Speeches

Madam President, dear colleagues, today we are discussing our concerns about media freedom in Georgia. Why we are discussing this issue is a lot of concern, because we are absolutely sure that the Georgian people deserve to be part of the European family. We want the Georgian people to be members of our Union. But in order to become a member of the EU, it is not enough just to have people wish to join the EU. The country needs to meet the membership criteria: democracy, the rule of law and media freedom criteria. And that depends, first of all, on the policy of the ruling party and the leadership of the country. And that is where our concerns come. Media freedom is becoming a victim of the deliberate policy of the Georgian formal and shadow leadership to politicise justice in Georgia. It is totally unacceptable. That is what this resolution is saying in a very clear way. It is not the first time when post-communist countries are facing a similar situation. In 1997, Slovakia was not invited to start negotiations because Slovakia’s then populist Prime Minister, Vladimír Mečiar, was destroying democracy and media freedom values. The Slovakian people resolved that problem and voted out the Mečiar Government. I would urge Georgian Government not to repeat the mistakes of Vladimír Mečiar.

Mr President, the Council made important decisions, but still there is a lot to be done in order for us to come out from this geopolitical crisis becoming stronger. In order to do that, first of all we need to look back and to name our mistakes of the last decades, which allowed this geopolitical crisis to happen. I see two major mistakes: first, for too long we were considering that dialogue with Putin is more important than democracy in Russia. That is how we allowed the Kremlin to become a new fascist regime. And second, for too long we were keeping Ukraine in a geopolitical grey zone, not giving it a clear membership perspective, and because of that Putin decided that Ukraine is his territory. We need to learn our lessons. We need to give Ukraine candidate status immediately. And also, we cannot be effective during the war with the individual veto right of Member States, which simply creates conditions for a blackmail culture to spread. We are at the war. Not just Ukraine. And I would like to see that this war will make all of us much stronger.

Mr President, it is important that the resolution defines the establishment of a special international tribunal for the crime of aggression committed by Putin. The establishment of such a tribunal will serve not only international justice, but also will have a major political impact on how the war will proceed further. It will be a very clear signal that the community of democracies has a political will to go for the full defeat of Putin in his war against Ukraine. The West will not be able to push Ukraine for beneficial—to—the—Kremlin ceasefire agreements, and plan to return to ‘business as usual’ with a person whose crimes of aggression are investigated by a special tribunal. The establishment of such a tribunal to investigate Putin’s personal criminal responsibility will put an end also to the phone calls by some Western leaders to Putin, and will stop concerns about ‘humiliation’ of Putin. The international tribunal will take care about the ‘face saving’ of Mr Putin. That will be the biggest political benefit from this initiative: the political West will be pushed to be united for the same goal – to defeat Putin’s fascism. Let’s remember, collaboration with international criminals is an international crime also.

Madam President, dear Commissioner, dear colleagues, it’s very clear that the continued persecution of opposition and trade union leaders in Belarus is a heavy crime committed by the illegal Lukashenko regime. Today we are standing together with all the persecuted fighters for a democratic Belarus and with the legitimate leader of democratic Belarus, Sviatlana Tsikhanouskaya. We should not be naive: our appeals to the Lukashenko regime to release imprisoned fighters for democracy will not be answered. That is why we cannot stay only with resolutions, which have been repeating such language for several years. Belarus is not a far away country somewhere in Africa, with some human rights problems. Belarus happens to be next door to us , in the geographical centre of the European continent. We need to understand our own responsibility, we need to look into what kind of mistakes we have made that allowed those atrocities and that military aggression to happen in the centre of Europe, in our vicinity. Today we need to learn one very clear lesson: if in our region we are not able to stop an authoritarian regime in its violations of human rights from the very beginning, then at some time later those regimes will become new fascist regimes and international criminal aggressors. That is why we now need to understand a very simple truth. The situation in Belarus will be radically changed for the better if Putin and Lukashenko are defeated in Ukraine and if Ukraine will get candidate status. Ukraine’s success is key for the future of democracy in Belarus and also in Russia. That is why we need to support Ukraine and together with them to win the war in Ukraine. Let’s learn our lessons!

