Speeches

Indeed, a colleague, independent ethical body of the European Union should already exist. But what if it looks like it's some kind of tale about a yoke of snakes? It may be more appropriate to sweep before our own threshold and make sure that our own ethical criteria and standards are strengthened, in particular by enforcing and upgrading them, especially with regard to the control of how former Members of Parliament access [...] this house and with the register of assets, i.e. the assets we own and already report on in our own countries. This will not affect the exercise and freedom of our mandate as Members, but it will probably – I hope so – strengthen, if not restore, the level of trust in the European Parliament. Why trust alone is what the European Parliament can build on and exercise its political power vis-à-vis the other institutions of the European Union. Thank you very much.

Dear Commissioner. Following the granting of candidate status to Bosnia and Herzegovina and the start of negotiations with Albania and North Macedonia, it appears once again that the enlargement process to the Western Balkans has come back to some kind of free-running. I therefore ask you whether, given what is happening on the ground, where we actually see complete stagnation in some candidate countries, the Commission will. Even in those negotiating for accession, we see a regression in some of the most fundamental and crucial areas of the negotiations. Does the Commission intend to change its relatively passive approach towards these countries and to engage in a concrete proactive attitude and promote the achievement of these countries – not only to make progress in the negotiation process and achieve the goals they have set themselves, but to maintain their European ambition? In many candidate countries there is a clear trend of backsliding in support of membership of the European Union, and I think that we also have a certain part of this responsibility for this backsliding on our side. I therefore ask whether the Commission will change its approach, whether it will take a more active approach to the candidates in order to make it easier for them to advance on their European path. Thank you very much.

Mr President, the blockade of the Lachin corridor has humanitarian as well as geopolitical consequences for the stability and security of the Southern Caucasus. Azerbaijan’s aggression on sovereign Armenian territory, in combination with the Nagorno—Karabakh blockade, are following the pattern we have witnessed in the past in the Balkan wars and also in the tragic war of Russian aggression in Ukraine. With these acts Azerbaijan is in breach of the UN Charter and preventing any possibility for a comprehensive peace agreement, which must guarantee the rights and security of the Armenian population of Nagorno—Karabakh, the return of all displaced people and the liberation of detainees in order to ensure lasting peace between the two nations. This is why Azerbaijan must immediately reopen the Lachin corridor to enable freedom of movement and ensure access to essential goods and services, release all detainees and fully withdraw its armed forces from Armenian sovereign territory. At the same time, the international community should negotiate the replacement of Russian peacekeepers with international peacekeepers under the UN mandate.

Mr. President! The complex security situation in Europe and the world requires us to build common European defence capabilities. Although the political debate is focused on the issue of qualified majority decision-making, which I personally see as a historical necessity, today, with the war in Ukraine raging, the real issue is the provision and maintenance of the necessary military capabilities. It is a painful fact that European countries, including members of the European Union, are largely dependent on imports for both military equipment and armaments and ammunition. The time has come to move from high-flying words to concrete actions. As a first step, set up a framework for joint defence procurement to replace the currently inefficient fragmented procurement system. Let us show unity, as in the time of COVID, and by doing so we will not only increase the efficiency and rationality of purchases, but also strengthen their transparency. Technological progress will be stepped up, not only in the defence field, but also in the civilian one, as this will finance many basic research that we would not otherwise have. Joint purchasing will lower prices and strengthen the price and technological competitiveness of European producers. Last but not least, we will support quality jobs in the European Union, which we are now supporting elsewhere through imports. That I do not lose my word on ensuring the necessary strategic autonomy of the European Union.

Dear Sir/Madam, Let's ask ourselves what is the goal of enlargement today? Is it a tool of geopolitical deterrence for China, Russia, Turkey? Is the objective to strengthen the stability of democracy and prosperity on the European continent and its full integration? What is the real goal of enlargement? Unfortunately, the answer to this question is not uniform in the EU. There is no single answer, either in this house, in the Commission or in the Council of the EU. As a result, developments around enlargement are becoming more of a process aimed at responding to the current developments in Europe, where countries are becoming candidates without conditions. At the same time, we are placing almost unattainable conditions on other countries for the same situation, such as Bosnia. On the one hand, in the case of candidates such as Serbia, we tolerate slipping into authoritarianism, but at the same time we cannot reward candidates, such as North Macedonia, who are making progress. On the contrary, with our actions and even more often inaction, we create the conditions for the strengthening of undemocratic forces in them. Enlargement has thus become a cacophony of interests, guaranteeing the status quo, where enlargement seems to be happening, but at the same time nothing fundamental changes or does not happen. We need a clearly defined enlargement policy with clearly defined conditions for accession to the process and for membership of the European Union, together with mechanisms to ensure that the enlargement objectives are achieved.

