Speeches

Madam President, a few words about the Council’s conclusions on Russia. I can really congratulate Council with ‘No’ to proposals on having immediate EU-Putin Summit, but the Council perhaps spent too much time on discussions ‘to meet or not to meet’ Putin, and here were too little discussions on the long-term strategy how ‘to push back’ Putin on democracy, on Navalny, on Ukraine and on Belarus. And of course we need to be effective in pushing back on human rights and democracy inside of the EU if we want to push back the Kremlin on democracy. While following the Council’s discussions on Russia, I am able to make only the following conclusions: the European Union and its institutions until now has a deficit of belief that Russia at some time can transform itself and return back to a democratic type of development. Second, EU institutions have a deficit of willingness to assist Russia in such a transformation. Third, EU institutions have a deficit of understanding how to assist Russia in such a transformation. And fourth, EU institutions have a deficit of courage to recognise, that so-called ‘dialogue’ with the Kremlin will not change Russia, because President Putin is not able to change his own behaviour. That is what the European Parliament was asking the Council – to review and update EU strategy towards Russia, and the Council unfortunately, for time being, failed to deliver. I hope that the European Parliament will be able to recommend those lines in its forthcoming report on EU policy towards Russia. Only with such kind of strategy on the table is there a value to have a meeting with President Putin.

Madam President, really it is an opportunity to praise the EU Institutions, the Commission and Council and the EEAS on a successful initiative to introduce the Magnitsky Act in the European Union. I will try to make some very practical remarks about our steps forward. First of all, the preventive effect of Magnitsky sanctions should be strengthened: the same type of crimes should lead to the automatic initiation of the same type of sanctions against all the similar perpetrators. Second, the preparation of sanction lists should be made in a more centralised way by the EU Institutions and should depend less on national states. Third, decisions on sanctions should not demand unanimity but should be adopted by qualified majority. Corruption should be also included as a reason for EU sanctions, as is done by Great Britain, US and Canada. Global democracies should synchronise their efforts to defend human rights and rights for democracy, especially in countries where people are still struggling with brutal autocracies – and especially in countries which have European roots but suffered a long denial of human rights during the Soviet period and are now suffering new authoritarian regimes.