Mr President, we all know what Moldova has faced during the last 40 years: occupation of part of the territory by the Kremlin, money laundering and Kremlin-loyal political parties in government and things like that. Now we have a totally different picture. We have a pro-European president and a pro-European government, and we have Kremlin threats to Moldovan sovereignty. We know what this means. All of the European continent, including Ukraine, Moldova and ourselves, we are facing a huge political crisis created by the Kremlin invasion of Ukraine and threats to Moldova and others. We need to learn a lesson – part of the responsibility for this crisis is also on our shoulders. The EU was too slow and too weak in the realisation of its strategic responsibility to bring stability and development to its neighbourhood, either in the Western Balkans or in Ukraine and Moldova. Let’s imagine a different picture now – one in which Moldova is a member of the EU. It’s very clear that it would be beneficial not only for Moldova, it would be beneficial for EU stability in its neighbourhood, it would be beneficial even for Russia, since it would have much less of a wrong temptation to restore its empire. So let’s make a strategic conclusion from the lessons of this geopolitical crisis. Moldova membership in the European Union is needed not only for Moldova; it’s very much needed also for the European Union itself. And it’s very much needed for the perspective of a different Russia. Together with the Moldovan people, we have a possibility to create a different future for the whole European continent. Candidate status for Moldova and negotiations for membership – it’s our obligation to the Moldovan people and to the European people.

Mr President, I would like first of all to congratulate and to thank the Commission President for this statement about sanctions and about Ukraine’s reconstruction package. It is our war, and we need to take care, first of all, of the biggest needs – and this is Ukraine. We shall have problems also, but our economies will not go down by 50%. It is obvious that reconstruction after the war will demand a big amount of our money – hundreds of billions or even a trillion euros. However, it will also open up new opportunities, for both Ukraine and for the EU itself, for modernisation. Investments on such a scale will create new jobs. We successfully invested a trillion euros in fighting the COVID-19 pandemic. Now it’s time to invest a trillion euros into the fight against the Kremlin’s fascism pandemic, for arms deliveries, for reconstruction, and for the mitigation of the consequences of the war on our side. We know how to do it. Also, let us create a special fund for reconstruction of Ukraine until the end of June, when decisions on its candidate status will be made. Ukrainian victory is the only way for all of us to live in peace on the European continent. There is no way for a cheap peace.

Madam President, dear colleagues, the European continent is hit by a huge geopolitical and security crisis – Russia’s war against Ukraine. Such kind of a crisis is showing that we, unfortunately, have been weak in our capacities in foreign and security policy to avoid such kind of crises. ‘Europe will be forged in crises,’ said Jean Monnet, one of the founding fathers of the European Union, ‘and will be the sum of the solutions adopted for those crises.’ We need new solutions now. It’s good that we have had broad consultations with the citizens of EU. It gave several important recommendations for the common and security policy to be improved. But we need to remember that the EU was created and reformed by intellectual and political leaders of the Union. Let’s not forget about this side of leadership: Robert Shuman, Jean Monnet, Konrad Adenauer, Alcide de Gasperi and others were the leaders, who created and who were changing the Union. We have responsibility of our generation – the EU needs to adapt itself to the changes and challenges of such kind of a crisis. That requires leadership from us. We need to rise to the demand of the citizens, which was expressed very clearly: qualified majority voting, new security capabilities, and strategic responsibility for the neighbourhood. That is what citizens are demanding from us. The EU needs to change itself, and Treaty change is an instrument for such a change. And let’s not be afraid of change. As the prominent Irish-British conservative philosopher and politician Edmund Burke said: ‘a state without the means of some change is without the means of its conservation.’ If we want to secure and conserve the state of the European Union, we need to go for change. That is what citizens are asking us to do.

and there are also terrible pictures from Bucha. We should not forget that the road to this terrible war started in 2000, when Putin replaced Yeltsin and began to destroy Russian democracy. Now we see that autocratic Russia without democracy is the biggest threat to European security. Navalny in Putin’s prison and the terrible Bucha pictures are very strongly interconnected in between them. Long—term peace in Europe is possible, not only if Putin loses his criminal war against Ukraine, but also if the Russian people transform their country back to democracy. That is why we support those fighting for democracy in Russia, for Navalny, and for those who were forced to leave Russia, and we support the long—term peace perspective on the European continent. This is what this resolution is about. The future of Russian democracy is a crucial strategic issue for European security. That is why we need not only to express our solidarity with Navalny, but also we need to have a clear strategy of how we are assisting the case of democracy, for which Navalny is fighting, and of how we are supporting those fighters who were forced to run away from Russia. Let’s help the Russian people to build a better Russia of the future.