Dear Sir/Madam, The European political community is an initiative that has come at the right time for Europe and the EU. However, I am not sure whether it will also deliver the results that the worsening geopolitical situation in the wider European area requires. I myself hope and expect that it is an idea of crucial integration of the broadest possible community of European countries, which, in the current difficult geopolitical context, are facing aggression and attacks not only on the values and principles on which the EU is founded, but on which the modern post-war world order is based, are firmly committed to defending democracy, human rights, the rule of law and policies to strengthen international cooperation and respect for international law. A coalition of states that not only does not accept, but rejects a world based on raw power. And here's the community we need today. In any event, the European Political Community must not become a substitute for the enlargement process, as it pursues objectives of the European Union that cannot be achieved by the European Political Community.

Madam President! The enlargement policy to the Western Balkans needs a radical overhaul. The revised methodology did not bring practically any of the expected quality objectives of the process. The fundamental objective cannot and must not be merely the technical and legal fulfilment of the criteria, but must pursue concrete substantive objectives. It must ensure the transformation of the economies of the candidate countries as well as the transformation of society through the implementation of the principles and values on which the European Union is founded. This is already a challenge for many Member States, let alone candidate countries. It is therefore time for the EU to develop an approach that addresses candidate countries individually in the field of the rule of law, democracy and the fundamental values of the European Union, and that adapts measures and policies to the realities of each candidate country. Conditionality does not deliver the expected results and it is therefore necessary to include additional mechanisms linked to European funds and the functioning of the judiciary, where an important role can be played by the European Public Prosecutor's Office. The people of the Western Balkans deserve the same level of legal protection as we enjoy in the European Union, even before formal full membership.

Dear Sir/Madam, The aim of the overhaul of the industrial strategy was to incorporate the insights and experiences gained during the epidemic. But what we have on the table today goes beyond that basic ambition. We have before us a document that, if followed by appropriate concrete actions at the level of the European Union and the Member States, can significantly strengthen the resilience, competitiveness and pervasiveness of the European economy and further strengthen the well-being of all Europeans. The indirect objective remains the green transition and digitalisation, which know how to require very focused and thoughtful investment in key technologies. This is why, in addition to investment in infrastructure, there is a need for investment in research and development, which will provide the EU with the necessary technological base and know-how to achieve the objectives set. In this context, it is important to emphasise support for small and medium-sized enterprises, to which we must ensure conditions for growth and development and access to technology capital. In the context of the green transition, which is also highlighted by the current energy crisis, the goal must also be to secure the supply of green energy in the necessary quantities and at affordable prices. We see the impact and consequences of high energy prices on our society and economy. I would also like to raise the issue of raw material dependency, which must be overcome or solved before the story of Russian gas is repeated. The announcement by the President of the Commission gives us high expectations, but we are even more keen to see concrete measures. Of course, strategic partnerships are part of the solution, but the key issues are the relationship between the level of self-sufficiency from own resources and the circular economy and the volume of imports. To sum up, this is a good document, but it must be followed by concrete measures. Thank you very much!

Dear Sir/Madam, Unfortunately, the report on Serbia's progress, or rather its lack of progress, towards the European Union before us does not tell the whole story of a country that is somehow unable or unwilling to make a political effort to definitively define itself as a European path. The issue of sanctions against Russia is only the tip of the iceberg dilemma, to which Serbia and its current authorities have no answers in the process of negotiating and bringing the EU closer. I wonder, especially after the complications with the parliamentary elections and the three-month delay in publishing the results, what are the real reasons preventing Serbia from moving closer to the EU on sanctions? Despite various explanations by the authorities in Belgrade, the impression is created that everything is more a question of sanctions and the approximation of the EU, a question of the survival of the current authority. If Serbia is not to join the Club of Eternal Candidate Countries, it must urgently and decisively embark on deep reforms in the areas of the rule of law, fundamental democratic standards, the independence of the judiciary and the media, the functioning of civil society and other fundamental values and principles on which the EU is founded. The current practice of formal fulfilment of commitments is no longer sufficient, but requires the actual implementation of all reforms for the benefit of the citizens of Serbia and only then to achieve the conditions for accession to the European Union.

