Verbatim report of proceedings of 1 April 2025
Date: 2025-04-01
Institutions: European Parliament
Subjects: European Parliament, parliamentary debate








C_202506424EN.000101.fmx.xml












Official Journal of the European Union


EN
C series














4.12.2025







            1 April 2025
            VERBATIM REPORT OF PROCEEDINGS OF 1 APRIL 2025
            
         
(C/2025/6424)

Contents







1.

Opening of the sitting
4










2.

Conclusions of the European Council meeting of 20 March 2025 (debate)
4










3.

Russia's war crimes in Ukraine: standing with Ukraine and upholding justice (debate)
33










4.

Amendment of the agenda
37










5.

Resumption of the sitting
38










6.

Voting time
38










6.1.

Amending Directives (EU) 2022/2464 and (EU) 2024/1760 as regards the dates from which Member States are to apply certain corporate sustainability reporting and due diligence requirements (vote)
38










6.2.

Request for waiver of the immunity of Jana Nagyová (A10-0029/2025 - Krzysztof Śmiszek) (vote)
39










6.3.

Request for waiver of the immunity of Petr Bystron (A10-0030/2025 - Dominik Tarczyński) (vote)
39










6.4.

Request for waiver of the immunity of Maciej Wąsik (A10-0031/2025 - Mario Furore) (vote)
40










6.5.

Request for waiver of the immunity of Mariusz Kamiński (A10-0032/2025 - Mario Furore) vote
40










6.6.

Partial renewal of a member of the Court of Auditors – Lucian Romașcanu (A10-0039/2025 - Tomáš Zdechovský) (vote)
40










6.7.

Common data platform on chemicals, establishing a monitoring and outlook framework for chemicals (A10-0018/2025 - Dimitris Tsiodras) (vote)
40










6.8.

Re-attribution of scientific and technical tasks to the European Chemicals Agency (A10-0019/2025 - Dimitris Tsiodras) (vote)
40










6.9.

Re-attribution of scientific and technical tasks and improving cooperation among Union agencies in the area of chemicals (A10-0020/2025 - Dimitris Tsiodras) (vote)
40










6.10.

Macro-financial assistance to Jordan (A10-0038/2025 - Céline Imart) (vote)
41










6.11.

Macro-financial assistance to Egypt (A10-0037/2025 - Céline Imart) (vote)
41










6.12.

Customs duties on imports of certain products originating in the USA (A10-0034/2025 - Bernd Lange) (vote)
42










7.

Resumption of the sitting
43










8.

Approval of the minutes of the previous sitting
43










9.

CFSP and CSDP (Article 36 TUE) (joint debate)
43










10.

Human rights and democracy in the world and the European Union's policy on the matter – annual report 2024 (debate)
64










11.

Presentation of the New European Internal Security Strategy (debate)
77










12.

EU Preparedness Union Strategy (debate)
90










13.

Improving the implementation of cohesion policy through the mid-term review to achieve a robust cohesion policy post 2027 (debate)
107










14.

Safeguarding the access to democratic media, such as Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty (debate)
120










15.

Crackdown on democracy in Türkiye and the arrest of Ekrem İmamoğlu (debate)
134










16.

Dramatic situation in Gaza and the need for an immediate return to the full implementation of the ceasefire and hostage release agreement (debate)
142










17.

Targeted attacks against Christians in the Democratic Republic of the Congo – defending religious freedom and security (debate)
153










18.

Explanations of votes
160










19.

Agenda of the next sitting
160










20.

Approval of the minutes of the sitting
160










21.

Closure of the sitting
161




Verbatim report of proceedings of 1 April 2025
                  


IN THE CHAIR: ROBERTA METSOLA


President

1.   Opening of the sitting

(The sitting opened at 09:01)

2.   Conclusions of the European Council meeting of 20 March 2025 (debate)

President. – Good morning to you all. The first item on the agenda today is the debate on the European Council and Commission statements on the Conclusions of the European Council of 20 March 2025. I will start by immediately giving the floor to the President of the European Council, Antonio Costa.

António Costa,
President-in-Office of the Council. – Madam President, Madam President of the European Commission, Commissioners, honourable Members, two weeks ago we concluded a very productive European Council. We addressed many crucial issues, including our support to Ukraine, defence, and migration. At a time when people's concerns focus on their economic situation, on wages, on quality jobs, on the twin transition, leaders do not lose sight of the urgency to deliver answers to these concerns.
To the contrary, our meeting had a strong focus on competitiveness, on shared prosperity, on how to build a more resilient and sustainable future for European citizens. Moved by a sense of urgency in the geoeconomic context, and building upon important initiatives of the European Commission, in line with the Competitiveness Compass, the European Council decided to take action to close our innovation gap, to close our productivity gap, to cut red tape.
To renew the European Union's promise of shared prosperity, leaders focused on three key areas: first, on cutting unnecessary red tape; second, on making energy more affordable for citizens and companies; and third, on turning savings into productive investments.
Through the reduction of bureaucracy by 25 % for all companies and 35 % for SMEs, we will make it easier for all companies in our economic space, without losing sight of our goals, such as the green transition.
Through the reduction of energy prices, we respond to the needs of our citizens and help companies be more competitive.
Through the integration of our financial markets, businesses and citizens will get the funding for more innovative companies.
Business as usual is not an option, because, as of today, around EUR 300 billion of European Union families' savings flow out of European Union markets each year. These are EUR 300 billion that don't fund businesses in the European Union, and this needs to change. This is why we agreed clear targets, clear taskings, clear timelines to guide our work towards a genuine savings and investments union.
Becoming more competitive on all fronts is not just the right path; it is the only path for a stronger Union. Because being competitive means creating more economic resilience, more quality jobs and better salaries for our citizens. But competitiveness also needs a strong investment in education, research, innovation and skills.
That is why it was so important to host, the day before the European Council, the Tripartite Social Summit, together with the social partners. Working closely with the unions and business federations is the right path to ensure that strong competitiveness results in shared prosperity for all, to ensure that our values and our social model are protected – values and social cohesion which are at the core of our European project, a project of peace and prosperity that needs economic strength and defence credibility to go hand in hand.
On the one hand, defence and security investments drive technological advancements that benefit industries beyond the military sector, linking regions and supply chains from various Member States, interconnecting sectors, infrastructures, centres of knowledge and local communities for the benefit of a more cohesive and competitive Union that leaves no one behind, no region forgotten.
On the other hand, a more prosperous economy will make sure that we have the resources to invest in our own defence. The decisions we took in the March European Councils were a turning point in moving towards a strong and more sovereign 'Europe of defence'.
It was the result of a very good cooperation with the European Commission and their President, which presented its very useful white paper just before the last European Council. The activation of the national escape clause will free up fiscal space in the national budgets of the Member States. The SAFE instrument of up to EUR 150 billion in loans will support Member States in boosting the defence capabilities that are urgently needed.
We now need to continue to move with a sense of urgency to complete this work and, if necessary, take further decisions, to ensure a just and lasting peace in Ukraine, a just and lasting peace in Europe as a whole.
Finally, leaders agreed to boost our network of partners. It is critical, precisely in this time, that the European Union must deepen its ties with like-minded nations and expand strategic partnerships towards global stability.
When trust in multilateral institutions is under strain, and unpredictability is the norm, the European Union is a reliable, predictable and trusted partner and is behind the United Nations and the United Nations Charter, no matter what. That is why it was so relevant to welcome, in the European Council, the United Nations Secretary-General, António Guterres, to discuss Europe's global engagements. Building our partnerships, strengthening our trade relations, has been a core priority since the start of our mandate.
It is impossible to tackle climate change on our own. It is impossible to reduce global inequalities unilaterally. It is impossible to protect oceans and biodiversity by ourselves. A multipolar world needs a strong multilateral system and the international rules-based order, driven by a bold sense of purpose – of peace, prosperity and partnerships.
Let me conclude. First of all, for the European Council, it's very clear: the sense of urgency on defence and on competitiveness – urgency on cutting red tape, urgency on promoting a savings and investments union, and urgency to approve the global framework to invest more, better, faster, together, in our own defence.