Madam President, as you have seen recently from the picutres of Bucha – terrible pictures – the Putin regime is a real neo—Nazi, neo—fascist and neo—totalitarian regime. Putin hates democracy because democracy is a mortal threat to his dictatorial regime. That is why Putin is so afraid of democracy. That is why he is so afraid of domestic fighters for democracy like Navalny or democracies in the neighbourhood like Ukraine. Putin would like to weaken or destroy European democracies based on common European values. That is why he finds some friends in European countries because authoritarian populism is attractive for some political parties and leaders in Europe. But the friendship of European politicians with the neo—Nazi regime in the Kremlin is exactly what emboldens Putin to become more dictatorial. The Putin regime shows very clearly that, if such a regime is not stopped by the international community at the very beginning of its authoritarian path, then it turns into an international criminal aggressor. The old European friends of that regime are in some way responsible for Putin’s aggression of today and they are accomplices of those horrible crimes in Bucha and elsewhere in Ukraine. In the end we need to understand that there will be no peace and stability on the European continent if Russia does not transform itself back to democracy. An undemocratic Russia was, is and will stay the biggest threat to European security. Those in Europe who were, or are still, cooperating with the autocratic Putin regime or who are trying to imitate his ideology in France, in Germany, in Hungary or in my Lithuania, are not just useful idiots for Putin, but they are also enemies of peace in Europe.

Madam President, it’s our war too. This war is fought not only in Ukraine; the fight is also going on in EU capitals. The only real way to end the war now is to introduce the maximum sanctions on Russia now – an embargo on oil and gas, an embargo on ports, and SWIFT sanctions on all Russian banks, and doing so in such a way as to push Putin to capitulate and withdraw. Unfortunately, there are capitals in the EU who are opposing the introduction of those maximum sanctions, including an embargo on energy imports, without clear arguments and clear numbers. European people have a very clear opinion. They demand that we show maximum support to Ukraine, alongside maximum sanctions. Yesterday here in the Parliament, we created a global network of parliamentarians: United for Ukraine. That is the title of this network. As a beginning, there are 160 parliamentarians from 28 countries, but there will be much more. The network will do its utmost to convince national leaders, Members of the European Council, to listen to their voters and to stop financing Putin’s war. Either we’re on the side of Ukraine and European citizens, or we continue to finance Putin’s war. It is a simple black—and—white choice, which we need to make now.

Madam President, unlike with the previous refugee crisis, we now have war on the European continent and Europeans from Ukraine are moving into other European countries for shelter. We have a simple European moral obligation to take care of all of them, our fellow Europeans. I would like to praise the Commission, the national governments, NGOs and individual citizens, especially in Central Europe, who are doing a lot to help those who are running away from Putin’s brutal war. But our obligation to the citizens of Ukraine and also to those who are looking for safe shelter in our countries is a bigger one. Our obligation is to stop the war. We cannot speak about solidarity with Ukrainians or refugees if we are not implementing a full embargo on the import of energy resources from Russia. Each day, we’re paying EUR 600 million into Putin’s pocket. It covers the purchase of four hundred new Russian tanks per day. During all the days of war so far Ukrainians have managed to destroy fewer Russian tanks than we are buying for Putin in one day. We need to declare that our sanctions on the Russian economy will stay in place until the last Russian soldier leaves Ukrainian territory, not only Kherson or Chernobyl, but also Donetsk, Luhansk and Crimea. Putin and those surrounding him in the Kremlin need to understand that they will lose this war and there will be much less suffering, not only in Ukraine, but also in Russia itself, if Putin stops his criminal war immediately and then we shall rebuild Ukraine. The refugees need to have hope and we need to deliver it, all of us are Ukrainians now and Europeans, Slava Ukraini!