Dear Sir/Madam, After more than two years of work in Bosnia and Herzegovina, I can conclude that our European engagement in BiH is neither geopolitical nor strategic. We missed the historic opportunity to maintain stability for a country that, despite all the threats, obstacles, the predictions of the secession, the desire for a third entity, what else could be found, and which, together with the role it occupies in the region, more than deserves candidate status. But no, in the EU, neither the Council of the EU, nor this House, nor the Commission can do that. As a drunkard of the plot, we cling to 14 reform conditions that arose in a completely different political and, above all, security context. While NATO clearly and unambiguously defines BiH's strategic importance for the security and stability not only of the Western Balkans, but of Europe as a whole, we Europeans retreat into a forest of various interests that have largely poisoned or made unified European action in Bosnia and Herzegovina impossible. It is a complete lack of awareness that BiH, if some in this house try to prove it, is not a story of failure solely because of its own complexity, but also because of our inability to act as one. That's why we're doomed to continuous crisis management. What we need in BiH today, in addition to candidate country status, is a clear and decisive European intervention. BiH needs a unified European intervention in establishing the rule of law, fighting corruption and organised crime, ensuring an independent judiciary and free media. The EU must resolutely, with a clear framework of conditionality in the enlargement methodology, stop the cat-and-mouse games we play with different local politicians. Instead of words, actions, reforms and changes must follow that will benefit both the people of BiH and the European Union. These changes will not please many local politicians, but we have been fruitlessly dealing with them for too long anyway.

Mr President-in-Office! It is one of the key measures to ensure the energy security or gas supply of European consumers. We have before us a set of measures of a temporary nature, which are primarily a response to the brutal Russian aggression against Ukraine and the related Russian energy blackmail. Like food, natural gas has become Putin's weapon of blackmail and destabilisation of the European Union in pursuit of its neo-imperial goals. Successful gas storage will ensure the smooth functioning of the single energy market and ensure the necessary solidarity between Member States. It is quite clear, also in the light of past experience, that only together, as the EU, can we prevent serious disruptions to the energy market. An important aspect is also that the legal and technical framework of static gas storage is being put in place and that energy nationalism is being prevented, which would turn the energy crisis into a political crisis and division within the EU. And this, let us not forget, is also one of Putin's goals. It is important to stress that the Regulation in no way hinders or limits our strategic objectives enshrined in the green transition. On the contrary, it puts in place an energy security framework that will enable a successful green transition even in tighter geopolitical contexts.

Madam President-in-Office, following the political crisis caused by the resignation of the previous government, Montenegro is facing an important turning point. The formation of a new minority government allowed the resulting political crisis to be resolved democratically and within constitutional frameworks. It can be said that Montenegrin politics has demonstrated a certain level of political maturity. The current question, however, is whether this political maturity will translate into the creation of a broader social platform committed to achieving Montenegro's European future. This is urgent, given the important reforms ahead of the country and, above all, the need to catch up with the important reform backlog. Why only through reforms can Montenegro re-establish itself not only as a favourite for membership, but also as one of the first countries in the region to gain membership of the European Union. One of the key issues of the future of the country will be the regulation of relations with religious organizations, especially the Serbian Orthodox Church and in such a way that Montenegro preserves secularity and at the same time political and wider social stability. This will define her future, which will either be European, or it will be a return to the pond of a nationalist past. Thank you very much.