Ursula von der Leyen,
President of the Commission. – Madam President, dear Roberta; Mr President of the Council, dear António; honourable Members, indeed, one of the main topics of the last European Council was competitiveness, and today I would like to focus on the threats to global prosperity and stability – thus our competitiveness – and the rise of protectionism.
And as our domestic agenda cannot be seen separately from global developments around us, let me start with the US tariffs. When the dream of a united Europe began, it started with a very simple idea: let's create one single market. Let's break barriers, take tariffs down. That is what made us strong, because our companies grew and so did the ties that bind us together.
And then in the same spirit, we worked with partners across the world, including the United States. We built strong connections that we believed were unbreakable. And trade brought more than prosperity; it brought the idea of a shared way of life.
And with commerce, our partnership has also grown. Countless other friendships across the Atlantic. And because of this collective experience of the last, well, almost 75 years, so many Europeans feel utterly disheartened by the announcement from the United States.
Let me be clear: Europe did not start this confrontation. We think it is wrong. But my message to you today is that we have everything we need to protect our people and our prosperity. We have the largest single market in the world. We have the strength to negotiate. We have the power to push back. And the people of Europe should know that, together, we will always promote and defend our interests and our values and together, we will always stand up for our Europe.
So far, the US administration has announced a 25 % increase in tariffs on imports of steel and aluminium, cars and car parts. The next sectors facing tariffs will be semiconductors, pharmaceuticals and timber. And tomorrow we expect another announcement with so-called 'reciprocal' tariffs that will immediately apply to almost all goods and many countries in the world.
Of course, there are severe issues in the world of trade – without any question – overcapacities, we know about the imbalances, we see unfair subsidies, denial of market access or IP theft. And I hear Americans when they say some others have taken advantage of the rules – I agree. We also suffer from it. So, let's work on it.
But tariffs across the board make things worse, not better. Tariffs are taxes that will be paid by the people. Tariffs are taxes for the Americans on their groceries and their medication. Tariffs will just fuel inflation – exactly the opposite of what we wanted to achieve. American factories will pay more for components that are produced in Europe. This will cost jobs. It will create a bureaucratic monster of new customs procedures. And today, nobody needs that, neither in the United States nor in Europe.
So, our strategy builds on three pillars. First, we are open to negotiations. We will approach these negotiations from a position of strength. Europe holds a lot of cards – from trade to technology to the size of our market. But this strength is also built on our readiness to take firm countermeasures if necessary. All instruments are on the table.
Second, we will keep diversifying our trade with other partners – you mentioned it, António. Our hallmark is not only that we are the biggest market in the world, but that we are reliable and predictable. We honour our commitments. And that is exactly what our partners are looking for today.
And my third point: we will double down on our single market. The single market is the cornerstone of European integration and values. It's our powerful catalyst for growth, for prosperity, for solidarity. But we have to tear down remaining barriers to have a single market to go big – because scale matters – and for the single market to go fast and to go far.
Now, to the first point: our immediate response to tariffs is unity and determination. I have already been in contact with our Heads of State and Government on the next steps. We have this parliamentary debate now here today and we will assess tomorrow the announcements very carefully to calibrate our response.
Our objective is a negotiated solution. But of course, if need be, we will protect our interests, our people and our companies. And I want to be very clear on the aim of our response: we think that this confrontation is in no one's interest. The flow of goods and services between us – the United States and Europe – is nearly balanced. Of course, we are willing to work on the trade balance of goods as well as on the trade balance of services. This is the largest and most prosperous trade relation worldwide. We would all be better off if we could find a constructive solution.
At the same time, it also has to be clear: Europe has not started this confrontation. We do not necessarily want to retaliate, but if it is necessary, we have a strong plan to retaliate and we will use it.
The second element of our strategy is diversification. Trade goes to where the business case is. We will open doors towards fast-growing markets across the world. Europe already has trade agreements in place with 76 countries and we are now growing this network. We just concluded trade deals with Mercosur, Mexico and Switzerland. We launched the first ever Clean Trade and Investment Partnership with South Africa. We aim to conclude a trade agreement with India by the end of this year. We are in intense negotiations with Indonesia and Thailand, and later this week, President Costa and I will head to Samarkand for the first ever summit between the European Union and Central Asia.
Europe has always been a trading continent, so let's connect with the beating hearts of the global economy. Our message is clear: Europe is reliable, Europe is predictable and Europe is open for business.
And the third point, honourable Members, is: unchain the single market. There are too many obstacles that tie down our businesses, and we have to do our homework. Mario Draghi is right when he says: 'High internal barriers are far more damaging for growth than any tariff.' The single market, as I said, was born to tear down barriers between the countries, to erase customs and duties and to make business inside the European Union as easy as possible.
So, we must go back to that idea and fulfil it. It must be easier for SMEs to sell the same product in all Member States, instead of re-labelling it 27 times to comply with national laws. It must be easier for professionals to work across borders instead of getting stuck with different national bureaucracies. It must be easier for tech companies to launch a new service all across Europe instead of dealing with 27 different procedures. And it must be easier for our Europeans to invest in Europe instead of sending their savings to the other side of the world. This is the promise of the single market. So, honourable Members, it must be fulfilled now.
I know, honourable Members, that the European Parliament has always worked hard to complete the single market. Now, we have the generational opportunity to get it done. We have a strong consensus on the Draghi and Letta report among all of us. We have put ambitious proposals on the table – you know it from the savings and investments union – to ensure that people get a better return on their money, but also that the companies find the finances they need in Europe, to our omnibus simplification packages or our union of skills. And more will come, including the 28th legal regime for innovative companies.
According to the IMF, Europe's internal market barriers are equivalent to a tariff of 45 % for manufacturing and 100 % for services. This simply cannot be. This must change now. This is why I have tasked EVP Séjourné to come up with concrete and bold proposals next month to remove most of these barriers and prevent new ones. These reforms are long overdue and now they have become more urgent than ever.
We all know in a stormy global economy, the single market is our safe harbour. It's now 30 years since Jacques Delors laid its first stone, so it's time to finish the job.
Thank you very much, and long live Europe.

Manfred Weber,
on behalf of the PPE Group. – Madam President of the European Parliament, Commission, President of the Council, congratulations, a few months ago, it would have been impossible to see Europe where we are today: a Commissioner for Defence, a White Paper on Defence, an 800 billion-package. And isn't it funny – even the British Government wants to be part of joint investments into the future of defence. So a lot is on the way.
But let's be honest, we managed only the first step: borrowing money on the shoulders of the young generation and spending it poorly with national measures. That's necessary, but it's not so difficult. The big things are in front of us. We need further steps. Common procurement to save billions of euros, not only voluntarily, because that never worked, but really obligatory. We need the East shield also as a common project – it's not only Poland, the Baltic countries who are responsible for this, it's all of us who have to finance this. We need European flagship projects like missile defence, sky surveillance. We need a European defence pillar, which is not revocable, as the founding fathers of the euro had in mind when they unified our economies.
And there is another challenge. You both, Commission President and Council President, participated in several special meetings in the last weeks – in Paris, in London. Not the European Council was in the lead, but a structure of the willingness of those who had the will to move forward. And why? Let's be honest, because leaders were afraid about unanimity on the Council table. The Orbán problem was solved by creating new formats where the Council President was only a guest and not leading the debate. That is a challenge in front of us.
And let me add, dear friends, there was this Signal chat scandal in Washington. A lot of people had fun criticising our American friends about the confidentiality of their communication. But I have to say on substance, Hegseth, the Defence Minister of the United States, wrote there that in the Red Sea, only 4 % of US trade is handled, while 40 % of EU trade is, and then the Americans have to protect the trade routes against the Houthi rebels. Let's be clear, the Americans are right with this complaint. They are right. And we are not capable of protecting, at this moment in time, our own interests – that is the real challenge in front of us, next to the big one on the Russian side.
So I would say there is still a lot to do, and we have to speed up because the next Trump challenge is already arriving on Wednesday: the big Liberation Day. Trump's tariffs are not about fair trade, they are about fear of trade. And fear is always a bad guide. We do not follow this logic. We, as the EPP, say 'yes' to the US relationship, as the most successful partnership in the world. We know about the numbers: five billion-worth of goods and services across the Atlantic every single day, 16 million jobs are defending on both sides of the Atlantic on this win-win partnership. The 2nd of April is not a liberation day, it's a resentment day. Trump threatens the world's best economic model that we have established.
But what to do now? Europe represents 22 % of the global GDP – we are the economic powerhouse – and the US 25 %. We are equal. A united Europe, as Ursula von der Leyen described it, can defend the interests, and we have to do so. Yes, we have a surplus on products, but the US has won on the digital services. So if Trump focuses on European goods, we have to focus on American services. The digital giants only pay little to our digital infrastructure, where they benefit so much from.
Then, dear colleagues, let's act, and not only wait to see what happens in America. Growth comes from the single market – Ursula von der Leyen mentioned the issues there – but it comes also from trade agreements, so we have to finalise them. Let me also underline that Mercosur is becoming now a symbol for our readiness to engage with the rest of the world. Mercosur is becoming an anti-Trump agreement and we have to finalise it now.
And, when we speak about our own actions, we have to work on cutting red tape. President Costa, it's great to hear that cutting red tape is an urgency, but I would invite you also to talk with the socialist group in this European Parliament, because they are not yet decided whether they follow the speed procedure on the omnibus at this moment in time. I hope that all of the socialists also recognise that finally cutting red tape is an important issue.
And, by the way, where are the friends of Trump at this moment in time? Viktor Orbán or Alice Weidel? Have you spoken with Trump at this moment in time, with Vance and Musk, on tariffs? I see the populists selling the interests of the European workers in the steel automotive industry or the farmers in Europe only to get a picture with Trump. That is what I see every day and none of them are really fighting for the European interests.
Dear friends, we will not fuel resentment. Ronald Reagan once said, 'The freer the flow of world trade, the stronger the tides for economic progress and peace among nations'. That's Republican at its best. We will not give up on these words. We want a good deal with the US, without losers, with only winners.

Iratxe García Pérez,
en nombre del Grupo S&D. – Señora presidenta, presidenta Von der Leyen, presidente Costa, ‘aquí se hace Europa o se muere’. Estas palabras no son de nuestros fundadores, sino de los miles de ciudadanos que el pasado 15 de marzo se manifestaron en las calles de Roma: jóvenes y mayores, trabajadores y estudiantes, que saben que la Unión Europea es su mejor esperanza de futuro.
               

                  Es nuestra obligación escuchar sus voces y actuar con la valentía que nos exigen, porque nuestra Unión está bajo asedio: desde el este, la ofensiva militar de Putin contra Ucrania; desde el oeste, la ofensiva comercial de Trump y sus aranceles; y, desde dentro, la ofensiva contra nuestros valores de los aliados de Putin y Trump, como la Hungría de Orbán. La sumisión a Trump de los falsos patriotas de la extrema derecha pone en peligro millones de empleos y el poder adquisitivo de nuestros ciudadanos. Si no lo remediamos, su traición a Europa traerá consecuencias para los agricultores, para las industrias, para los consumidores. Pero no lo vamos a permitir. Defenderemos a nuestros trabajadores y empresas del sector del automóvil, del agroalimentario, del acero y del aluminio con todo nuestro poder comercial. Y no debemos dudar en utilizar el instrumento anticoercitivo si es necesario.
               