Mr President, dear brothers and sisters in Ukraine, dear colleagues, first of all I would like to praise the heroism of Ukrainian people. I would like to praise heroism of Ukrainian soldiers and the heroic leadership of President Vladimir Zelenskyy. Ukrainians are facing and defending themselves against the war launched by a real new Nazi regime in the Kremlin. Putin is a real war criminal. Ukrainians are suffering because we, in the West, till now were too weak to stop Putin’s crimes from the very beginning. Ukrainians with their blood are fighting for their right to reunite with Europe. They are more Europeans than many of us. That is why we need to give them candidate status immediately and then we need to design special fast procedure for Ukraine to join us. There is an example of such a special procedure, when in 1990 East Germany integrated into the European Union and it took less than a year. So, let’s establish a special procedure also for Ukraine’s swift reunification with Europe. After the EU started to deliver weapons to Ukraine, when SWIFT and other banking sanctions were introduced, we need the next steps. First of all, we need to stop imports of Russian oil and gas immediately. Each day we are paying to Putin for 100 new T-72 tanks. Twice more than Ukrainians are able to destroy during one day on the battle field. Second, let’s create a multi-billion ‘Free Ukraine fund’ to support the resilience, reconstruction and modernisation of the Ukrainian economy. Let’s finance it in the same way as we financed the Next Generation EU Fund, with the EU borrowing in the market. Thanks, Josep Borrell, for a good idea. Third, let’s introduce full-scale SWIFT and other sanctions also against criminal Lukashenko and his banks. And the last point, a stable peace on the European continent will be possible only if the ‘de-Putinisation’ of Russia will happen. With the help of Ukrainian victories on the battlefields, with our sanctions and with the help of ordinary Russians protesting on the streets, the de-Putinisation of Russia is coming closer and closer. Mr Putin, you lost this criminal war. The International Tribunal in the Hague is waiting for you. For justice to be served. Justice first of all to Ukrainians. (The speaker concluded his speech in Ukrainian)

Mr President, today we need to understand that Russia under Putin is a declining post-imperial power. Russia under Putin is a desperate new ‘sick man of Europe’. Internally Putin is afraid of Navalny, externally, he’s afraid of the example of success of a democratic Ukraine. Authoritarian Russia under Putin is the biggest threat to security on our continent. Putin will not change himself. Threats to Ukraine will continue during the years to come, because this is the way the Kremlin aims to weaken the Ukrainian economy. Future of democracy in Russia, not a dialogue with autocratic Putin, is a long-term goal for a new security architecture in Europe. Strong and able to defend itself, Ukraine will deter Kremlin aggression, since only the weakness of its opponents is provoking Putin for further threats and aggression. That is why the West must invest in the political, military and economic success of Ukraine. EU integration is the only way to create such a successful democratic Ukraine, for that purpose, the EU should put forward for Ukraine a new process of accelerated reintegration beginning with integration into the EU single market. Such an integration strategy for Ukraine is the most effective long-term strategy to deter Russia. European integration and Western unity is a unique European instrument to keep long-term peace on the European continent.

Madam President, it is a good report, and it is important for us to understand that a major strategic goal of our foreign and security policy should be peace on the European continent. The major challenge to peace – authoritarian and aggressive Russia. New security architecture on the European continent is possible only when Russia will transform itself back to democracy. The European Union has an immense soft transformative power of democratisation in its neighbourhood. The European integration of Ukraine is the only way how the EU can help to create success of Ukraine, which would have a major impact on the democratisation of Russia. It’s good that integration of the Western Balkans, in this report, is recognised as very important for the stability and security of the whole continent. I cannot understand why it is impossible to say the same about the importance of Ukraine’s integration? The Balkans got such a sentence after the war ended in 1999. Do we really need a war against Ukraine in order for Ukraine to be treated in the same way?

Mr President, today we should speak not only about Kazakhstan, but also about all the post—Soviet post—imperial authoritarian area, which is becoming an area of brutality, oppression and blood. We know what a tragedy had happened recently in Kazakhstan, when during the period of peaceful protests, brutal riots were artificially initiated as a pretext to seek the Russian—led military deployment. The outcome of this brutal action against those peaceful protests is very bloody: several hundred dead, many injured and nearly ten thousand detained. There is a need for objective international investigation of all the recent tragedies in Kazakhstan, of course. But even now, we can make three general conclusions. First, recent developments in Kazakhstan, in the same way as 2020 developments in Belarus, have shown that ordinary people and civil society in those countries are fed up with authoritarian regimes, corruption, lack of justice and lack of rule of law. And that is a reason why people are demanding essential change in their countries. Second, the Kremlin is becoming geopolitically weaker in the region, and the only way for the Kremlin to keep influence on authoritarian regimes in the post—Soviet area is to play the role of military gendarme against any democratic developments. And third, in the post—Soviet area, we see clear evidence that authoritarian regimes, with the assistance of the Kremlin, are bringing only persecution, torture and deaths of innocent people, and only those countries which, after the fall of Soviet Empire, managed to establish democracies and the rule of law are able to keep peace and protect basic human rights. History repeats itself. Soviets collapsed when militaries were started to be used against peaceful protesters. Now, the end of authoritarianism in the post—Soviet area is also coming closer and closer.