Madam President-in-Office, honourable Prime Minister, welcome also on behalf of Renew Europe, and allow me to raise a few questions and dilemmas on which I would like to hear your opinion. We are pleased that Croatia will join the euro area and I see this as a great opportunity for both Croatia and the European Union as a whole. However, I would like to know what the Croatian Government will do to prevent the misuse of the introduction of the euro for unjustified price increases in these costly times, as this affects the image of the European Union in the eyes of the people. Let me once again underline the full support of our political group for European assistance in the reconstruction of earthquake-stricken areas, where we expect faster and more efficient functioning of both the state authorities and all those involved in the reconstruction. But let me also underline our strong expectation that the Croatian Government will prevent the misuse of European funds, as we have seen in the past. I will not raise border issues in the region, but allow me to underline that, in the spirit of the rule of law principle on which the European Union is founded and falls, court rulings, including arbitration rulings, are expected to be respected and implemented regardless of any different political views. In view of the current issue of migration in the European Union, I would like to hear your opinion and views on the European Migration Pact and, in particular, the position as to whether, also in the light of reports of "pushbacks" and deaths at the borders, including drownings in the Kolpa River, Croatia will respect and also implement, in cooperation with all its neighbours, the highest standards of international European law, while at the same time effectively protecting the external borders of the European Union. I think it is our common interest that Schengen works, that it is not only a common space of free movement of people and goods, but also a space of common and uniform legal norms. And in the end, I cannot pass by the impression, despite your words today, that Croatia remains in some way hostage to its own policy towards Bosnia and Herzegovina, which, unfortunately, remains involved in supporting narrow-minded and misguided nationalist policies. There are policies that, on the one hand, are blocking Bosnia and Herzegovina's European path and, on the other hand, are damaging both the Republic of Croatia and the Croatian people in Bosnia and Herzegovina. This is a unique paradox, which, despite all its complexity, can only be solved by a clear and solid path of Bosnia and Herzegovina towards full membership of the European Union. Bosnia and Herzegovina, as part of the European Union, is in the interest not only of the European Union, but above all of Croatia and the Croatian people in Bosnia and Herzegovina. Allow me, because of the importance of the tourist season, to wish Croatia a successful tourist season and to give our visitors as little congestion as possible on this route.

Mr President, dependence on Russian energy has taught us above all that we need a single and well-functioning European energy market that is not dependent on a single supplier. Therefore, as envisaged in REPowerEU, we need measures to diversify our energy sources. We must in no way replace one dependency with new dependencies, even if this means that, at least temporarily, we need to rely more on our own European resources and, in some cases, especially in interconnections, invest in existing infrastructure. Another measure is to accelerate the transition to renewables, which is the only long-term measure of the European Union's energy self-sufficiency. This means speeding up investment in new renewables, investment in energy efficiency and, above all, design, and this is also our task, colleagues, of a legislative-normative framework that will enable the EU to become carbon neutral and energy independent. The third set of measures is the need for systemic solutions to tackle energy poverty, where we need to protect our people from price shocks.

Dear President, Honourable, Honourable. The use of spyware has been historically proven. Control over the use of these technologies has always been subject to parliamentary scrutiny, and what is being shown in the Pegasus case is, in fact, that this parliamentary scrutiny has shown the vulnerability of our democracies, because it has somehow, we might say, failed either because of the fervent fight against terrorism or because of other different political cases. It clearly points to the need to further develop, above all, parliamentary oversight, in addition to judicial protection itself. Abuses, especially those of an illegal nature, point to authoritarian ambitions, manifested not only in the control of society, but also in the totalitarian control of political life in individual countries. The Committee of the European Parliament, which will verify all these uses of illegal use and lawful uses of this tool, also has a different mission. It must, above all, examine the business model that has been created, and where it appears that the private company, which is the only one that has developed this equipment, is the only one that knows what was collected, how it was collected and, above all, to whom something was passed on. I therefore believe that our committee will be able to set new standards of parliamentary scrutiny, especially in the use of such new technologies.

(Start of speech with microphone off) ... TEN-T must provide infrastructure that will provide sufficient amounts of energy for all European consumers, both households, which are particularly vulnerable in the circumstances, and industry. In doing so, we must ensure that this energy is affordable and competitive for industry and households. Of course, the so-called projects of common interest or PCs are of key importance. These must be geared towards achieving the climate targets set, as well as security of supply. In any case, in this context, we cannot allow them to become the so-called interconnections that we need today in the short term in order to ensure energy security, we must not allow them to become either an excuse or an excuse for not respecting the climate and sustainability goals that we have set ourselves. This means that, in these emerging projects, we need to be technically measured in such a way that we can adapt them to new, more environmentally acceptable sources of energy.

Dear Sir/Madam, The only way to achieve strategic autonomy, and in this context also energy autonomy, in the European Union will be to deliver on the green transition. In the short term, vulnerability can be mitigated by diversifying resources, but we need to remember, and we need to be careful not to get into new dependencies, as we witnessed in the 1970s with the oil embargo. The long-term solution is, of course, only the transition to renewables. We need investment in new technologies, in the technologies of the sun, wind, water, and, where necessary and there is social consensus, also a debate on the role of nuclear energy. But we should not focus only on models of the past, only on electricity generation. It is also necessary to focus on other technologies, such as geothermal technology, which enables heating and, more and more importantly, cooling of our homes, which are increasingly under pressure due to heat waves. However, we must not forget all those affected by energy costs. We need to help all of them immediately and effectively, while systematically addressing the issue of energy poverty, which will not disappear with the green transition.