                  La Europa unida y próspera, libre y en paz también se defiende en Ucrania. Un alto el fuego parcial no puede suponer la rehabilitación de Putin, un criminal de guerra. Nuestro apoyo militar y financiero debe continuar hasta que Rusia se retire de todo el territorio ucraniano. Sigo pidiendo una propuesta legislativa por parte de la Comisión Europea para poder confiscar los 200 000 millones de activos rusos congelados.
               

                  Y, si defendemos el Derecho internacional en Ucrania, debemos hacerlo también en Gaza. No puede haber dobles raseros. Después de más de 50 000 muertos, 110 000 heridos, casi 15 000 desaparecidos y un millón y medio de refugiados, ¿qué más tiene que pasar para que Europa proponga la suspensión del Acuerdo de Asociación con Israel?
               

                  Señorías, la Unión Europea debe tomar las riendas de su destino, también en materia de defensa. Los 150 000 millones en préstamos no son suficientes. Necesitamos un plan de defensa financiado con deuda común y bajo ningún concepto permitiendo que la inversión en defensa se haga a costa del Estado del bienestar. Porque el mejor antídoto contra el auge de la extrema derecha es ese.
               

                  La única manera de deshacernos de Trump y de Putin es con una economía más fuerte y competitiva. Pero no podemos impulsar la competitividad sacrificando la transición ecológica. Hay que cumplir el Pacto Verde y, señor Weber, el Grupo de Socialistas y Demócratas sabe perfectamente lo que tiene que hacer para trabajar con coherencia y con una unidad proeuropea. Por lo tanto, usted sabrá a quién escucha, también a su extrema derecha, para hacer sus alianzas y sus propuestas. Nosotros sabemos cuál es nuestra posición.
               

                  We must also stand up to the autocrats allied with Putin and Trump. Within the European Union, Orbán has crossed every line with his new law banning the Pride celebration in Hungary. To all democrats across Europe, I want to send a message: let us take to the streets of Budapest this year to celebrate Pride and defend European values. The LGBTQ community is not alone. We stand with you because there is no place for discrimination or hate in our Union, and as long as Orbán continues attacking fundamental rights, we will block EU funds to his government.
               

                  Members, there was another motto in Rome that we must remember today: our true enemies are ourselves, when we forget our fortune. Our fortune is democracy, peace and social justice. We will not allow them to be taken from us. We will defend them with all the determination that our citizens expect from us. That is where Europe is made, and together we will make Europe!
               

Kinga Gál,
a PfE képviselőcsoport nevében. – Tisztelt Elnök Asszony! Az Európai Unió egy béke projekt, amely azért jött létre, hogy békét és biztonságot garantáljon a polgárainak. A Bizottság legújabb javaslata, hogy az európai polgárok halmozzanak fel 72 órára elegendő vészhelyzeti tartalékot. Gyakorlatilag háborús pánikkeltés. Ez veszélyes, mert félelmet kelt, és alaptalanul.
               

                  Három év szörnyű pusztítás után Ukrajnában most leginkább arra lenne szükség, hogy Európa támogassa az új amerikai adminisztráció tűzszünet és béke irányába tett diplomáciai erőfeszítéseit. Az nem kérdés, hogy Európának többet kell tennie a saját biztonságának garantálásáért. Éppen ezért fontos a védelmi képességek megerősítése, de nem engedhetjük, hogy ez további brüsszeli centralizációval, a nemzeti szuverenitás aláásásával járjon, ahogy az nem történhet újabb közös hitelfelvételből sem.
               

                  De az európai védelem megerősítését külön kell választani az Ukrajnába irányuló fegyverszállítások kérdésétől. És őszintén kellene beszélni arról is, hogy Ukrajna uniós csatlakozása jelentős kihívást jelentene mind a mezőgazdaságunk, a kohéziós politika, a munkaerőpiac és a biztonság szempontjából is. Káros, ideológia-vezérelt döntések helyett valódi megoldásoknak van itt az ideje a versenyképesség, az autópiac vagy éppen a mezőgazdaság terén.
               

                  Az európai emberek biztonságát ma mindenekelőtt a tömeges illegális bevándorlás és az elhibázott brüsszeli migrációs politika veszélyezteti.
               

                  A migrációs paktum rossz. Tudjuk. Nem kozmetikázásra, hanem koncepcióváltásra van szükség. Gyökeres fordulat kell, a változatlanságot megtestesítő Európai Bizottsággal és az ehhez asszisztáló balliberális néppárti koalícióval szemben.
               

                  A fordulatot mi, patrióták képviseljük. Bárhogy akarják vezetőinket elhallgattatni, nem Orbán Viktortól kell a demokráciát Európában megvédeni. Tegnap volt sötét nap a francia demokrácia történetében. Egy demokráciában a döntést választásokon, nem pedig bíróságunkon kell meghozni. És kiállunk Marine Le Pen mellett.
               

Nicola Procaccini,
a nome del gruppo ECR. – Signora Presidente, signora Presidente von der Leyen, signor Presidente Costa, onorevoli colleghi, il Consiglio europeo ha finalmente messo nelle sue conclusioni la necessità di procedere a una rivoluzione delle azioni politiche europee.
               

                  I capi di governo dimostrano di aver compreso il motivo per cui sono stati eletti: semplificare la vita dei cittadini, non renderla impossibile, e proteggere la vita dei cittadini, non metterla in pericolo.
               

                  Su due temi questa inversione di marcia è particolarmente evidente. Sull'immigrazione, che deve poggiare sulla lotta ai trafficanti di esseri umani e sul trasferimento del governo europeo della migrazione fuori dai confini europei. Ciò significa non solo rimpatri più veloci, ma anche accordi di collaborazione olistici con i paesi di origine e transito dei migranti, al fine di fermare le partenze illegali e rimuovere le cause della migrazione.
               

                  L'altra grande questione è il rilancio della competitività industriale. Rappresento un gruppo politico da sempre schierato a difesa del libero mercato: perché sa premiare il talento degli imprenditori, la qualità dei loro prodotti e, di conseguenza, la libertà e il benessere delle persone.
               

                  Il presidente Reagan diceva, giustamente, di essere contro i dazi perché ‘la legislazione protezionistica distrugge la prosperità’. Ciò detto, coloro che oggi strepitano contro la minaccia di dazi da parte dell'amministrazione Trump sono gli stessi che hanno trascinato l'economia del nostro continente in una palude socialista, con la motivazione che bisognava difendere il pianeta Terra dagli esseri umani che vivono in Europa.
               

                  Nelle prossime settimane saremo chiamati a uno sforzo legislativo urgente e profondo per rimuovere i dazi che ci siamo imposti da soli con il Green Deal. Al netto di ogni ipocrisia, il cosiddetto pacchetto omnibus serve esattamente a questo.
               

                  E allora mi rivolgo al gruppo dei Popolari: non abbiate paura di fare le scelte giuste, anche se condivise con i gruppi che siedono alla destra del Parlamento. Io c'ero nella scorsa legislatura, quante volte il ricatto dei socialisti di votare con l'estrema sinistra e i Verdi ha guidato il percorso legislativo indicato da Frans Timmermans?
               

                  Ora c'è da salvare l'Europa. Come ci hanno scritto i produttori dell'associazione Business Europe: ‘time is of the essence’. Dobbiamo fare presto, dobbiamo fare bene.
               

Valérie Hayer,
au nom du groupe Renew. – Madame la Présidente, Madame la Présidente de la Commission, Monsieur le Président du Conseil, chers collègues, le monde vacille. À l'Ouest, de vieilles alliances sont remises en cause. À l'Est, l'agressivité supplante la diplomatie. Chez nous, en Europe, certains s'en prennent à ce qui fait le fondement de notre société: notre modèle démocratique.
               

                  Le moment que nous vivons est décisif pour notre avenir. Aux tentatives de déstabilisation l'Europe doit répondre par trois principes: unité, crédibilité, audace.
               

                  Unité, d'abord: c'est l'unité qui fait notre force à 27. L'unité, c'est se tenir aux côtés de toutes celles et de tous ceux qui se battent pour être libres. C'est donc se tenir aux côtés de l'Ukraine. C'est aussi prendre des sanctions quand des acteurs hostiles manipulent l'internet et dressent nos compatriotes les uns contre les autres. C'est l'unité des États, des opinions publiques, de notre tissu économique et de nos armées. C'est comme cela que nous pèserons dans ce monde devenu instable.
               

                  Crédibilité, ensuite: nous sommes une puissance mondiale et nous devons assumer ce statut face à ceux qui cherchent à nous intimider. Je veux ici avoir un mot sur notre capacité à défendre nos intérêts, notamment face à la nouvelle administration américaine. La priorité, c'est l'unité et la solidarité, y compris avec les Groenlandais, qui sont soumis à des pressions inadmissibles. Je veux rappeler un principe intangible: celui des peuples à disposer d'eux-mêmes. Le Groenland n'est pas à vendre et c'est aux Groenlandais, et à eux seuls, de décider de leur avenir.
               

                  Au-delà des territoires de ses États membres, l'Europe se doit de réagir si elle est la cible d'attaques commerciales. Le travail que vous menez en ce moment, Madame la Présidente, pour identifier les secteurs à cibler et pour assurer la coordination des États est crucial. Nos contre-mesures doivent être crédibles et fortes pour dissuader de nouveaux droits de douane, qui seraient encore plus élevés.
               