Madam President, as we know, Putin wants to destroy Memorial. Many human rights organisations were destroyed by the Kremlin up till now. But Memorial is a unique organisation which was created by Andrei Sakharov back in 1989 in order to preserve memories about the atrocities of the gulags and Stalin’s crimes. Andrei Sakharov understood in a very clear way that in order to build a new democratic post—imperial Russia, Russia needed to recognise the tragedies of its past. The largest victim of Stalinist crimes was the Russian nation itself. The nation needs to recognise the crimes and the tragedies of its past, because this is the only way to overcome the nation’s post—imperial nostalgia for its imperial past, which is the biggest enemy of a young post—imperial democracy. After Yeltsin, a young Russian democracy failed to survive. It appeared that in the society of young democracy, nostalgia for the imperial past was stronger than a democratic mentality. And now Putin wants to destroy memories about Stalin’s crimes. He wants to destroy an institution which was trying to bring the truth about Stalin’s crimes to ordinary Russians. It is symbolic that Memorial, in its activities, combines its care about the memories of Stalin’s crimes in the past and its care about Putin’s crimes against human rights today. There is no big difference in the mentality of the Kremlin during Stalin’s time and during Putin’s time. For both, human life means nothing; for both, human dignity, human rights and the sovereignty of nations means nothing. The only difference is that one was stronger in mass persecution, while the other is stronger in mass kleptocracy. Putin wants to destroy Memorial because he wants to destroy memories about Stalin’s crimes. For Putin, Stalin is an example to follow, not an object to be criticised. The logic of Putin is very simple – there is no need to register or investigate either the crimes of Stalin or the crimes of Putin. We cannot stop Putin right now in destroying Memorial, in his attempts to destroy memories about gulag crimes and in his attempts to bring Stalin back to glory. The future of democratic Russia will stop him, and history shows that such a future is unavoidable for Russia also, but for the time being Putin can succeed in destroying Memorial. What should be our answer? First of all, we need to be ready to recreate Memorial inside the European Union, which would take care of the safety of archives and memories which were collected by Memorial in Russia. Second, we need such a Memorial inside the EU to collect all the evidence about Stalinist unsolved crimes not only in Russia, but on the whole continent of Europe. One last point. Since Putin is finishing destroying the last human rights organisations in Russia, we need to establish a special EU envoy for human rights in Russia, whom we could call the ‘Memorial envoy’ and who would be responsible for collecting, analysing and publishing all the data about human rights violations in today’s Russia. Mr Putin, you can destroy Memorial, but you will not destroy human memory, including the memory about your crimes.

Mr President, what we are discussing today is not just one more instance of the aggressive behaviour of the Kremlin. It is possible that, in the future, this day will be shown as the day when the geopolitical future of the European Union in the 21st century started to be designed. Putin, who started the war against Georgia in 2008 and against Ukraine in 2014, is now demanding that those countries should not take care of their security, and that the West should abandon them. Here is the most important question to us, not to Georgians or Ukrainians: are we ready to succumb to the Kremlin’s brutal threats and blackmail on the future of Georgia and Ukraine? Are we ready to take big new steps in the ‘appeasement of Putin strategy’? We know where the appeasement of Hitler brought not only Europe, but the whole world. The appeasement of Hitler came to a culmination when Hitler blackmailed the West on the future of Czechoslovakia and the West succumbed. Now Putin is blackmailing the West on the future of Ukraine. Are we ready to succumb again? If not, than it is not enough just to say that NATO and the EU will not listen to the Kremlin’s demands. It’s time to move forward with the real Euro—Atlantic integration of Ukraine, Georgia and Moldova, starting from the Eastern Partnership Summit, which will start tomorrow, and moving forward with the MAP for NATO membership. If that is not done, then it will become clear that the future of those countries is being sacrificed for the appeasement of Putin. For the sake of appeasement, there were no decisions made to invite Georgia and Ukraine for the NATO Bucharest Summit in 2008. Because of that, Putin decided that he could start his wars against Georgia and Ukraine. Now we see that the continuation of that appeasement brings only new threats and blackmail and, if we succumb now, we shall be responsible for the recreation of real aggressive Fascism in the 21st century and for all the future tragedies of the European continent. (The speaker spoke in Ukrainian)

