Speeches

Mr President, 14 years ago, Alexei and myself were riding a bus bringing us back to the Yale University to New Haven. We were discussing prospects for Russian politics. I was sceptical, but Alexei was the one who changed my mind with one simple phrase: we shall convince them if we are able to reach them. This was the essence of his understanding of what it means to be a leader for common good. It was not about exerting benefits, not about serving lobbies. It was about reaching out to his fellow citizens, telling them the truth, believing in them and giving them hope. I don’t have any sentimental relationship to my country of origin, but Alexei and people like him have become my sentiment. People who differ in politics but are united on democracy. People like him and his wife Yulia, who returned to their homeland because they belong to their homeland, to their people, even risking their lives, even losing their lives. People like Vladimir Kara-Murza, who continues speaking the truth despite being poisoned and imprisoned. People like Navalny’s lawyers who continue serving the rights, civil rights and freedom, even though losing them themselves. This resolution is a testimony, a message to those courageous people who believe and don’t give up in despair, even in the face of death. For many of them and for me, Alexei never died. Alexei cannot be killed because you cannot kill hope. And so, Alexei is still alive in my memory, smiling against the sun of New England as we continue our bus ride and discuss about the beautiful future of Russia. And he reminds me again and again in what he believes: we can convince them if we’re able to reach them.

– I am curious to see what the consequences of this statement will be for you. I hope you will bring this initiative to your party, and this will affect not only this youth organisation, but all youth organisations that are observed as far-right in Germany.

– A question also to you, which I have already asked my colleague before: We now get reports about the AfD youth organization from Saxony, which talked about the deportation of the Jews in ghettos and also about anti-Muslim plans during its trip. Doesn't that contradict your ardent appeal to fight anti-Semitism? What conclusions would you draw from this?

Madam President, I would like to start by calling on my colleague: Stop playing different groups against each other! We have mass demonstrations of democrats in Germany, and these are people who stand up for the rights of all. This must not be misused for anti-Israeli political rallies. That's not how we're going to get any further. A Jewish student was kicked into hospital a few days ago, in the middle of Berlin, because he was Jewish and because he did not welcome Israeli-related anti-Semitism. This attack did not come from nothing. There are, of course, many Jewish students at FU, the university where he studies, who are harassed and feel threatened. A Jewish team captain was deposed in South Africa and an Israeli player in Turkey. All this has nothing to do with legitimate concern for Palestinians – all this has to do with 1000 years of hatred against Jews. And so in this House, too, my appeal: Anyone who starts with echauffeured speeches, with obsession and one-sidedness, ends up with hospital-mature beaten Jews on Europe's streets.

Colleague, thanks for these enthusiastic words on anti-Semitism, but how do you react to the new reports that one of the youth organisations of your group, Alternative for Germany, in Saxony was openly discussing bringing Jews, and people of other origins as well, into ghettos? These are the news items coming in right now from Saxony in Germany.

Mr President! Lisa-Maria Kellermayr was a doctor in Austria and is now dead. Not because of a physical influence, but because of bits and bytes, because of words, because of hatred. During the COVID epidemic, she campaigned for vaccinations and harvested a veritable hate avalanche online. She then took her own life out of desperation. People will hate people and that will not change in the future. But network platforms bundle the hate, fuel the hate, and bring it home to us. They make it a business model and make money out of it. For far too long we watched with a naive look. With the DSA, we've taken a right step in the right direction, and with the new AI law, we've also addressed the deepfakes. They must now be flagged when they are generated. And media literacy: It must be strengthened in the same way as civil courage, including online. Let's create a culture of digital civil courage!

Mr President! If in June 400 million people decide how this house works for the next five years, how we relate to our neighbours, then I wish that they form their own opinion beforehand, not the opinion of Putin, Erdoğan or Xi; an opinion based on facts, not deepfakes, hate speech and disinformation. And I hope that in July there will be 720 MEPs here in this Chamber who stand up for the interests of the people in our Union and for human rights and not for the interests of aggressors and imperialists and not for their secret services. We have to wake up from the land of our dreams. We must recognize and combat attempts of espionage and infiltration within our own ranks. This is not child's play and must be done in accordance with the rule of law. Yes, this is a Herculean task, but it is a necessary task, a task for all of us, for all factions, including mine. No, the EU is not at war with Russia, as Russian propaganda portrays it. But Moscow is looking for confrontation with us, and Moscow is trying to do everything possible to influence our decisions and our informational field. Everyone who sees Russian media and follows how I do that knows that. The Kremlin wants to hit the heart of our democracy and destroy our unity and pluralism. And to all those who are involved and who feel addressed now, I say: Shame on you! I have always said that, including at our Group meetings. And if in the current case a colleague is seriously suspected of espionage for a Russian secret service, then we demand and support a complete investigation and call on the authorities in each Member State to investigate. Last but not least: The question of self-discipline is important in this House. This also applies to our political groups, and this applies to each of us. Maximum responsibility and prudence: We owe it to our constituents.