                  Mais, lorsque sera venu le temps de la négociation, Madame la Présidente, nos règles, qui ont été établies et votées ici, dans ce Parlement, ne devront pas être la variable d'ajustement. Je pense en particulier à nos lois, celles qui ont pour but de mettre fin au far west numérique: le règlement sur les services numériques et le règlement sur les marchés numériques. Elles sont l'émanation de nos valeurs et elles ne peuvent en aucun cas être mises à mal.
               

                  Enfin, l'audace. Avec mon groupe, nous saluons les nouveaux efforts proposés pour nos capacités militaires: le livre blanc sur l'avenir de la défense européenne, la préférence européenne enfin ancrée solidement dans les conclusions du Conseil. Mais nous devons être plus ambitieux encore. L'audace est d'aller chercher des pistes de financement nouvelles, comme les euro-obligations ou les produits d'épargne des Européens. Ces pistes seront indispensables à un changement d'échelle, pour véritablement donner un coup de fouet à notre tissu industriel, en plus du travail de simplification déjà en cours.
               

                  Pour toutes ces initiatives, Madame la Présidente, Monsieur le Président, Renew Europe sera un soutien. Nous devons tenir le rythme aussi longtemps que la situation l'exigera, parce que, certes le cap est bon, mais, disons-le clairement, tout reste à faire.
               

Terry Reintke,
on behalf of the Verts/ALE Group. – Madam President, Commission President, Council President, dear colleagues, what a world we are living in. I was born two years before the fall of the Berlin Wall, and I must admit to you that when I grew up – and you can call me naive – I somehow thought that democracies in this world would become more numerous just with time, and that there would be a basic understanding between these democracies that we would cooperate with each other on fair terms, with the sincere agreement that we are stronger together, that we work together and that we base our conflicts on facts and try to find compromise between each other, not only to better the lives of the citizens living in our respective countries, but to better the lives of everyone living on this continent.
Now, after the brutal invasion of Russia in Ukraine, the US President, let's be honest, has not only turned his back against the bravely fighting Ukrainians, but against Europe as a whole. And I take note of the fact that the loud cheering of the far right that we heard when Trump was elected has significantly calmed down over the past weeks, because it has become far too obvious what Donald Trump in the White House means for European citizens. He's not only attacking our – and actually his own – economy by imposing unfair tariffs, but he's attacking our democracies by attacking our sovereignty and decisions that have sovereignly been taken also here in this House.
Now, the incoherence of the far-right colleagues, that is no surprise to me. What I found more surprising were the latest turns by the German EPP, where suddenly prominent voices from the CDU are discussing moving back to Russian gas or even resurrecting Nord Stream 2.
Colleagues, what a grave mistake that would be. In a world where we have Donald Trump on the one side and Vladimir Putin on the other side, we have only one way to survive as Europeans, and that is to stand strong together.
Now you can tell me, colleagues, but this is very hard in a situation when we have one Member State that is not following our commonly agreed rules, when we have Hungary constantly trying to undermine the strength of the European Union.
But the solution to this is obvious. Over the past years, we have gathered evidence and proof that Hungary is not a functioning democracy anymore, that rule of law has been undermined. And so, the Article 7 procedure is long, long overdue. What else needs to happen? Viktor Orbán is attacking the very foundation of his own democracy and of our Union.
Let's finalise the Article 7 procedure, take away voting and veto rights from Orbán to protect Hungarian citizens, to protect Hungarian democracy, but also to fight for a strong and sovereign European Union.

Manon Aubry,
au nom du groupe The Left. – Madame la Présidente, Madame von der Leyen, Monsieur Costa, je vais commencer avec une question assez simple: Madame von der Leyen, combien de temps encore allez-vous laisser Donald Trump dicter sa loi sur les relations commerciales entre les États-Unis et l'Union européenne? Qu'attendez-vous, Madame von der Leyen, pour hausser le ton et proposer une réponse ferme, qui protège les travailleurs et travailleuses des secteurs concernés?
               

                  Je vous ai entendue ce matin: vous en êtes encore à réfléchir, considérer, calibrer votre réponse, pendant que Donald Trump est, en réalité, en train de nous dépouiller. La fébrilité de l'Union européenne face aux pressions de Donald Trump en dit long sur son incapacité à envisager sa propre indépendance. Pourtant, nous avions là l'occasion de remettre à plat l'ensemble de la politique de l'Union européenne, y compris de sa politique commerciale. Avec les États-Unis, bien sûr, mais aussi avec le reste du monde. Car, c'est une évidence, notre fragilité économique actuelle est la conséquence de plusieurs décennies de vos politiques libérales, celles-là même qui ont promu une mondialisation et une spécialisation économiques poussées à l'extrême.
               

                  Le doux commerce était censé se substituer à la guerre. Résultat: nous aurons et la guerre par les armes sur le continent européen et la guerre commerciale. Cette supposée liberté du libre-échange, c'est celle qui nous rend désormais captifs du chantage commercial de Donald Trump. Cette supposée liberté du libre-échange, c'est celle qui nous rend aujourd'hui incapables de subvenir à nos propres besoins: médicaments, panneaux solaires, vêtements, nourriture, et j'en passe, sont importés en masse depuis l'autre bout du monde. Nous faisons produire par d'autres ce que nous devrions produire ici, sur le continent européen.
               

                  Les conséquences, elles, sont bien connues: délocalisations et désindustrialisation, augmentation des inégalités et du chômage, accélération de la catastrophe écologique. Mais, Madame von der Leyen, loin d'apprendre de ces leçons, vous poursuivez la fuite en avant et multipliez les accords de libre-échange avec le Mercosur, le Mexique, l'Inde, la Thaïlande ou encore la Malaisie. Comment osez-vous, Madame von der Leyen, ce matin encore, venir prôner les accords de libre-échange? N'avez-vous vraiment rien appris de notre dépendance aux États à l'extérieur de l'Union européenne?
               

                  Il y a urgence, urgence à repenser entièrement les manières de produire et d'échanger. Que produit-on, et où? Pour quels besoins et en quelle quantité? Produit-on pour exporter des avions ou des produits de luxe et engraisser les multinationales, ou produit-on pour satisfaire localement les besoins essentiels – se nourrir, se loger, s'habiller, se chauffer, se meubler, se déplacer, se soigner?
               

                  Voilà, Madame von der Leyen, les questions que vous devriez vous poser, plutôt que de vous complaire dans le confort de dogmes économiques usés jusqu'à la moelle: libre-échange, compétitivité, marché, concurrence, croissance… Plus que jamais, nous avons besoin de mettre en place un protectionnisme solidaire et écologique, de recentrer notre économie sur nos besoins et dans les limites planétaires, de construire une économie de la paix plutôt qu'une économie de la guerre. Voilà ce qui doit orienter nos économies: nos vies plutôt que leurs profits.
               

Alexander Sell,
im Namen der ESN-Fraktion. – Frau Präsidentin! Frau von der Leyen braucht Geld – 800 Milliarden Euro für Aufrüstung. Darüber hinaus will sie – ich zitiere – private Ersparnisse in Investitionen umwandeln; die Kommissionspräsidentin nennt das Spar- und Investitionsunion. Schon der Name ist ein Etikettenschwindel. Sparen will Frau von der Leyen natürlich nicht – im Gegenteil. Sie will mehr ausgeben, und zwar das Geld der Bürger. Für den Krieg in der Ukraine sollen sämtliche Sparkonten Europas geplündert werden.
               

                  Wir Deutschen wissen sehr gut, wie vertrauensvoll Sie, Frau von der Leyen, mit dem Geld der Steuerzahler umgehen. Als Verteidigungsministerin in Berlin haben Sie öffentliche Aufträge unter der Hand vergeben. Der Bundesrechnungshof sprach von – Zitat – systematischen Verstößen gegen das Vergaberecht. Mehrere Millionen Euro wurden ohne Ausschreibung an befreundete Berater gezahlt, belastende Nachrichten und Chats wurden gelöscht. Zur Untersuchung der Vorwürfe setzte der Bundestag einen Untersuchungsausschuss ein, doch der drohenden Entlassung sind Sie, Frau von der Leyen, durch Flucht nach Brüssel entkommen – weggelobt von Angela Merkel.
               

                  Hier machen Sie genau so weiter: Impfstoffe für 35 Milliarden Euro in der Corona-Krise – wieder per SMS, wieder bei einem guten Bekannten. Auch in diesem Fall ermittelt die Staatsanwaltschaft, und auch in diesem Fall sind alle belastenden Nachrichten von Ihrem Handy verschwunden.
               

                  800 Milliarden Euro wollen Sie jetzt haben, unter Umgehung des Parlaments. Das dürfen wir nicht zulassen, Kollegen! Niemals sollte diese Frau Schulden in unserem Namen machen dürfen. Niemals darf diese Frau Zugriff auf die Ersparnisse der Bürger bekommen. Auch wir wollen eine bessere Ausrüstung der Bundeswehr, wir wollen aber nicht, dass unsere Steuergelder an Freunde und Bekannte der Kommissionspräsidentin verteilt werden. Schluss mit den Milliardengeschenken per SMS!
               

Dolors Montserrat (PPE). – Señora presidenta, señora Von der Leyen, señor Costa, el mundo exige liderazgo, Europa responde con valentía y un solo Gobierno, el español, se esconde. Así se resume un momento crítico de la Unión Europea: un continente que enfrenta la tiranía de Putin enarbolando un ‘whatever it takes’ para defensa y un autócrata, como Sánchez, cuyo Gobierno califica nuestra supervivencia como una inquietud inútil.
               