Madam President, first of all, we are discussing a very important issue, and second, we give our full support to this important resolution, and thank the initiators very much. Everybody knows what the Kremlin’s Wagner Group is and what kinds of war crimes they have committed in Crimea, Donbas, Syria, Libya, the Central African Republic and other places: torture, killings, sexual violence, mass summary executions, disappearances and so on and so on. Until now, nobody has been brought to international justice. We also need to understand what the Wagner Group is, according to international law. It is not a private military and security company, and it is not a voluntary group of mercenaries. It is a Kremlin regime proxy organisation, a proxy military force with clear elements of criminal gangs in their activities. Such a state proxy organisation is covered neither by conventions which prohibit the activities of mercenaries nor by any kind of international regulations which are applied to private, military and security companies. That is why it will be very important, after this resolution is passed, to continue our job in the Parliament and other EU institutions in order to deal with such entities as the Wagner Group. My proposals are, first, to make a full—scale investigation into Wagner Group activities and crimes with a special parliamentary report, not just with an urgency resolution, which is good and needed for the time being; second, to qualify the activities of the Wagner Group as activities of state—organised and state—sponsored criminal gangs; third, to create an international law which would set out that states or entities which hire such proxy organisations as the Wagner Group also become internationally responsible and liable for the crimes committed by the Wagner Group; and fourth, to create an international law which would define that, for the crimes of such criminal gangs like the Wagner Group, Russia, the Russian State and the Kremlin regime, which created such proxy criminal organisations, are also internationally responsible and liable.

Madam President, I am from Lithuania, that is why I am really grateful to the Commission. And I will not speak about Lukashenko today, but I will emphasis that, in this House, it’s quite popular to say that defence of the EU’s borders is in some way against the human rights of migrants. It’s wrong. Yes, we need to take care about the humanitarian crisis of those migrants who became hostages of the Lukashenko regime in Belarus. But we also need to take care of the safety of those hundreds of thousands of migrants, who potentially will be tempted to take the same route towards the EU if they see that the EU is not able to defend its borders. Those who now are criticising Poland or Lithuania should understand what kind of crisis can be created if the borders were not defended. Let’s find an effective humanitarian solution today, but let’s not create false hopes, which would lead to much bigger suffering, with much bigger numbers of potential victims.

Mr President, I am from Lithuania. For me, it is very clear: Lukashenko and Putin have a strategic goal to escalate situation on EU border. Let’s be ready. What do we need to do? The biggest mistake of Europe would be not to defend its own borders. That is why I would like to praise the daily job of our border guards. First of all, EU needs to answer to Lukashenko’s hybrid warfare with clear support measures to assist defence of EU bodies, including with the construction of physical infrastructure where it is needed. Also, EU needs to immediately stop the influx of migrants into Belarus, organised by Lukashenko, with immediate sanctions against those airlines and Belarussian airports, which are used in this smuggling crime. But we need to remember that the major reason of the threats is Lukashenko’s regime itself, and Putin’s support for his crimes. And that is why EU needs to target directly both the Lukashenko and Kremlin regimes. EU needs to show clearly that because of his crimes, Lukashenko’s secret treasures will be arrested immediately, and Lukashenko himself will be brought to the International Court of Justice in the Hague for the breach of the UN Convention against Transnational Organised Crime, Protocol against the Smuggling of Migrants and Convention against Torture. Putin needs to know that the EU will introduce new sanctions against Kremlin, if Kremlin continues to support the crimes of Lukashenko. The weakness of democracies in their response to Lukashenko’s crimes in an effective way since last year inspires him to become even more aggressive and to start new international crimes. Let’s stop with that weakness on our side. With authoritarians, we need to talk the language of tribunals on confiscation of their secret treasures, and needs to be done now.