Madam President, This war will never end until Ukraine gains the upper hand. This war will never end until Ukraine is stabilised and strengthened – by us. If we fail, we have all collectively and collectively failed, and we invite Putin to keep going, to our own limits. And to the Putin friends on the right and left, those who are now thinking of peace negotiations, I say: You don't have to read peace letters. Negotiations are always better than war, but only if they strengthen the victim of aggression, do not further torment, empower, do not incapacitate. And so there are three things that apply to us. Firstly: The delivery of military equipment must be reinforced, including Taurus, and also other equipment, which effectively helps Ukrainians. Secondly: We need transparency about the assistance we have received so far. The acrobatics of numbers in Paris and Berlin are embarrassing. Thirdly: We are observed by Moscow and also by Beijing. All Orbán's embarrassing action must stop. And that will be so.

Mr President! It's October '23 and Ukraine is fighting out of last resort on the front lines in the east and south of the country. In Beijing, a social chat with friends takes place. "It is a great pleasure to see you again," said President Putin, who is bombing Ukrainian cities. "Hungary never wanted to oppose Russia", Orbán replies. “Our aim has always been to expand the best contacts.” I read this protocol on the side of the Kremlin, and I seriously wonder: Mr Orbán, you don't have them all anymore. They sell out our European interests. They are paralyzing Europe. They're blackmailing us all. Everyone here in this house and in the capitals of Europe. It's not about gimmicks, it's about the existential interests of our continent! I would also like to say to the Commission: Anyone who gets blackmailed will always get blackmailed. And if the extortion money is still illegal, then even more so. This is another reason why we in the Committee on Legal Affairs will seriously examine the correctness of the action against the Commission.

Mr President, we are mourning for countless Palestinian innocent victims. So many children. So many civilians. We are mourning for Israeli victims of Hamas pogroms. Baked babies, women raped to death again and again. Committed by a criminal organisation now hiding behind Palestinian children. Shooting missiles on Israeli civilian cities. We need to ask ourselves where our responsibility lies, for more humanitarian aid, more pressure on Israel to make this humanitarian aid accessible for more restraint of Israel and more humanitarian law respect. Our responsibility for being too passive in any attempts to reach a durable and just two-state solution. During the last years, our responsibility for tolerating Hamas, a leadership in Gaza with a genocidal ideology, and our responsibility today to help Palestinians, but not by pouring fuel into fire by using unverified figures, with populist TikTok diplomacy, which helps to get more likes rather than more help for Palestinians. We must engage immediately in the region for a durable two-state solution, instead of projecting our own demons on victims of our own European genocides.

Mr President, ladies and gentlemen, We did not agree with this report. We will not agree with this report either. Why? For two simple reasons: Firstly, I personally do not agree with reports that are eye-wiping, and I do not agree with reports that make civil society the scapegoat of our problems. This report is eye-wiping because it imposes requirements on the NGOs that have been around for a long time. And the Commission has confirmed it several times, even today: The requirements set out in this report have long been set out, for example, in the Financial Regulation. to find. And here we are on the subject of scapegoats: Anyone who stylizes NGOs, which are part of our democracy, as the main evil of corruption, who does not use Qatargate to address corrupt politicians, but instrumentalizes it to denounce our civil society, has not understood the foundations of our democracy. And that is another reason why we will not agree with this report, no matter how softly flushed it is in the end.