                  No esperen nada del Gobierno de Sánchez. Sé que algunos ya han visto la verdadera naturaleza de este presidente que ha hecho de la mentira su forma de vida. Sánchez miente a los españoles en España, a la OTAN en Varsovia y a los europeos en Bruselas. Miente a todos todo el tiempo porque su único objetivo es sobrevivir.
               

                  Por eso no cumplirá sus compromisos de inversión en seguridad y defensa, porque no conoce la lealtad. España no llegará con Sánchez al objetivo mínimo del 2 % en defensa, porque ha renunciado por cuarta vez en siete años a aprobar los presupuestos nacionales, incumpliendo un mandato constitucional, lo que nos confirma que Sánchez no es un hombre de Estado: es el hombre de paja de un fugado de la justicia, de filoetarras y de un Gobierno en descomposición.
               

                  Sánchez vuela la próxima semana a China en plena crisis comercial, pero no precisamente para mediar por Europa ni defender nuestros intereses, como sí ha hecho el vicepresidente Šefčovič. Detrás de ese viaje está el expresidente socialista Zapatero, blanqueador de Maduro en Europa, defensor del levantamiento del embargo de Europa a China por la masacre de Tiananmén y presidente de un think tank quizás con conexiones con el régimen de China en Europa y en Latinoamérica.
               

                  El Partido Popular Europeo siempre defenderá el proyecto europeo y denunciará a quien lo ataque. Por eso, la Comisión debe exigir que Sánchez esté a la altura de este momento político, porque la batalla que libramos no se ganará con retórica ni presidentes mediocres, sino con principios firmes, líderes fuertes y coraje para señalar a quien no cumple, sobre todo si se sienta con nosotros en el Consejo Europeo.
               

Raphaël Glucksmann (S&D). – Madame la Présidente, Monsieur le Président, chers collègues, je me demande parfois si nous avons tous réellement conscience de la gravité du moment que nous traversons aujourd'hui. Les services allemands, danois, estoniens ou encore polonais disent tous la même chose: la Russie de Poutine pourrait envahir un pays de l'Union européenne avant 2030, et chaque mot, chaque décision, chaque pas de Donald Trump nous confirme une chose nouvelle: nous sommes seuls pour assurer notre propre sécurité.
               

                  Alors, j'ai des questions. Pourquoi? Pourquoi sommes-nous incapables de faire, face à une telle menace, ce que nous avons fait face à une pandémie? Pourquoi le grand emprunt commun pour la défense est-il toujours bloqué? Pourquoi ne proposer que des solutions nationales? Pourquoi le seul programme réellement européen de défense, l'EDIP, est-il financé à cette hauteur ridicule de 1,5 milliard d'euros? Et pourquoi l'instrument de soutien à l'Ukraine, qui vient avec l'EDIP, est-il, lui, financé à hauteur de 0 euro?
               

                  La crise actuelle sera le berceau de la puissance européenne, ou elle sera son tombeau. Nous avons peu de temps pour agir.
               

Jean-Paul Garraud (PfE). – Donald Trump vient d'annoncer une hausse de 25 % des droits de douane sur les voitures européennes. Une décision brutale, mais, hélas, sans surprise. Pourquoi? Parce que les États-Unis savent que l'Union européenne cède toujours.
               

                  Loin de défendre les intérêts de ses membres, l'Europe s'est enfermée dans une obsession technocratique, coupée des réalités industrielles, incapable de protéger ses usines, ses filières, ses salariés. Une puissance de façade, qui préfère la posture à l'action, comme si la soumission était devenue une ligne de conduite.
               

                  Ce coup porté par Washington n'est que le dernier en date d'une longue série. Les conséquences sont claires: ce sont nos constructeurs, nos équipementiers, nos sous-traitants et nos automobilistes qui vont en payer le prix. À court terme, par des hausses de coûts, à moyen terme, par des fermetures d'usines, et à long terme, par une perte irréversible de souveraineté industrielle.
               

                  Mais ne nous trompons pas, cette attaque économique ne tombe pas du ciel. Elle est aussi le fruit de nos propres renoncements, d'un aveuglement stratégique qui dure depuis des années. Depuis trop longtemps, l'Union européenne impose des politiques industrielles hors-sol, déconnectées des réalités de terrain, au nom d'une transition écologique devenue dogmatique. Sous couvert du pacte vert, elle efface nos savoir-faire, sacrifie nos motorisations thermiques, impose des normes intenables et nous livre pieds et poings liés à une technologie dominée depuis vingt ans par la Chine. Une Chine qui, elle, protège, finance, accompagne massivement son industrie, comme le font également les États-Unis.
               

                  Pendant ce temps, Bruxelles échoue à bâtir un véritable secteur européen de la batterie. Les projets s'effondrent les uns après les autres, faute de coordination, faute de volonté, faute de vision. Pis, la Commission continue de financer des ONG militantes, souvent radicales, qui mènent une croisade antivoiture, sapent notre industrie, stigmatisent nos modes de vie et imposent leur idéologie à coups de rapports et de campagnes de dénigrement de la voiture. Cette machine à culpabiliser a remplacé la stratégie. Le projet européen aboutit aujourd'hui sur un continent sans usines, sans énergie, sans emploi, sur une Europe qui avance sans boussole, guidée par des normes irréalistes, des injonctions contradictoires et des illusions bureaucratiques, sur une Europe qui, à force de mépriser le réel, finit par saboter ce qui reste de son industrie.
               

                  Il est temps de dire stop, de défendre notre indépendance industrielle, de protéger nos emplois, notre savoir-faire, notre compétitivité et de remettre les pieds sur terre. Car, si l'Europe poursuit ce suicide économique, demain il sera trop tard, et nous n'aurons que notre silence pour pleurer ce que nous aurons laissé disparaître sans combattre.
               

Patryk Jaki (ECR). – Pani Przewodnicząca! Otóż bezpieczeństwo, świetnie, ale dobrze, żebyście zadbali najpierw o bezpieczeństwo wewnątrz Unii Europejskiej, skończyli politykę migracyjną i zaczęli szanować prawa i wolności obywateli. Najpierw anulowaliście wyniki wyborów w Rumunii, bo wygrał nie ten kandydat, co trzeba, a teraz zabroniliście prowadzącej w sondażach Marine Le Pen startu w wyborach, aby tym razem nie ryzykować, że może wygra. Zrobiliście to pomimo tego, że zachodni system demokratyczny jest zbudowany na domniemania niewinności i instancyjności.
               

                  I bądźmy szczerzy, szef Rady Konstytucyjnej, który dopuścił się takiego skandalu, jest wieloletnim politykiem partii Macrona. Dopiero był szefem jego biura i posłem przestał być, bo przegrał wybory – ostatnie wybory – i jak na ironię zabronił kandydować osobie, która wygrała te wybory i to z rekordowym poparciem. Więc tak naprawdę wy nie zabraliście praw Marine Le Pen. Zabraliście prawa zwykłym obywatelom, prawa do decydowania o ich przyszłości, o tym, kogo chcą wybierać.
               

                  Zauważyliście, że ludzie coraz bardziej przestają się nabierać na tą waszą propagandę i chcecie im zabrać prawa i dać je wybranym przez was sędziom. I to oni mają decydować za obywateli. Tylko wtedy to nie jest ani trójpodział władzy, ani demokracja, ale to jest tyrania oligarchii. I nie ma znaczenia to, ile razy powtórzycie słowo demokracja, wolność obywateli, skoro w swoich decyzjach robicie wszystko dokładnie odwrotnie, aby jak najwięcej wolności i praw obywatelom zabrać i dać te prawa wybranym przez siebie sędziom. To trzeba skończyć.
               

Billy Kelleher (Renew). – Madam President, President von der Leyen said that the EU had the strength to negotiate and the power to push back. And those are the two things that we must do. We must negotiate and continue to have dialogue.
But equally, the European Union is obligated to ensure that it acts strategically in terms of potential tariffs that may be placed on European goods tomorrow, which is called 'Liberation Day' by President Trump.
But may I say from the outset, it is critically important that when we are looking at tariffs and when we are looking at retaliatory measures, that we do it strategically and without emotion, that we look at it from the point of view of the impact that it will have collectively across Europe. But equally, we have to look at it from a Member State perspective and ensuring that countries that are specifically dependent on certain sectors are not harshly punished by decisions of the EU collectively.
And for that, I welcome the fact that President von der Leyen has said she has been in discussions with the Heads of State and Heads of Government across Europe to try and come up with a strategy to ensure that we can retaliate, but also in a way that does not damage Member States and certain sectors of industry in Member States itself.
From an Irish perspective, we clearly want to maintain that unity of purpose of the European Union. But in doing that, we must ensure that we look at every country and the dependence that they may have on specific sectors when we are making decisions on behalf of the European Union.

Virginijus Sinkevičius (Verts/ALE). – Madam President, dear President of the Council, dear Commissioner, let me begin by welcoming the fact that 26 Member States have firmly reiterated their commitment to providing Ukraine with regular and predictable support. Our backing for Ukraine's independence, sovereignty and territorial integrity within its internationally recognised borders remains steadfast.
Let's not make a mistake. We do want peace, but in these circumstances, peace needs to be protected. Ukraine must be equipped to defend itself militarily, economically, politically. We will continue working with our allies to provide the comprehensive support it needs.
The recent talks that were held in Saudi Arabia showed that Ukraine is ready to negotiate. Ukraine is ready to take steps to de-escalate. But peace requires much more than just proposals – it demands political will, and so far, Russia has shown zero of that.
The return of unlawfully deported Ukrainian children, the release of civilians and the exchange of prisoners of war. They are not optional. They are humanitarian imperatives. They could be the first steps to show willingness to come closer.
We must be prepared to further increase pressure on Russia – with stronger sanctions, with tighter enforcement – until it ends its aggression. Peace can be achieved not with the surrender of Ukraine; peace can be achieved when Russia withdraws its troops.

