations between traditional allies. What else needs to happen for Europe to finally put itself together and to contribute adequately to its own defence, to the realisation of its international potential and to the development of its own economic space? It is human to start acting only when some big mess is already in the offing. But Europe as a whole must be wiser, have more foresight and not simply wait for another catastrophe. Europe is capable of much more. But for this to happen, diplomacy, defence capability, development cooperation and international trade must all go hand in hand. We must finally abandon the demand for consensus in foreign and security policy, because it does not work in times of crisis. We must build strong and functioning relations with our allies from Great Britain and Norway to Japan, Korea, Canada and others. Member States that have come under unfair political attacks, such as Denmark, must be strongly supported. Europe is potentially the strongest power in the world and at the same time the kindest power.

Madam President, dear colleagues, the European Union is committed to lasting peace in the Middle East, supporting a two-state solution and halting Iran's destabilising actions. However, the EU's ability to influence the region has been limited by the need for consensus among all Member States, resulting in a fragmented approach. This lack of unity has prevented the EU from fully leveraging its foreign policy potential. A European Parliament report in March 2023 on the functioning of the European External Action Service and advocating for a stronger EU in the world called for a stronger EU presence in global affairs. But progress on these recommendations seems minimal. Without significant changes in shaping EU foreign policy, the EU's role will remain constrained. Given the current geopolitical situation, it's time to implement the European Parliament's proposals from two years ago and strengthen the EU's positive foreign policy impact, including in the Middle East.

Dear President, ladies and gentlemen, A day before Russia launched a new wave of attacks against Ukraine on 24 February 2022, many key analysts said they believed that Russia would not attack Ukraine. But he attacked. The analysts were very wrong. In recent months, several ships have repeatedly broken underwater electricity and communications connections in the Baltic Sea. The last time was on Christmas Eve, as a result of which people in the Baltic States pay much more for electricity than they would for a functioning connection. And still there are those who do not believe that the dismantling of connections is part of Russia's hybrid war against the West. It is, and must be, united and united. Russia is testing how far it is allowed to go and the potential targets of attack are not only in the Baltic Sea, but also in the North Sea, the Atlantic, the Mediterranean and elsewhere. Our connections must be protected and those who break them punished with all rigour. To make it more difficult for Russia, by the way, to find vessels and crews willing to commit crimes for Russia. However, action by European countries can only be effective if our threat assessment is adequate and all illusions about Russia are dropped.

Mr President, dear colleagues, when I visited Georgia – which was under Russian invasion – in August 2008 and walked in the empty city of Gori, I hoped for a quick withdrawal of Russian troops from Georgia and for a clear future of Georgia in Europe. Unfortunately, it did not happen that way. Russia still occupies part of Georgia, and Georgia is currently moving away from Europe. But the majority of people in Georgia still want to see their country's future in Europe. This is one of the reasons why the EU named Georgia as its candidate country. Unfortunately, Georgia's current government is working against this. In the recent years, Georgia has moved further away from the EU and increased Russia's direct influence on Georgia's choices. Georgia's adoption of the Law on Transparency of Foreign Influence and others are tools used by the government to violate freedom of expression, censor media, impose restrictions on critical voices in civil society. It is clear that until such legislation is removed, there will be no progress in the relations with the European Union. Georgia's attitude towards Russia in today's world and circumvention of European sanctions is also an example that Georgia is not ready to align itself with the EU's foreign policy. But it is not yet too late for Georgia to change its course and above all, for the sake of its own people, show that Georgia is serious about its return to Europe.