Mr President, what Bosnia needs today is understanding and, above all, a message of hope in a better, more prosperous European future. European security depends on peace and stability in our neighbourhood. As you can see in Ukraine, there is a thin line between peace and war. Bosnia and Herzegovina is in our close neighbourhood and it needs our attention. It needs our support. It is threatened by the blockade of the state institutions, and if that is not enough, it is facing a threat of secessionism inspired by a never truly and fully cleared historical burden, which reflects itself in genocide denial. All in Bosnia need to come to terms with the past, as painful as it might be, but without an understanding of the past, there is no hope of the future, no hope of overcoming the nightmares of the past. To overcome all this, we need to send a very clear and united EU message. There will be no return to the past for those who still nurture nationalistic fantasies of the past, like Mr Dodik and other political leaders. We need to impose a set of sanctions to deter them from further destabilisation of the country. Sanctions need to be targeted so they will not affect the ordinary people of Republika Srpska or Bosnia in general, but only those who wish for their narrow-minded, political, frequently corrupt-linked aims to tear apart the country and cause new bloodshed. Sending additional troops from EUFOR is part of the effort, but we need to do more. We need to seriously reconsider giving Bosnia membership candidate country status, which needs to be followed by a strong commitment by the EU to help Bosnia to do its homework. It needs to make a set of deep and demanding reforms, starting with the change of the electoral law in line with the judgment of the European Court of Human Rights, followed by credible implementation of the reforms listed in the Commission’s 14—point plan and all other necessary and needed reforms which will enable the country to firmly set its European path. Bosnia needs a sign of hope which will empower all those political forces which believe in a modern, democratic, civic and – above all – European Bosnia.

Dear Sir/Madam, The crisis at the Ukrainian-Russian border proves that we live in an unpredictable world of uncompromising competition, in which the use of force is unfortunately becoming a reality. The current crisis not only determines the future of Ukraine, but also breaks the spears of the future of the European security architecture, which has ensured relative peace and stability in Europe for the last 30 years and is based on difficult negotiations during and at the end of the Cold War. We must be aware that these are tectonic shifts in the European security architecture, but they are a process that has been going on for some time and will continue. Unfortunately, it is very likely in the series of crises that we are and will be witnessing in the wider European area. It will therefore be crucial that both the US and NATO and the European Union are aware that this process will require from us unity, an unequivocal commitment to fundamental democratic values, patience and determination, perseverance and a great deal of wisdom. Why? We are facing a challenging geopolitical game in which we will be able to prevail not only with diplomatic skill and military determination, but also with a clear commitment to democracy. At the same time, the European Union must strengthen not only its military, but also its energy, raw materials and technological sovereignty.

Dear President. The European Union needs a more credible and, above all, a more united foreign and security policy. We live in a time of great power competition, and if the European Union is to become a geopolitical player, it must adapt to it. We must honestly ask ourselves what kind of common foreign and security policy we want and, above all, how we will approve and define it so that it reflects the objectives of the interests of both the Member States and the European Union as a whole. Ukraine's similar crises are becoming the norm. Therefore, if we want to preserve the existing European security architecture, we need to strengthen the ambitions enshrined in the Strategic Compass. That is why, in addition to unity, the European Union needs its own and credible military capabilities. This is not about replacing NATO, but about a European pillar that, on the one hand, will complement and strengthen NATO's capabilities, while at the same time providing the European Union with military and security autonomy where and when needed. Thank you very much.

Mr President, the recent events in Kazakhstan have once again proved how fragile the situation is in Central Asia. Two weeks after the tragic events in the country, we still don’t have a clear picture of what actually happened. There is an official account of the events with limited credibility and a flood of unofficial reports with a greater or lesser degree of credibility. What we know for sure is that extreme violence and rioting took place, people died and the country was on the verge of sliding into complete chaos. There seems to be consensus that social issues were the trigger of these protests, as peaceful demonstrators demanded lower fuel prices and political change in the country. However, the nature of the protests completely changed when rioting, robbing and use of firearms in the streets began. Some reports indicate an excessive use of force by the authorities, but it is also true that rioters used force; some of them were armed and extremely violent, not only towards the police, but also towards fellow citizens and bystanders. What we need now is a foreign investigation of recent events, with the involvement of the international community. I think the OSCE can do an excellent job in this matter. But above all we need to stress that it is in the hands of the Kazakh authorities to draw lessons from these tragic events if they wish to be a strategic partner of the European Union. Kazakhstan needs to start an open and frank process of democratisation of its society. I know it is a tough choice, but the only way to guarantee the long-term stability and prosperity of the country is to ensure the full respect of all citizens’ fundamental rights.