Pasquale Tridico (The Left). – Signora Presidente, signor Commissario, onorevoli colleghi, l'Europa non è nata dalla paura, ma dalla speranza. Da uomini e donne che, tra le macerie della guerra, ebbero il coraggio di immaginare un futuro diverso, un'Unione fondata sulla cooperazione, sulla democrazia, sulla pace.
               

                  Oggi questa visione è alla dura prova: assistiamo a una corsa al riarmo ingiustificata, inutile, frammentata, priva anche di una strategia comune che ci rafforzi e, invece, ci espone a debolezze, a maggiori tensioni geopolitiche.
               

                  Senza un coordinamento europeo, con investimenti scoordinati e una disparità nella capacità di spesa dei singoli Stati, paesi come l'Italia si troveranno a fare nuovo debito e il nostro debito raggiungerà il 150 % del PIL.
               

                  Ma la sicurezza non si costruisce solo con le armi, ma con l'indipendenza tecnologica ed economica e la stabilità sociale.
               

                  Questo riarmo, con 800 miliardi di euro, porterà l'Italia a dover tagliare il welfare e la sanità, ma non solo l'Italia, tutti i paesi membri.
               

                  Per questo il 5 aprile saremo a Roma per manifestare contro questo riarmo, per un'Europa di giustizia e di pace.
               

Zsuzsanna Borvendég (ESN). – Tisztelt Elnök Asszony! Három évnyi iszonyatos öldöklés után nem további támogatásokra, hanem kompromisszumos békére van szükség. Önök kizárólag orosz háborús bűnökről beszélnek, és meg sem említik a másik fél embertelenségeit. Az orosz agresszió ténye nem menti fel az ukránokat sem az általuk elkövetett háborús bűnök felelőssége alól. Veszélyes üzenete van annak, ha a kettős mérce alkalmazásával az Unió szemet huny az emberi jogok sárba tiprása felett, bárki is követi azt el.
               

                  Legutóbbi békepárti felszólalásomban szóvá tettem az ott élő magyarok elleni jogsértéseket, ezért fenyegető e-mailt kaptam ukrán szélsőségesektől. Ukrajna ellenségének nyilvánítottak, és utolsó figyelmeztetést intéztek hozzám. Az Európai Parlament a demokratikus alapelvek, így a véleménynyilvánítási szabadság védelmének a letéteményese. A fenyegető levelet továbbítani fogom a parlament elnökségének, és kérem, hogy ítéljék el azokat a szélsőségeseket, akik fenyegetéssel és kényszerítéssel próbálják akadályozni a szabad képviselői mandátum gyakorlását.
               

Ruth Firmenich (NI). – Frau Präsidentin! ‘Von der Leyen schwört Europa auf möglichen Großkrieg ein’ titelte gerade ein großes Webportal. Mit 800 Milliarden soll die EU kriegstüchtig gemacht werden. Aber weshalb, wenn sogar US-Geheimdienste sagen, dass Russland keinen Angriff auf NATO-Staaten plant? Wenn es nicht Verteidigung ist, dann kann es nur um die Vorbereitung eines Kriegs gegen Russland gehen, den die Koalition der Kriegswilligen der EU offensichtlich will. Dieser Irrsinn muss gestoppt werden!
               

                  Gerade schreibt die New York Times, wie die USA ihren Stellvertreterkrieg in der Ukraine von Deutschland aus führen. Das kommt einem direkten Kriegseintritt gleich. Wir sollten deshalb heilfroh sein, dass es Verhandlungen gibt, den Krieg zu beenden. Doch die EU möchte den Krieg nun auch ohne die USA weiterführen. Das ist doch Wahnsinn!
               

                  Auch die Angriffe auf die Demokratie in Europa wirken wie Teil einer Mobilmachung für einen Krieg. Aussichtsreiche Kandidaten schließt man von Wahlen aus, der russischen Minderheit in Estland entzieht man das Wahlrecht, und in Deutschland wird trotz megaknappem Wahlausgang nicht nachgezählt. Wer aber die Demokratie abschafft, die er vorgibt zu verteidigen, ist nicht anders als die, die er zu Feinden erklärt.
               

Siegfried Mureșan (PPE). – Madam President, colleagues, to everyone here in the House who wants to weaken Europe we say very clearly, the pro-European parties here in the European Parliament are united in strengthening Europe, in defending the European Union. What the Eurosceptics advocate for – a weak Europe – only serves the Russian Federation and autocratic regimes around the world. We want a strong European Union capable of defending its citizens. A weak European Union is a vulnerable European Union. Being stronger means that we can defend the citizens, and this is what pro-European party stand for, because this is what the people of Europe expect.
Whoever believes that the world is changing is late. The world has already changed. Unfortunately, the United States of America are turning their backs on key allies, on their neighbours, on their closest partners, and also on international institutions which they helped create, which they often led and which brought prosperity and peace for over 80 years.
What should we do in this case? In this case, we should make more friends and more partners around the world, and we should strengthen the international partnerships that the European Union has. In these times, the European Union is becoming more important and more relevant to the Member States, to the citizens of Europe and also to our neighbouring countries. We're going to provide for prosperity, and we are going to do more on security and on defence.
And as Manfred Weber has said in the beginning, the first step, the EUR 800 billion, is just a first package. It's the beginning. Our clear position is that on security and defence, we will have to do more. We will have to do it faster, and we will have to do it for a longer period of time.
We have to create mechanisms right now, but we also have to make sure that we provide sufficient funding for security and defence in the long term. Security and defence should become a priority for the budget of the European Union in the long term, and we should invest in those projects which firstly bring European added value – people should see the European signature – and, secondly, they meet the needs of the people on the ground. People should see that Europe is there to help. It spends where it is needed on the ground.

Paolo Borchia (PfE). – Signora Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, io prendo atto dell'esercizio di marketing o di maquillage – chiamiamolo come vogliamo – per rendere più accettabile il piano di riarmo, che però alla gente non piace. Si tratta probabilmente di una frettolosa riedizione del piano Pleven, che forse farà la sua stessa fine.
               

                  Poi, colleghi, guardate: a me le persone, nella quotidianità, chiedono quando aumenteranno gli stipendi, quando aumenteranno le pensioni, non quando arrivano i droni di ultima generazione, non quando arrivano i carri armati più moderni.
               

                  Quindi, se parte il messaggio che la flessibilità sui bilanci si può applicare soltanto alle spese militari e soltanto al riarmo, allora, scusate, ma questa Unione perderà la poca credibilità che le è rimasta.
               

                  Poi c'è un altro grande tema, quello dell'urgenza. L'abbiamo letto anche nelle conclusioni del Consiglio: bisogna fare presto! Si vuole trasmettere ansia agli europei, perché poi quando un popolo è ansioso accetta supinamente, accetta senza fare storie quelle che sono le decisioni calate dall'alto.
               

                  Colleghi, la Lega non è, e non sarà mai, il partito delle armi! E poi, consentitemi: se un'idea è pessima, resta pessima e non basta cambiarle nome.
               

Nicolas Bay (ECR). – Madame la Présidente, tout arrive! Bruxelles s'aperçoit enfin que le pacte vert est une catastrophe pour notre compétitivité, notre économie et nos entreprises. Mais vous ne savez pas comment vous en débarrasser sans perdre la face… La prise de conscience est bien lente, et l'action encore plus.
               

                  Suspendre la directive sur la publication d'informations en matière de durabilité par les entreprises n'est pas suffisant: il faut purement et simplement l'abroger. Ce n'est pas d'un court répit dont ont besoin nos entreprises, mais de liberté. Elles croulent, elles étouffent sous les charges administratives, déclaratives et fiscales.
               

                  Dans ses conclusions, le Conseil demande ‘des efforts aux États et aux régions’. Mais que l'Union commence par supprimer les objectifs extravagants du pacte vert! Nous devons en finir avec la surréglementation, avec l'obésité administrative et bureaucratique, avec tous les boulets que vous enchaînez aux pieds de nos entrepreneurs, de nos industriels et de nos agriculteurs. Sans cela, l'économie européenne n'a aucune chance face à ses concurrents mondiaux.
               

                  Il faut simplifier, élaguer, supprimer. Pour être compétitive, l'Europe n'a pas besoin d'une boussole. Elle a besoin, avant tout, d'une tronçonneuse.
               

Gerben-Jan Gerbrandy (Renew). – Madam President, Mr Costa, thank you for being here. You haven't long been Chair or President of the European Council, but long enough to know that its ways must change.
Your members – government leaders – concluded once again under your leadership that we must have a European Union which is climate neutral, competitive, a military power, a foreign policy actor, even the guardian of the oceans.
And that's all fine and well, and I couldn't agree more, and many agree with these words. It's just that your members go home and then do nothing. While Europeans have never wanted more Europe, they are far from meeting the moment. The customers want a Michelin star dinner, but the European Council delivers thin porridge.
It has been two months since Trump, and no sovereignty has been shared to defend our territory. It's been six months since Draghi, and no economic or democratic reforms were carried out. It has been 11 months since Letta, and no jealously guarded national powers were pulled.
Mr Costa, grab history by the scruff of the neck, wake up your members and stop talking, but start doing.

