Debate contributions by Michael GAHLER

Mr President, ladies and gentlemen. The unprecedented challenges in the global environment and the unstable situation in terms of peace and geopolitics require very good coordination between the Commission and the External Action Service. We are therefore concerned about the lack of operational budgets of the External Action Service and also about the proposal to radically restructure the EU’s presence in third countries by drastically reducing the staffing of EU delegations in the light of the budgetary constraints mentioned above. We note that if adopted, the plan will have a negative impact on the effectiveness of the Neighbourhood, Development and International Cooperation Instrument. The European Union is strongly interconnected internationally. We are a sought-after partner for many other countries. Today we need more than less international representation of our interests and exchange with our partners. Only the dismantling of USAID with the countries that are abandoned there by the USA has led to the fact that the request to us has become significantly larger. Therefore, the EEAS needs to be better and adequately equipped. Moreover, there was an agreement between the EEAS and the Commission that the Commission would pay something for the fact that there were also Commission officials in the field offices. I was told that this amount, although the costs have risen so much, has been fixed for many years. I therefore call on the Commission to step up its efforts so that the EEAS can also act better on the ground.

Madam President, colleagues, on behalf of the EPP, we are in principle in favour of the debate. However, we have had a look at the packed agenda that we have this week and we suggest, also in order to have some more detailed information about this very recent decision, to have it in two weeks time, to have it in Brussels in the next plenary in two weeks. That is our suggestion.

Madam President, Commissioners-in-Office, ladies and gentlemen! It is good that we have a connected debate on foreign, security and defence policy, because we are in a world situation that we have not experienced since the end of the Second World War – especially as Europeans. And that is why it is so important that we not only stand together here in the European Parliament, with a large majority of the major mainstream groups, support the policy that our Commission, which the Council is pursuing vis-à-vis Ukraine, is pursuing, but also on the other issues. That is why it is important that we continue to support the long-term measures here – one is in the direction of security and defence, which we are debating there, and the other is in fact with regard to Ukraine. And that's why we should also address what works on bonfires here or try to instrumentalize and update in the way you block here. And we must also mention the name: There is, unfortunately, Hungary, which is both the Peace Facility blocked in the payout, but also the beginning of the first clusters Negotiations with Ukraine. And here I say very clearly: The Hungarian prime minister does not serve the Hungarian minority in Ukraine if the result were that these people would come back under Russian control. It's a shame how this government behaves. And I am also convinced that the majority of Hungarians do not support this irresponsible course. We will find ways to ensure that this policy does not create a permanent blockade.

Mr President, colleagues, Commissioner, when it is for the Foreign Affairs Committee, of course, as the lead committee on external issues, when it is about war and peace in Europe, and it's about defending our European way of life, this has to be reflected in the budget of the European Union as well. And we address, of course, the Russian war of aggression in Ukraine. We address the situation in the Middle East. And as the Commissioner rightly said, we already reformed the Multiannual Financial Framework, we are grateful for that, for the EUR 50 billion Ukraine facility primarily last year – well, we ought to reform it already now and not wait till we are in the next financial framework. But, the measure is taken by the Commission, when it comes to ReArm Europe, and you are aware of the position of the Parliament, that we are not happy about the legal basis that has been chosen, because that excludes us, and insofar, we support the need to address the challenges that are on the agenda, but the legal base is not to our advantage.

Mr President, colleagues, Commissioner, in Milorad Dodik's wet dreams, he sees Bosnia and Herzegovina disintegrate and he leads the Republika Srpska into a Greater Serbia. That is why he acts the way he acts. The law on the protection of the constitutional order would, if adopted and implemented, actually result in the opposite of what it claims in its title. Today they initiated the adoption of a new constitution. A special session will be held tomorrow to adopt the draft constitution and the law. The RS is clearly not abiding by the BiH Constitutional Court interim measures to annul earlier decisions of the RS Assembly of 27 February. But fortunately, Dodik is quite alone. Not even the relevant opposition parties in the RS support him. His best supporter, whom he visited at least three times last year, is Vladimir Putin, who is always willing to promote any activities that can cause us trouble. It is good to see that we are upgrading our EUFOR military presence in the country as a preventive measure. A contingent from the Czech Republic, Romania and Italians are arriving. From the European Commission and other executive bodies, I expect that they will be very explicit. You did it with regard to our demands towards all stakeholders, including Dodik. You have to accept that the framework for policymaking is the Dayton Agreement, the constitution of Bosnia and Herzegovina, and that includes the respect of the verdicts of the Constitutional Court. What was started today is clearly anti-constitutional. If the constitutional authorities of BiH can eventually not prevent this process being finalised, it would be up to Christian Schmidt to act. I hope it is not necessary, but we have also possibilities from Brussels to have appropriate pressure to apply. Can we afford to send funds to an anti-constitutional structure? Can you prevent that? I think only together can we make Bosnia and Herzegovina advance towards the EU. And that is what the people ...