Madam President, dear Commissioner, dear colleagues, when we are talking about push-backs on the borders with Belarus, we need not to forget about the illegitimate Lukashenko regime and his crimes. He is the reason for the suffering which people of Belarus and millions on the borders are living through. Let’s push back Lukashenko out of power and there will be no more sufferings of ordinary people either from Belarus or from far-away countries. Let’s not allow Lukashenko win this hybrid war against the European Union, that he shall us to discuss only about migrants in order not to have time to discuss Lukashenko’s crimes. I would like to thank the Commission, including for the recent communication on a renewed EU action plan against migrant smuggling, which clearly shows that what we are facing in Lukashenko’s actions  is a special hybrid warfare, using state-sponsored smuggling of migrants. We need to remember that the smuggling of migrants is an international crime, which should be punished by all the force of international criminal law, including United Nations conventions. So, my question is very simple: is the Commission ready to bring Lukashenko to criminal responsibility for criminal smuggling of migrants?

Mr President, since we are coming to the end of our discussions I will make a few conclusions and messages from our debate and from the report. The first one: There is strong cross-party support in this House for this unique report, which means that everybody is for more intensive relations between the EU and Taiwan. This is a message not only to China but also to EU institutions: Taiwan is no less an important partner than China. Taiwan is a striving democracy of Chinese people and it is a good example of democracy for mainland Chinese people. One more message: The formula ‘One country, two systems’ means that at some time in the future both sides can unite themselves under the democracy umbrella. And the last message: China should abandon its attempts to threaten democracy and independence of Taiwan or its attempts to threaten Lithuania for our support to Taiwan. I want to thank Parliament and the Weimers report for the language of support to us, and would like to remind the Chinese authorities that thirty years ago the big Soviet empire collapsed when it tried to fight against the democracy and independence of small Lithuania.

Mr President, Madam Commissioner, dear colleagues, all of us we know what crimes against Belarusian people Lukashenko is committing, for what international crimes he is responsible. There is no need to repeat all the list. I would like to use this opportunity to thank Commissioner for your support for the Lithuanian authorities in defence of EU borders. But the only way out from this crisis is new, free and fair elections in Belarus, which not only Lukashenko, but also Putin are so heavily afraid of. There are three major factors, which are making influence on developments in Belarus: Belarusian peoples’ protest, Putin’s support for the brutal Lukashenko regime and western support for Belarusian people. With the lack of clear Western leadership in resolving the Belarusian crisis, with the protests temporarily silenced by brutal force, there is the only one significant factor in the field – Putin’s support to Lukashenko, and Putin is responsible for all Lukashenko’s crimes. This is why the EU has to make it clear that if the Kremlin continues its current policy on Belarus, the EU will have to introduce additional containment and deterrence measures on Russia. And second what we need to do, we need to consider bringing Lukashenko crimes to the International Court of Justice immediately on the basis of the Chicago Convention, Montreal Convention and the Convention against Torture Violations. In addition, EU needs to establish a special task force to work with universal jurisdiction cases at the EU and Member States level. the EU needs to show real leadership and to prove that it is able to resolve major political and humanitarian crisis on its borders. And Žyvie Belarus!

Madam President, first of all I would like to thank the rapporteur for a really good report. I will try to spend my minutes on some comments on Chinese policy towards EU Member States – this means Lithuania. The government of my country, Lithuania, in the spring decided to leave the so—called 17+1 format, which China created for relations with Central Europe in order to split the EU. Also, our government decided to upgrade relations with Taiwan and decided to open a Taiwanese, not Taipei, representation in Vilnius. Of course, China became very angry over Lithuania, recalled the ambassador, and our business in China experienced different pressures and sanctions. I would like to thank all of you for the support and solidarity which you have shown to us. We in Lithuania, several years ago, saw the same behaviour against Lithuania, against our business, shown by Russian authorities. We survived and we learnt a lesson. Business with an economy which is led by authoritarian regime is a risky business, very risky. So today we need to send a clear, simple message. Business with China or in China is a very risky business. Second, China is big, we as Lithuania are small, but we shall not be defeated because we are together.