Mr President! Baby Sara is now four years old, she likes to laugh, romps around and certainly has her own head. She is raised by two people who love her, who love each other. But love can sometimes be complicated, because Sara does not have the same rights as other children of her age, because her rights and those of her parents Kalina and Jane are curtailed in Bulgaria and in ten other EU countries. Because they can be discriminated against in 11 Member States. Because eleven Member States are more interested in how Sara was conceived than how much she is loved or what her future looks like. We therefore support the Commission's proposal to give same-sex couples a right to their child and their children a right to parental love. We are appalled that this proposal is already a red line for so many Member States, whether out of false concern for their so-called traditional values – here nice greetings to the Kremlin and Mr Putin – or out of false consideration for alleged formalities. It's not our job to complicate love. It is our job to support all children in the EU, no matter where they live, no matter what gender their parents are. Rainbow families must be recognised in each Member State, otherwise the fundamental rights of parents and children will be undermined.

Madam President, Madam Vice-Presidents, Madam Commissioner, yes, we have issues with foreign interference, with hybrid interventions from abroad, and with corrupt politicians at home. But frankly, those issues are not quite new. There has always been money that spoke louder than words if paid to the right people. There was always corruption and always politicians for sale to foreign powers. So what is new? I will tell you what is new. A political trend where authoritarians and anti-democrats set their NGOs under pressure by accusing them of being foreign agents, by blaming them for representing interests of their grantors, by imposing on the NGOs the burden of bureaucracy, distracting them from their original burden: the burden of saving democracy. This should not happen with this law, for one simple reason: we are not authoritarians. We do not want to assist authoritarians in the EU to label, prosecute, pressure their civil society, and this is our goal with this legislation. We must strike a delicate balance between accountability and freedom. This is how history will judge us, will judge you, and will judge this legislation. Let’s do everything possible to defend our free space for our civil society.

Dear Mr President, Vice-President, Rapporteur, Colleagues! The digitalisation of cooperation is urgently needed and it is good that we are pushing it forward. Europe and its justice systems: Yes, we are growing closer together, and digital means are part of it. And yes, it also gives us opportunities. For example, access to justice will be improved in such a way that case-law can become faster and more efficient. And what is particularly important to me: Victims of crime do not have to arrive in person when they are in other Member States, or – which is also very important – violence and traumatising experiences do not have to be relived when you are in a room with the perpetrator, the perpetrator, or the accused at this time, as a witness or as a victim. That's on the good side. But let us not forget that it is about fundamental rights. This is not only about trust in this system, but also about fundamental rights, about the integrity of our legal system and, ultimately, about the rule of law. We all know from our normal lives: remote meetings have something different than meetings in the room, and the more important it is in court hearings that digital hearings are not the same as on-site exchanges; This should not and should not become the norm. Also important for us: Confidentiality of communication with lawyers must be maintained. We must not go in the direction of Russia and other authoritarian states. But, I'm very optimistic about that. We've put in enough protections.

Madam President, the amendment addresses the horrific situation around the hospital in Gaza and the tragedy that took place there. It was formulated in consensus with the leading groups in the first hours after the incident news arrived. And now, as more and more news is upcoming and more and more differentiation is there about what happened, we would like to propose an amendment that would focus on those who innocently perished there, and the potential perpetrators who are responsible for it, with consideration of the new information that we have in the media, so that we do not spread fake information or do not somehow push it, even unwillingly. Our proposal is the following: ‘Deeply regrets and mourns the loss of hundreds of innocent lives and those injured at the Al-Ahli Hospital blast; calls for an independent investigation under international law to establish whether this was a deliberate attack and thus a war crime; calls for perpetrators to be held accountable.’

Madam President, ladies and gentlemen, ladies and gentlemen, So far, we have not considered geostrategy. Now we're trying to spell out geostrategy in analogy. What we're still not doing is developing a geostrategy for the digital space. After all, a true geostrategic Europe does not see digital policy merely as a technical thing. Our future decides on it. There has to be a technology foreign policy. To this end, we must formulate three objectives, three areas and three necessities. Three objectives: It must be about the ability to act, also in the digital field. It must be about our capacities and a balance between capacities and values. The values are a green Europe and a people-centred, digital Europe. And it must be a strategic approach, embedded in our foreign policy. Three areas are necessary: Competition between global powers must be addressed, especially in the technological field. We need to talk about war and peace-making through digital means. And we need to talk about freedom and oppression with the means of digital technology. These are the goals that we have to embed and work on in a normal geostrategic and foreign policy way.