Mr President, thank you very much, colleagues, Commissioner, in our resolution today, we demanded the substance of the frozen assets and not only the windfall profits. States have an obligation under international law to make reparation for internationally wrongful acts. The Permanent Court of International Justice held that it is a principle of international law, and even a general conception of law, that any breach of an engagement involves an obligation to make reparation. The articles on state responsibility for international wrongful acts of the United Nations International Law Commission provide that the responsible state is under an obligation to make full reparation for the injury caused by the internationally wrongful act. Such reparation must, as far as possible, wipe out all the consequences of the illegal act and re-establish the situation, which would in all probability have existed if that act had not been committed, and includes reparation for both material and moral damage. The obligation to provide reparation can be invoked by any state under international law. The General Assembly of the United Nations has already recognised that Russia must bear the legal consequences of all of its internationally wrongful acts, including making reparation for the injury, including any damage caused by such acts. I am aware we are not at war with Russia, so we cannot directly do it. But the point is that Russia has caused not only to Ukraine, but also to us so much damage in costs of that aggressive act that we, I would say, are in a position to claim it also from Russia. So, let's get hold of the substance.

Mr President, colleagues, we heard the good news yesterday of a Ukrainian and American agreement to offer a ceasefire, which may help end fighting and prepare for negotiations of a peace agreement. This should be reflected in our resolution, and that is why I propose to add, after this paragraph 13, the following text: 'Welcomes the joint statement by Ukraine and the Unites States following their meeting in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia on 11 March 2025, including the resumption of US military assistance and intelligence sharing as well as a proposal for a 30 day ceasefire agreement; reminds that a ceasefire can be an effective tool of suspension of hostilities, only if the aggressor fully adheres to it; expects therefore Russia to agree to it and follow it by ceasing all attacks on Ukraine, its military positions, civilian population, infrastructure and territory;'

Mr President, colleagues, dear Commissioner, when the Lisbon Treaty entered into force, we began checking the potential of the treaty in the area of defence, starting with the costs of non-Europe in this policy area. Simply adding all national defence budgets showed how inefficient the expenditure was – almost no common planning, no common procurement. And since 2011, instead of making use of the single market on defence products, the abuse of Article 346, which made Member States step out of European spending. Times have changed: there is war in Europe, Putin threatens all of us, and this US administration leaves doubt whether they will live up to their NATO commitments. That is why I thank the Commissioner for presenting this white paper on the future of European defence, together with the earlier announcement on the programme to ReArm Europe. Let us make the best out of it – let us defend our European way of life together and let us start on the front line, supporting Ukraine with whatever it takes as they defend their and our freedom. Slava Ukraini!

We will support anything that leads to a just peace – and the sooner, the better. And that also means that when we have ended a state of war, we will do our part not to invade Ukraine again, and that means that this deterrence must be credible. Ukraine needs security guarantees that deserve the name, and the British Prime Minister has said:boots on the ground and planes in the air’. I believe that this would be a common response to the Russian threat after the end of the state of war.

Madam President, ladies and gentlemen, The aggressor in the Kremlin does not know what is happening to him: The previous leading power of the West changed sides in the matter of Ukraine. It must be enough for us as a wake-up call that there are doubts as to whether the US will comply with its assistance obligations to its allies in the event of an emergency. We have to get from worst case to go out and activate as soon as possible all the instruments to defend us and to make us defence-ready at national and European level – in principle, as proposed by the Commission. As an EP, we have problems with the legal basis, and I would also have liked to see the national escape clause apply only to the extent that the additional expenditure is invested in joint defence projects in order to achieve economies of scale in order to increase interoperability. We also need European projects to protect us together. One European Sky Shield would be such an example; Other projects have been mentioned. In the meantime, we see the Russian armaments machine running at full speed and already producing more than it uses in Ukraine. What is it for? Let's finally get clear: The Russian threat is against all of us, and Ukraine is our first line of defense that we need to strengthen as we ramp up our own potential. Ukrainians are the first to want peace. They didn't want the war either. But they also know what a Russian peace looks like, a Stalinist peace in the Russian Gulag. This also threatens us if Ukraine falls and we are not able to defend ourselves. Let's not let it get this far! Slava Ukrajini!