– Mr President, this report on the European Parliament recommendations on the direction of EU-Russia political relations is a report on a really important topic. Russia is an important country which has a big influence on all the developments in the Eastern part of the European continent and the EU needs to have a clear long-term strategy with clear goals and clear instruments for our policy towards Russia. Our report is based on several clear principles. First of all, we want to have good relations with Russia, but it depends on Russia. With Russia, led by the authoritarian, kleptocratic and aggressive, both domestically and externally, Putin regime, it is impossible to have good relations. The Russia of today is the greatest threat to European security. Second principle. We are making a clear difference in our attitude towards the Kremlin regime and towards Russian people and Russian society who are the first victims of such a regime. We are very critical of the Kremlin regime and very positive and optimistic about the future of Russian society. Third principle. We are absolutely sure that, in the future, Russian people will live with a European-type democratic system of governance. If Ukrainians can do it, if Belarusians are striving for it, there is no reason why Russian people cannot go the same way. And we are absolutely sure that in the future the EU will have good and pragmatic relations with democratic Russia. The report gives several clear recommendations to EU institutions on EU future policy towards Russia. First of all, to concentrate our efforts on a very clear long-term goal and how to assist the Russian people to transform their country back to democratic, European-type development. This is the first time the European Parliament has given such a clear direction on the major goal of EU political relations with Russia. The report elaborates that the Strategy of EU political relations with Russia should have three major pillars: push back, contain and engage. It sounds in a very similar way like it was first declared by Vice-President Borrell, but in the report maybe we are bringing more precise and concrete content to those three pillars. The first pillar, ‘Push back’. Push back against the Kremlin’s aggressive policies of today, both external and internal policies. Clear non-recognition policy of occupations and annexations in Crimea, South Ossetia, Donbas; more effective type sanctions which should be better coordinated with transatlantic partners, including sanctions against oligarchs; possibility of non-recognition of legitimacy of elections, if they are stolen; effective implementation of the Green Deal as an instrument to cut EU dependency on Russian gas, and so on. Second pillar. Containment pillar. Sets out how to contain Kremlin hybrid influences and how to make EU clean and safe of Russia hybrid threats and corruption practices inside of the EU. If we want to help democrats in Russia to transform their country and to get rid of Kremlin autocracy, we need to make ourselves clean of Kremlin influences. And the third pillar ‘Engage’. Engage not only with Kremlin, but engage strategically with civil society in Russia. Let us offer the Russian people a clear vision of what kind of relationship we’re going to establish between the EU and Democratic Russia – visa free, free-trade agreements, EU-Russia real modernisation partnerships, and so on and so forth. That is what we can do in the future. The Russian people need to know that transformation of their country will be beneficial to all of them who now are the first victims of their authoritarian and corrupt regime. What else can we offer? Let us offer Russian people also inspiration and an example to follow. Much more ambitious EU support to make a success of the Eastern Partnership region, especially Association Trio countries: Ukraine, Moldova and Georgia. Their success, built with more ambitious EU integration policy, could bring a real inspiration to the Russian people to follow a similar democratic way of development. And the last point. As you know this weekend there will be elections to the State Duma in Russia, so-called elections. Lukashenko last year stole the election results after the elections. Putin is trying to steal them even before the elections have taken place. More than 100 of the most important opposition or independent candidates were not allowed to participate in the elections. Navalny is in prison, no OSCE observers are allowed to come. Our report recommends not recognising the Parliament of Russia as the legitimate parliament if the elections are recognised as being fraudulent and having been conducted in violation of democratic principles and international law. That is why next week will be a test for all of us, and the EU institutions, not to be afraid to say that elections were organised in violation of democratic principles and international law, since even now there is a lot of evidence that this is the case. Our report is a message to the Russian people: we are together with them. We need Russia as a good neighbour, with whom we can have good relations. We want the Russian people to enjoy the same human rights, the same rule of law and democracy privileges as we have and we enjoy. We want the Russian people to enjoy a modern and prosperous country. Such a development of Russia would be beneficial for Russian people and for the whole of Europe. And the EU can do a lot to assist Russian people in such a transformation of their country. The EU needs to understand and accept its exceptional role and responsibility in such a transformation. And first of all the EU needs to overcome it’s ‘Westlessness’ as was diagnosed by the Munich Security Conference and Wolfgang Ischinger. Our report provides recommendations on how to overcome this ‘Westlessness’ in political relations with Russia. The report was supported by a large majority and consensus among major political groups in the Committee on Foreign Affairs (AFET). Such unity is also a strong signal to the Kremlin. I hope that we will be able to keep the same unity here in the plenary. I would like to thank all the shadow reporters with whom it was a real pleasure to elaborate this important report.