Hannah Neumann (Verts/ALE). – Madam President, dear colleagues, Europe needs to spend more on defence. And we, Commission, Council and this House, need to make sure that more spending actually leads to more security – security for European citizens and for Ukrainians – and not to higher profits for the defence industry.
Let me be clear, we, Greens, are ready to support the defence industry where it matters: access to finance and raw materials, securing supply chains, less bureaucratic hurdles, more skilled workers. But this isn't a one-way street. I expect you, in the Commission and the Council, to make this very clear in the strategic dialogue that you are going to have with the defence industry. All this extra money must result in extra security and not in extra shareholder returns.
And if there will be no serious answer, no fair contribution from industry, then yes, expect our calls for an excess profit tax to grow only louder in this House, across party lines, as it does in the UK already.

Li Andersson (The Left). – Madam President, last week we in The Left Group gathered young Ukrainian leftists and trade unionists in Brussels to discuss how Ukrainian civil society can be supported during the fight against Russian imperialism.
The message was crystal clear: in addition to arms support, Ukrainian society needs to address acute problems such as the severe lack of affordable housing, the lack of care services, and also proposed reforms to weaken workers' rights and trade unions.
We need to find the legal basis to use frozen Russian assets and to direct these funds into a large investment programme for social housing in Ukraine.
Now is also the time to finally put an end to Viktor Orbán trying to stop support to Ukraine and blocking Ukraine's EU accession process. We must remove Hungary's voting rights in the Council under Article 7. Enough is enough.

Katarína Roth Neveďalová (NI). – Vážená pani predsedajúca, tento rok oslavujeme 80. výročie konca druhej svetovej vojny a Európska únia, ktorá vznikla ako projekt na prevenciu mieru, na ochranu mieru, práve tento rok debatuje o tom, ako dať peniaze na ďalšie zbrane, a rozprávame, že toto bude naša nová realita.
               

                  Európska únia vznikla ako projekt, pôvodne ako projekt uhlia a ocele, uhlie sme už v Európskej únii zakázali a vidíme, aké sú problémy s oceliarskom priemyslom v Európskej únii. Máme problémy s energiou, máme problémy s energiou a s jej cenami pre občanov, a preto by som aj z tohto miesta chcela vyzvať na – naozaj – na splnenie aj záverov Rady, ktoré boli na začiatku marca, aby sme poprosili a pomohli Slovenskej republike a ďalším krajinám na východe Európskej únie s tým, aby Ukrajina konečne povolila tranzit ruského plynu cez ich územie, aby sme mali diverzifikáciu plynu a aby sme mali naozaj lacnejšie energetické zdroje aj pre Východoeurópsku úniu.
               

                  Zajtra nás čakajú nové clá na autá. Slovensko je krajina, ktorá vyrába najviac áut na obyvateľa na celom svete, a preto sa nás takisto veľmi dotknú tieto opatrenia a pripravujeme rôzne návrhy práve v spolupráci s automobilovým priemyslom, ako by Európska únia mala zasiahnuť, pretože to musíme urobiť, aby sme našich občanov ochránili.
               

Željana Zovko (PPE). – Madam President, tomorrow, many of us who will wake up with the God's will will enter from as many calls April Fools Day into a liberation day. Just another name. For some Europeans, it will be just another day of lent, preparing for the Easter holiday, going through the detox phase after the long Babette's Feast that we went through in the last years of living in the lah lah land of social heaven, that somebody else will provide for us.
The news from the other side of the Atlantic are not the encouraging ones. We must stand at our own feet, take care of our own production, facilitate trade amongst us in a better way in order to become happier and stop complaining about somebody else bringing a misery into our life. The time of preventive diplomacy in our trade relations is over. We are entering a new phase where reciprocity will be the tool for retaliation, and the old friendship will suffer.
In the meantime, we should stop philosophies about getting rid of unnecessary burden in order to boost our competitiveness and start taking brave measures. On passing the omnibus package as soon as possible through this House to send a clear message. Europe means business.
We must also agree and vote through all these trade agreements that we are praising ourselves with. From Mercosur to Norway, Switzerland and many more to come. Situation on our borders are more and more worrisome, and we must be able to protect our trade routes with the same force in order to continue to trade with newly acquired partners. No one else will do it for us.
Multilateral order is changing in front of our eyes, and we should finally position ourselves with our partners with whom we share democratic values and clear long-term strategic vision with a realistic approach of our strength.
To conclude, we should get busy working and stop spending time being dependent on social networks and high-tech companies. Maybe that's the way to decrease our trade balance with the US. In the end, people have elected us to give them conditions to thrive with their families. Let's not waste their time. They will remember us with the jobs that we provide, not with the quotes and the pictures on Instagram.

Alex Agius Saliba (S&D). – Sinjura President, illum il-kriżi umanitarja f'Gaża hija waħda katastrofika. Rajna, sa dawn l-aħħar sigħat, qabar tal-massa illi kien jinkludi ħmistax-il ħaddiem umanitarju kollha maqtula mir-reġim Iżraeljan. Din mhijiex sempliċiment traġedja, imma huwa ksur rampanti tal-liġi internazzjonali.
               

                  Il-Qorti tal-Ġustizzja Internazzjonali għamlitha ċara li kull Stat madwar id-dinja għandu jintervjeni sabiex iwaqqaf il-ġenoċidju u jiżgura responsabilità għad-delitti tal-gwerra. U għaldaqstant, illum hija okkażjoni fejn għandna l-Kummissjoni, il-President tal-Parlament Ewropew u l-President tal-Kunsill illi nappellalhom sabiex tittieħed azzjoni mill-aktar urġenti sabiex l-ewwel u qabel kollox jitwaqqaf il-ftehim ta' assoċjazzjoni bejn l-Unjoni Ewropea u l-Iżrael, nimponu s-sanzjonijiet u nappoġġjaw il-pjan ta' rikostruzzjoni f'Gaża.
               

                  Il-poplu Palestinjan diġà sofra għal għexieren ta' snin. Ma nistgħux inkunu siekta quddiem dan il-ġenoċidju. Dan huwa test morali għalina u għall-valuri illi nħaddnu. L-Unjoni Ewropea trid tieħu azzjoni issa f'ġieħ il-ġustizzja, it-tħaddim tal-liġi internazzjonali u fuq kollox l-umanità.
               

Anna Bryłka (NI). – Pani Przewodnicząca! Panie Przewodniczący! Panie Komisarzu! Najgorszą odpowiedzią na niebezpieczeństwa Europy jest to, co robi Unia Europejska. Przez ostatnie lata Komisja Europejska bezczelnie ingeruje w sądownictwo, w politykę energetyczną, politykę finansową i w wiele innych obszarów państw członkowskich. Łamie przy tym traktaty i wykorzystuje każdy kryzys do budowania europejskiego superpaństwa. Na naszych oczach trwa pełzający proces federalizacji Unii Europejskiej i potwierdzają to kolejne konkluzje po szczycie Rady Europejskiej.
               

                  Biała księga europejskiej obrony będzie kolejnym biurokratycznym narzędziem Komisji Europejskiej, które zamiast wspierać obronność w Europie, będzie tylko ograniczało niezależność państw członkowskich. Pani von der Leyen, my nie chcemy pani jako cesarzowej Europy, której będziemy pytać, jakie czołgi mamy kupić. Nie zgadzamy się też na niemiecką politykę migracyjną. Podrzucanie imigrantów własnym sąsiadom to jest właśnie ta solidarność europejska? Europejskie narody chcą współpracy. Tak, to prawda, ale nigdy nie pozwolą sobie na odebranie suwerenności i niepodległości.
               

                  To są czarne dni w Europie, naznaczone kolejnymi przykładami podważania fundamentalnych zasad demokracji. Zrobiliście to w Rumunii, a teraz wykluczacie z życia publicznego liderkę opozycji we Francji. To są te unijne wartości, to jest ta demokracja? Ten wasz plan na budowanie federacji się po prostu nie uda. Europa to jest kontynent wielkich narodów. Europa zwycięży.
               

Charlie Weimers (ECR). – Madam President, Commissioner, the ongoing mass migration to Europe is unsustainable.
Member States realise this. They want the prevention and countering of illegal migration, more returns of migrants who should not be in Europe and designation of safe third countries to enable the return of more individuals. They want to secure the border.
All of these demands are reasonable and could find a majority in this House if you look at the election manifestos of the groups.
But, friends, we are facing a litmus test quite soon. As the European Parliament takes a position on return policy, we must address the fact that eight out of ten with deportation orders remain in Europe.
If we agree on the deliverance of this policy, we can actually get a forceful return regulation together with the Council. But for that to happen, the Christian Democrats need to work with us conservatives.

(The President cut off the speaker)


Hilde Vautmans (Renew). – Voorzitter, collega's, het is de zoveelste week dat Europa als een konijn naar de Trump-lichtbak kijkt. Mijn boodschap aan de Raad en aan de Commissie is dan ook klaar en duidelijk: kijk weg van die Amerikaanse lichtbak!
               

                  Maak werk van een versnelde ontkoppeling van Amerika. Bouw op onze eigen Europese sterktes, want die dreigen we in al het pessimisme soms te vergeten. We hebben enorm potentieel in huis. Gebruik onze Europese industrie als springplank naar dat Europese leger. Verplicht die nationale legers om Europees te kopen. Maak werk van de digitale euro zodat we niet financieel afhankelijk zijn van Amerikaanse bedrijven als Visa en Mastercard.
               