() it is not directed against Serbia, its citizens, but it is a warning to the Serbian authorities that violations of fundamental rights, such as those witnessed in the case of the Linglong factory and environmental protests, are completely unacceptable for a country wishing to become a member of the European Union. Both cases, despite their extreme nature, point to the wider problem of Serbia as a candidate country. In the case of violations of the fundamental rights of Vietnamese workers, there is also the issue of the attitude of the Serbian authorities towards Chinese investments, in particular their special position in relation to the Serbian legal order, which is completely unacceptable for a country negotiating for membership of the European Union and preparing for the adoption of the European acquis. Violence by hooligans against environmental protesters, to say the least, the unusual passivity of the police, warns that the Serbian authorities have great difficulties in implementing what was agreed in the negotiations, especially with regard to such a fundamental right as the right to peaceful protest. The resolution recalls that despite assurances, the Serbian authorities are not putting into practice what was agreed in the accession negotiations. Let me underline that with all the open classmates, the new methodology, the fate of the negotiations on Serbia's accession to the European Union is in the hands of the Serbian authorities. It is up to them to put the covenants into practice, not only on paper, but through concrete actions. As a supporter of the enlargement of the European Union in the Western Balkans, I cannot hide my disappointment at what is happening in Serbia.

Mr President, colleagues, colleagues. The fight against organised crime is an issue closely linked to corruption. Both in the Western Balkans are concerned with the rule of law. The fight against corruption and organised crime in the Western Balkans will only be more successful if we have an independent judiciary and prosecution services there. And the reform of both must become the focal point of European policy towards the region. An independent judiciary will be the basis, not only for the successful fight against corruption and organised crime, but also as a bulwark against the democratic backsliding of the region, and thus the foundation of its successful accession to the European Union. That is why we need a concrete project in the enlargement process, including concrete efforts and judicial reform in the region, not only in words, but also in concrete actions.

Mr. President! The current government, fearing the mechanism of conditionality of access to European funds, after practically destroying the STA as a public information service, only paid part of the planned funds and temporarily appointed a delegated prosecutor, who, it seems, according to the draft amendments to the law, will be recalled again. This gives the impression that Slovenia is in the best shape. But it's just an impression. The policy of systematically and deliberately weakening key public institutions with the aim of subordinating them or at least silencing them continues. How else can we explain that a few months before the elections, the programme scheme of the public television news programme is urgently being changed, that the ruling coalition is changing the law on the police, which allows the minister to appoint more than a hundred leading police personnel according to his own taste? Or to reduce the resources of the judiciary, in particular the Judicial Council, which is directly responsible for protecting the independence of judges and preparing a proposal for the appointment of new judges, in the event of recurring budgetary expenditure. And this is done, by the way, by the government, whose Minister of Justice is under judicial investigation. So in a nutshell: The dogs bark and the caravan goes on.

Madam President! Why is today's debate on Bosnia important and why we need to send a very clear message to Bosnia and, in particular, to Mr Dodik and his friends. Because what is happening is affecting not only the region, but because it is happening in our immediate neighbourhood. The blockade of institutions and the threat of secession of the Republika Srpska not only threatens peace and stability in Bosnia and the region, but also directly threatens the European Union and our interests. We must not, and cannot, allow Bosnia to find itself once again in the grip of the madness of nationalist policies and divisions. We therefore urgently need a determined and united action by the European Union and our Euro-Atlantic friends to prevent Bosnia and the region from slipping into a new cycle of nationalist madness, if necessary through sanctions against all those who support the policy of division. We must achieve the unblocking of the institutions of Bosnia, which must become operational and a forum for urgent reforms, including changes to the electoral law and constitutional amendments, in line with the decisions of the European Court of Human Rights, the Venice Commission and the Constitutional Court of Bosnia and Herzegovina. The European future of Bosnia, however, is not in the hands of MEPs or Mr Dodik and his friends, but in the citizens of Bosnia and Herzegovina, who, with their election choices and active citizenship, must put Bosnia on the European path and send politicians like Mr Dodik to the dump of history.