Mr President, my wholehearted condolences to the victims and all those affected by the destruction of the Al-Alhi al-Arabi Hospital in Gaza, no matter how many victims there were, because even one person’s life is a human life. It is tragic that missiles of Islamic Jihad and Hamas are flying over the heads of those whom Hamas has made their hostages, and by that I don’t mean Israelis – I mean Palestinians. It is tragic that instead of investing in water and sewage systems, water pipes are used to produce missiles, machinery to kill – to kill others and sometimes to kill one’s own. It is unimaginable pain to look at photos of the Israeli victims. It is tragic that Israel has no choice but to defend itself and, yes, defend itself by military, because Hamas leaves Israel no other options. This war started with Hamas inhumanity. This war will end through Israel’s humanity. Because yes, it is human, deeply human, to try to provide security to your civilians, but it is also human to do the utmost possible to limit the humanitarian losses in Gaza, to look for peaceful solutions beyond the current operation and, yes, look for a peaceful solution with Palestinians ultimately. This time is now time for our commonness in Europe without hatred, without hatred on the streets and without us trying to get political benefits from supporting the masses, chanting for terrorists. We need to stand together, even if it is very, very hard to be able to stand.

Mr President, the effectiveness of sanctions is determined by clarity about our sanctions’ goals, and effectiveness of sanctions is determined by the professionalism of sanction policies. This Council and this Commission have lost sight of the main priorities: our priority is to prevent Russian government and Russian machinery from continuing to be able to finance this genocidal war. The goal of sanctions is not collective punishment of Putin’s opponents in the EU. Just recently, the interpretation of sanctions by the Commission – according to which Russian dissidents cannot bring personal items such as shampoo or soap from Russia to the EU – is frankly an embarrassment and is self-ridiculing the sanction instrument, one of the most important instruments of our foreign policy. Cars with Russian plates should not be allowed in the streets of the EU? Come on, listen to that. Are those our priorities? At the same time, while EU customs officers were hunting down Russian dissidents and their personal cars, we have heard about lifting sanctions from key actors of the media landscape in Russia, based apparently on two articles in the media. Is that the professionalism that we want in our sanction policies? We hear reports about sanction lists that are created based on Wikipedia articles. Is that the professionalism that we have? We still do not have a clear understanding of how sanctions are imposed, lifted and implemented. Dear Commissioner, dear Council, we must increase pressure, we must enact more sanctions, and our colleagues were right about that. We must close the loopholes. But please do it with a clear view of helping Ukraine through restricting the Russian state, and do this by driving a clear, transparent and professional strategy.

Mr President! Anyone who has seen pictures of Sarema Musayeva knows what this is all about. It is about inhumane crimes against an innocent woman whose family members have dared to contradict Kadyrov. But it is also about much more: It is a symptom of the disintegration of the Putin system – systemic disintegration, moral disintegration. It's also about a deal, a deal with human lives between Moscow and Grozny, a deal to maintain power. And it is also about Chechnya becoming a laboratory for decades – a laboratory to normalise inhumanity. Only through a war of extermination against the Chechen people, now to normalize the most brutal cruelty against dissidents, against the families of these dissidents, against oppressed women and also against minorities, especially against the LGBTQI community. With this resolution we say: We look very closely at these crimes, and these crimes are not only in Moscow, they are everywhere in Russia and especially in Grozny. We are watching and we are drawing our conclusions. We won't let it go on like this.

Madam President, We do not believe when Azerbaijan says that Nagorno-Karabakh will be integrated into a multinational Azerbaijan. We cannot believe this when cultural development and civil rights protection are verbally promised. No, what we are seeing is cultural annihilation and ethnic cleansing, if not by proven violence – some doubt – then certainly by proven threats of violence and physical annihilation. If the cause of Nagorno-Karabakh is presented as terrorism, the entire population, at least the male population, will be degraded to criminals and thus also threatened with death. Our demands must be that we also offer the Armenian minority from Nagorno-Karabakh a perspective, up to an opportunity to return under an international guarantee. In any event, the payment of compensation must be clearly and unambiguously demanded. And we must support small democracy in Armenia and offer the poor a Western, democratic perspective.