Mr President, Commissioner, Presidency, colleagues, dear Ukrainian friends, it is with sorrow, but also outrage and undiminished resolve, that we commemorate the third anniversary of Russia's full-scale, illegal and unprovoked war of aggression against the Ukrainian nation. Our thoughts are with those who gave the ultimate sacrifice for the freedom of their country, and their families and loved ones. The character of Putin's Russia is that of a terrorist state that respects no international law, disregards basic human rights and basic principles that the civilised world has agreed upon, even in times of war. Both Ukrainian and Russian lives are irrelevant in the imperialist agenda of the dictator and the Kremlin. It is this Parliament that has and will always defend Ukraine's legitimate resistance, as Ukrainians defend our values and are attacked exactly for this reason. Ukrainians are the first to seek an end to this dreadful war. We insist that on upcoming occasions, like the Munich Security Conference, nothing is discussed about Ukraine without Ukraine, and nothing is decided without involving us Europeans. We will be prepared to assume greater responsibility when it comes to guaranteeing Ukraine proper security, and prepare their membership in the EU and NATO. Those arguing for a grey zone of any form only invite the Russian aggressor to progress whenever convenient. We will achieve our goals in unity and with a united Ukraine. I therefore call on the Ukrainian presidential administration and those in their line of command to refrain from partisan games. Stop curtailing the rights of the opposition in Parliament. Stop depriving the former president of his rights as a member of Parliament. Your enemy – our enemy – sits in the Kremlin, not in the Verkhovna Rada. Slava Ukraini!

Mr President, colleagues, Commissioner, Presidency, Lukashenka again holds fake elections. And while there is large public focus on Russia's war of aggression against Ukraine, or the manipulated elections in Georgia, or Russia's unsuccessful attempts to turn the majorities around in Moldova, we need to keep the Belarus dictatorship on the agenda and support the legitimate representatives like Sviatlana Tsikhanouskaya. In our resolution, we have enumerated some of the more than a thousand inmates, and I have been the political godfather for many years of Pavel Seviarynets, who is innocent and who is in prison– one of those who are active in democratic parties. I call on the Council and the Commission, please check on the on the agenda of sanctions where Belarus serves as an escape route for sanctions against Russia. There are issues where we have not imposed sanctions on Belarus, so goods are sent to Belarus and further transported to Russia. I think civilian trucks is one of these examples, so please have a look where we can close this gap where it exists.

Mr President, colleagues, Council Presidency, Commissioner, among the multifold wake-up calls that we are getting to assess the Russian threat to our countries – the Presidency alluded to some others – the demolition of critical infrastructure such as sea cables is just one further example. I think Putin would be disappointed if we discussed whether that was accidental or who was responsible. He wants us to know that he is able to exploit and test our vulnerabilities. In these circumstances, it is good to see that we are increasingly prepared, and I am happy to learn that 52 additional vessels were added to a list of those who have no access to our ports, and I am grateful to the Commissioner that you listed all the measures that we are working on or already implementing in this regard. I think that is yet another example where we see only together we are strong and only together can we represent and defend our interests.

Mr President, once upon a time there was an Autonomous Republic of Crimea in Ukraine. In 1991, during the independence referendum, also a majority of inhabitants of Crimea voted in favour of Ukrainian independence. Crimean Tatars could feel at home as much as Ukrainian and Russian speakers. Russian was an official language in Crimea. The Crimean Tatars had their majlis, their legal representation. This changed all dramatically with the illegal occupation and subsequent annexation by Russia of the Crimean Peninsula. Ever since, the rule of law, basic human rights, international conventions, and also the legitimate representation of the Crimean Tatars has been disregarded. For the Tatars, the situation seems more and more, and resembles more and more, the situation that they had after, first, German occupation of Crimea and, then, retaking by Stalin and the deportation that happened thereafter from Crimea. This situation is unbearable, but what is more important is to shed a light also on the fate of individuals who are persecuted because they demand their legitimate rights. We have picked three persons in the title of this urgency, namely Iryna Danylovych, Tofik Abdulhaziiev and Amet Suleymanov, and we have added another 13 persons who, because of their political activities, because they belong to this minority, they are persecuted. It is important that their names are on record, so that the aggressor and the oppressor knows that we know about them, and we demand the immediate and unconditional release, and condemn the Russian action that is ongoing within the big war against Ukraine, starting in 2014, in Crimea.