Madam President, I am one of many who have consciously decided for a future in Germany, in the EU. For years I was asked how it could be that I lived in the country of the perpetrators. For years I have answered proudly that, precisely because of Germany's past, I look confidently into Germany's future, that, like so many of us, I feel confidence in German democracy precisely because this society has never forgotten what it carries in the backpack of its history. We have repeated these answers so many times that now no one abroad asks these questions that we ourselves became proud German Democrats. But now let's look at the latest poll results, at the poll-drinking regulars' tables. And we ask ourselves the question: Was self-confidence in vain? There must be a jolt through Germany, through Europe and through this Parliament. Where is the responsibility of the parties? I do not ask Mr Krah about his TikTok revisionism. But I turn to Mr Weber, whose Prime Minister sacrifices the German tradition of remembrance on the altar of maintaining power. We must fight for our common democracy together. And that means that we as Democrats do not make a pact with populists, fascists or anti-Semites, even if it hurts. This is democracy.

Mr President, here we go again: another year, another report on Türkiye, another time to congratulate the rapporteur for his great job. Thanks for holding us together and finding solutions for everything. Once again, we assessed if our Turkish partners came closer to us and we to them. We rely on Turkey and now we rely on Turkey even more, as a neighbour, as a NATO partner, and Türkiye relies on us. But year after year, we don’t come closer. We are still waiting for Türkiye to ratify Sweden’s NATO accession, for political prisoners to be released, for the implementation of several judgements of the European Court of Human Rights. Yet we can help our societies to continue to cooperate. And yes, we should discuss how to advance visa liberalisation. We should discuss how to advance customs union and talk about high-level representatives meeting together again. But it does not mean that we stop thinking and believing in the accession process. I talked to civil society. I talked to the young generation. They all asked us to reiterate this chance – chance for their European future. And yes, the criticism remains, and it will always remain, and we will keep fighting for people to be released from prisons and for democracy in Turkey. But we will do it with a mind focused on Turkey being Europe at some point. We owe it to the young generation.

Madam President, Vladimir Putin doesn’t use the internet. But if he did, he would be able to visit the site of the World Food Programme and read the very first sentence: ‘Today, 828 million people around the world will go to bed hungry.’ 828 million people: the equivalent of six Russias are starving in the world. And Putin’s ultimatum will add yet another Russia to it. Over 100 million more would starve. And what is it all about? It’s about lies, it’s about blackmail and it’s about greed. It’s about lies because there are no sanctions against food exports from Russia, but Russia always says. It’s about greed because by bombing port storages and infrastructure in Ukraine and offering Russian grain on Russian terms, it is about greed and what should we do? We should simplify, not complicate imports through the EU on Ukrainian grain. Customs and sanitary controls should not become an unnecessary burden. And yes, we need EU subsidies to make the transfer of crops with new routes economically viable. It is not about the Polish election here. It is our responsibility to ensure Ukrainian crops do not rot and people do not starve.

Mr President! The AI Regulation was not even adopted yet, as the European Commission has already launched initiatives that are overtaking it. In any case, this could misunderstand the Commission's overzealous public relations work on the AI Pact. We must agree on a common cause, dear friends and colleagues. I hope this is undisputed here. The AI law we just passed is the foundation of our AI strategy. As co-legislators, we owe citizens, we owe companies what we were elected for: To give politics and society certainty through innovation, but also orientation through regulation. That's our job. That must be clear. We must not give away momentum, we must not confuse it with egomaniac initiatives that outdo each other. We need to implement effective and equitable regulation for AI worldwide, based on our law. We agreed on this in response to demands for moratoria and bans. We're not Elon Musk, we're not the Italian government, but we're not China or Russia, where everything that serves despots seems to go. The use of common rules in AI can help – can help, but must take place on the basis of European rules and must not undermine them. That is the common message that emanates from today's discussion, and that is a good thing!

Mr President! One can disagree on the wisdom of NATO's decisions these days, including how realistic the Ukrainians' expectations were. But there are two things that are clear: It is now also our responsibility, the EU's responsibility, to give the Ukrainians what has been lost for many of them these days. We need to start a process, an accession process that is seriously and clearly planned. In this Parliament, we have already started a parliamentary process in this direction, and the Council must now follow suit. Secondly: We must clearly signal to Putin: Vilnius is not Bucharest. The Vilnius pledges are not consolations and shifts, as happened in Bucharest, and are not an encouragement for Putin to strike. The security of Ukraine is everything and remains everything to us. We will do everything, with or without a clear plan, to support Ukraine’s membership here. A word to the left: Stop playing social and human rights against each other. The ... (The President withdrew the floor from the speaker.)