Madam President, colleagues, normally, one cannot change history because what happened just happened. And still it is typical for all kinds of dictatorships and autocratic rule – not only Russia – to instrumentalise a selective or distorted presentation of the past to justify today's aggressions. I stand here as a German and I feel free to accuse today's Russia of what it is: an utterly Stalinist and, yes, fascist dictatorship. But that is possible only because we have told the truth about the darkest part of our national history, partly being committed on today's territory of Ukraine. Nothing to relativise, never again to be repeated by Germany, and never again to be accepted by anyone, against anyone. Putin's July 2021 essay about the historic unity of Russians and Ukrainians deprives Ukrainians of their identity, pretending it was about one people, one empire, one language, one church. It was the attempt to thereby justify the 'Heim ins Reich', the 'back to the Empire' policy. As democracies, we must have the strength to counter that. As democrats, we must call a spade a spade. We must expose those who are in the service of the dictator because they suffer from a 'Führer‑withdrawal syndrome', from a 'Führer‑Entzugserscheinung', and have learned nothing from history.

Mr President, dear Vice-President and High Representative! First of all from my side, also on behalf of the EPP, all the best for the new function! They will also have our support on the big issues, where we have a broad consensus here. I think we have a situation here where we can really be relieved, together with the Syrians, that the end of one of the most brutal regimes the world has seen has been achieved. It is also a strategic defeat for Russia and Iran: This specific terrorist axis in Syria, where we have seen that the Russian air force has bombed the cities there in recent years, as a prelude and test for what followed later in Ukraine. I agree with what you have presented as tasks now. It is also good that today, for example, the President of the Commission is in Ankara to meet with one of the Major players agree in the region – with Turkey – on how to move forward in cooperation now. I expect Turkey not to respond to this new development with bombs. I believe that the Syrian Kurds do not intend to work as a retreat for the PKK, but they have organised themselves very well there, and we should acknowledge this and also enable the Syrian Kurds to make their contribution to stabilisation there. Now the time is over, there is much more to say.

I'd like to tell you this: Russia has waged a war of aggression against Ukraine in violation of international law and this objective – I don’t know if it was the Ukrainians, you obviously know better, I don’t know, but even if it was them – has, in my view, been a legitimate objective in order to draw on Russia’s ability to create money from these revenues. I think that's very clear. The aggressor – do not reverse the offender/victim here. But that's part of the AfD policy, and you probably get paid for it.

Madam President, colleagues, honourable President Niinistö, thank you very much for this excellent report. The need to enhance Europe's civilian and military defence, preparedness and readiness is obvious. And he rightly described the facts: Putin sees the West as weak. And his logical conclusion is we must change this perception. This requires several things. First, as he formulated, the trust of citizens that the political institutions, meaning our democracies, are worth to be protected. Second, it requires political leadership in our respective countries to tell the citizens the truth and the full scale of the threats that we are exposed to, and there are many that have been enumerated in the report and it is not only about a full-scale war. Third, it requires action – coordinated action – and, again, I quote 'Strengthening Europe's defence is an urgent and monumental task'. We try to address it with supportive legislation here in the Parliament, but we also need to learn from countries like Finland, to compare notes and assess what is best practice, how we can raise resilience and get civilian and military preparedness and readiness from theory into practice. Putin won't wait if we allow him to win in Ukraine. Supporting Ukraine now is the best way to give us the time to prepare our civilian and military structures, not to be considered too weak by the aggressor, and thereby deter him from any further reaching sinister thoughts.

Madam President, Dear colleagues! America has chosen. We take note of the outcome. The country remains an indispensable partner for us Europeans, especially in the areas of security and defence and in countering the spread of authoritarian rule. And we must, of course, continue to intensify economic relations with this most important trading partner. In dialogue with colleagues in both houses of Congress and in the administration, it remains our task to make it clear that maintaining and expanding these relations is also in the American interest. We should also maintain contacts with the federal states, especially where European investments have been made or where exports to Europe benefit locally. In this way, we Europeans can make it clear that we are attractive partners and not only in need of help, as was the case with the withdrawal from Afghanistan. Let's offer something: Substantially increased own defense budgets. Or we offer to abolish import duties on each other, for example on cars, and not to raise them. And if we buy more liquefied natural gas from the US instead of relabelled liquefied natural gas from Russia in the future, that is in the American, European and Ukrainian interests.

Mr President, colleagues, I'm not anticipating at this stage a verdict on the qualities of the upcoming elections. For that, we have an OSCE long-term mission who are doing a professional job. I simply expect the competent authorities to apply the existing laws for elections in a proper, fair and professional way. The Georgians will, indeed, decide on their own which path they would like to proceed, and it is my impression thus far that they have embraced this path to the European Union, because that is the perspective that has something for every citizen, in every country. There is not a single country that is worse off today than it was before they entered the European Union. And they also do not need the American engagement or interference in order to be motivated to go the European path. We, as Europeans, accept the path and the decision that a free people takes for their future. That is the difference to Russia, which does not accept that. And in so far, I am confident that through this process that is now ongoing, the people will make a very clear decision and tell the world and all who would like to listen what Georgia's path is. All the best for this election, Sakartvelo.

Mr President, ladies and gentlemen! First of all, I would like to apologise for this embarrassing contribution by the previous speaker, who has learned nothing from history – obviously. We are confident that the Moldovan authorities will properly conduct the presidential elections and the referendum on EU integration. As was to be expected, we have been witnessing multifold ways and means initiated by Russia to influence and manipulate the electorate. We know how Russia works: As they have nothing positive, attractive or even fascinating to offer from their side, they work with fake news, intimidation and cash payments to bribe voters to vote for pro-Russian presidential candidates. A special focus is given from their side on the EU integration referendum. They have no arguments against in substance because they know that the people in all countries that have ever acceded to the European Union are better off thereafter than before. Their outrageous insinuation is that a 'yes' to EU integration means to be dragged into the war against Ukraine – by the way, a very similar insinuation to what happens in Georgia from those who want to prevent the continuation of the European path over there. Let us therefore counter the lies and allegations with the truth, with facts and figures, and also positive emotion. Welcome citizens of Moldova to the European Union.

(Start of speech off mic) ... to be one of the key phrases expressed by Ukrainians during last Friday's and Saturday's Yalta European Strategy conference, the 20th of its kind, held for obvious reasons in Kyiv and not in Yalta. While the European Parliament has always expressed with impressive majorities its unwavering support for the country and the people of Ukraine in their existential resistance against the imperialist and Stalinist Russian attack, many of our governments still announce more than they deliver. As we are in a systemic confrontation with the aggressor, who not only wants to win by deleting Ukraine from the map of Europe, but also wants to destroy our European project, which is, as a concept, a threat to his dictatorship, we need to show our resolve to do whatever it takes for Ukraine to win. When Ukraine wins, we win. When Ukraine loses, we lose. On some of our governments, including my own, I call: stop being afraid of Putin and his threats. When we appease, he escalates. When we stand strong politically and enable Ukraine militarily to stand and push back, we get the country in a position to negotiate a solution that is in line with international law. So lift all restrictions on the use of weapons on Russian soil. I am grateful to the Dutch Government, who have done so with respect to the F-16. We will not be able to deliver so many Patriots and IRIS-T air defence systems to have comprehensive coverage of Ukraine and Russia's attempts to destroy the infrastructure. It is obvious it is far more militarily economic to hit the launch sites instead of trying to get the air defence done. So that is my call on the governments: stand strong, lift the restrictions. Slava Ukraini!

Madam President, ladies and gentlemen! As the Ukraine rapporteur in the last parliamentary term and also as the co-rapporteur for the 50 billion Ukraine Facility, it is very important for me to say one thing at the outset: We must carry this broad consensus of political parties into this new legislature, this broad consensus of support for Ukraine. Because it is in our own interest that this country wins in the end, that this country can drive the aggressors out of the country in the end. We can decide here what we are doing in the civilian sector – that was 50 billion euros. We have drafted many political resolutions with over 90 percent support. We can imagine many beautiful things for Ukraine on the way to the European Union, but it is very important: If the country is not put in a position to push back Russia's military forces, then everything is nothing. That is why the call remains: Let us do everything we can to help this country militarily, so that this aggression, which is also directed against us, cannot succeed.