                  Laat Trump alsjeblieft doen wat hij denkt te moeten doen. Laat Trump vooral in zijn eigen voet schieten. Wij van onze kant moeten het Europees tempo opdrijven door onze ondernemers te steunen. Laat ons morgen vol overtuiging op die pauzeknop drukken en dat zo lang als nodig is. Elke wederopstanding begint met het geloof in het eigen kunnen, met vertrouwen in Europa.
               

Reinier Van Lanschot (Verts/ALE). – Madam President, dear colleagues, dear Mr Costa, the EU has a black hole: it's called the European Council. If this Union were a galaxy, that is where bright ideas go, pulled in by its gravitational force, never to be seen again.
Enable Ukraine to win, remove Orbán's veto, create a European army, Treaty change – for years, the European Parliament has sent ideas your way only for them to vanish. The list of things stuck in the Council is long. Hiding behind unanimity. Afraid of breaking taboos. And the strange thing is that these taboos only exist in the Council, not in the minds of the European people.
The threat of war is on our doorstep. Ten years from now, government leaders will regret that they held on to the national past instead of embracing the European future. Mr Costa, please prove me wrong and transform this black hole into a North Star that guides our way to a brighter future.

Paulo Cunha (PPE). – Senhora Presidente do Parlamento, Senhor Presidente do Conselho, as conclusões do Conselho Europeu de 20 de Março refletem avanços importantes para a União Europeia, mas deixam-nos com desafios claros pela frente.
               

                  O reforço da competitividade, a aposta numa maior autonomia energética e o apoio contínuo à Ucrânia são prioridades com que concordamos plenamente, mas que exigem ação concreta.
               

                  Como bem afirmou o Primeiro-Ministro português, Luís Montenegro, a Europa tem de ser rápida a afirmar-se como um bloco comercial competitivo e coeso. E acrescento: a competitividade não é apenas economia, é também sinónimo de segurança. Uma Europa competitiva e resiliente terá melhor capacidade de apoiar a Ucrânia neste momento histórico e de responder ao desafio que a guerra nos coloca.
               

                  Precisamos de simplificar a legislação e reduzir o fardo administrativo, como decidido neste Conselho. Mas pergunto: quanto tempo terão de esperar as pequenas e médias empresas para verem essas promessas no terreno? Sem elas, a Europa arrisca-se a perder a base da sua força económica e social.
               

                  Outro ponto essencial é a autonomia energética. Apesar do consenso sobre a criação de um mercado energético comum, a Península Ibérica continua limitada em termos de interconexões. E pergunto: até quando seremos uma ilha energética na Europa? Portugal está pronto para ser parte da solução. Precisamos de compromissos concretos.
               

                  Por fim, destaco que apoiar a Ucrânia é uma responsabilidade estratégica. A competitividade na inovação, energia e defesa é a melhor alavanca para que a União Europeia seja um pilar de apoio sólido a quem luta pela liberdade e democracia.
               

                  Não podemos assistir imóveis e serenos aos desafios que se acumulam. A União Europeia precisa de avançar.
               

(O orador aceita responder a uma pergunta ‘cartão azul’)


João Oliveira (The Left),
Pergunta segundo o procedimento ‘cartão azul’
                     . – Senhor Deputado Paulo Cunha, o senhor falou aqui de competitividade das empresas e da necessidade de desenvolver a economia e pergunto-lhe como é que o senhor deputado, olhando para a realidade portuguesa, pode achar que as conclusões deste Conselho Europeu nos servem?
               

                  Como é que uma economia como a portuguesa, que está assente sobretudo em pequenas e médias empresas, pode beneficiar de medidas como o Pacote Omnibus ou o offshore legal do 28.o regime jurídico, que se destinam exclusivamente a favorecer a ação das multinacionais?
               

                  Como é que o senhor deputado entende que as pequenas e médias empresas portuguesas podem suportar esse confronto com as multinacionais se elas passam a ter melhores condições de desenvolver a sua atividade, inclusivamente em concorrência com as PME portuguesas?
               

Paulo Cunha (PPE),
Resposta segundo o procedimento ‘cartão azul’
                     . – Senhor Deputado, os dados, que são públicos e são recentes, demonstram melhorias significativas na economia portuguesa, não só do ponto de vista macroeconómico, mas também, em concreto, ao nível da empregabilidade.
               

                  Hoje, há, inequivocamente, uma melhoria da situação económica em Portugal. Isso deve-se a políticas públicas consistentes, não só adotadas no nível interno, mas também aquelas que são adotadas no plano internacional.
               

                  Acreditamos, genuinamente, que aquilo que se tem feito no contexto da União Europeia, somado com aquilo que está a acontecer no contexto nacional, é a conjugação necessária para que cada cidadão português e cada empresa portuguesa, particularmente as que citou, as pequenas e médias empresas, possam beneficiar de um clima económico favorável.
               

Christel Schaldemose (S&D). – Fru formand! Krig i Europa er ikke længere noget, vi læser om i historiebøgerne. Det er virkelighed. Ukraine kæmper på fjerde år for deres frihed, for vores. Danmark tager ansvar. Frontstaterne tager ansvar, og nu må resten af Europa komme med. Vi må gøre op med os selv, om vi har tænkt os at forsvare vores kontinent eller ej. Vi kan ikke forsvare vores værdier med halve løsninger og tomme løfter. Hvis vi vil et stærkt Europa, så kræver det handling. Det kræver oprustning. Det kræver investeringer, og det kræver viljen til at stå sammen. Europa-Kommissionen har leveret et godt forslag, og Rådet bør støtte. Ikke næste år, ikke om fem år, men nu. Vi kan ikke blive ved med at lægge ansvaret over på dem, der bor tættest på krigen. Vi skal deles om byrden, hvis vi vil deles om friheden. Vi må ikke tvivle. Vi skal stå fast, og vi skal stå fast, vi skal stå sammen i Europa. Jeg tror på, at Europa kan, hvis vi vil.
               

Gilles Pennelle (PfE). – Madame la Présidente, partout en Europe, les peuples se lèvent pour contester la dérive autoritaire de l'Union européenne et la dérive autoritaire de Mme von der Leyen. Face à cela, comme dans toutes les dictatures, on assiste à un raidissement, à un sursaut d'autoritarisme et à des dérives liberticides.
               

                  On l'a vu lors de ce Conseil européen du 20 mars, où certains, y compris dans cette assemblée parlementaire, ont contesté ce qui est pourtant dans les traités, c'est-à-dire le droit de vote d'un État, le droit d'un État de s'opposer à certaines décisions. Nous l'avons vu, bien évidemment, avec la Roumanie, où, sous l'acclamation des européistes, on a interdit à un candidat de se présenter et on a annulé des élections. Nous l'avons vu hier en France, où s'est produit un véritable scandale démocratique, un coup d'État judiciaire visant à empêcher la favorite de l'élection présidentielle – certes très critique à l'égard de votre Union européenne – de se présenter devant les urnes.
               

                  Je voudrais vous dire quelque chose, chers collègues, qui devriez être indignés par ces décisions. Faites attention, parce que l'histoire nous l'a prouvé: ceux qui s'en prennent à la démocratie le regretteront, parce qu'il y aura de graves conséquences.
               

Carlo Fidanza (ECR). – Signora Presidente, signor Commissario, signor Presidente del Consiglio, onorevoli colleghi, nell'ultimo Consiglio si è parlato molto di difesa e di sicurezza.
               

                  Non abbandonare la cooperazione transatlantica in nome di iniziative velleitarie; non ragionare soltanto di nuovo debito pubblico, ma di strumenti per stimolare gli investimenti privati; non parlare soltanto di riarmo, ma di sicurezza a 360 gradi e di difesa delle nostre libertà dalle minacce ibride. È questa la strada di buon senso tracciata da leader lungimiranti, come Giorgia Meloni.
               

                  Ma si è parlato di competitività e semplificazione: concetti chiave, che però non si possono realizzare se non rivedendo obiettivi e tempistiche di ogni singolo provvedimento del Green Deal, disinnescando il pilota automatico di qualche burocrate ideologizzato.
               

                  Colleghi, nelle prossime ore depositeremo le firme necessarie per richiedere l'istituzione di una commissione di inchiesta sul cosiddetto ‘green gate’. Ringrazio i quasi 200 deputati che l'hanno supportata e faccio appello agli amici del PPE, che hanno avuto un ruolo importante nel richiedere chiarezza sulle azioni delle ONG ambientaliste, affinché si uniscano a noi in questa battaglia di verità e di trasparenza.
               

Svenja Hahn (Renew). – Frau Präsidentin, liebe Kollegen! Es ist doch einfach nur frustrierend, wenn wir sehen, wie klein die Schritte der EU-Länder sind, während Trump und Putin und die Autokraten unsere Welt im Sprint einreißen – und währenddessen blockieren die Vereine der Demokratie innerhalb der EU jeden Fortschritt. Dabei kann die Welt nicht auf uns warten, bis wir Orbán mal wieder mit Geld zugeschüttet haben, damit er wenigstens nicht Nein sagt. Es ist doch verrückt, dass Europa immer noch die Feinde der Demokratie mit ihrem eigenen Geld füttert. Und währenddessen versucht Präsident Macron zumindest eine Koalition der Willigen – dabei brauchen wir vor allen Dingen eine Koalition der Handelnden.
               

                  Europa muss handeln, sonst werden wir im Konflikt zwischen Autokratie und Demokratie im besten Fall irrelevant, im schlimmsten Fall zerrieben. Die EU muss jetzt die dritte Weltmacht neben China und den USA werden – eine Sicherheitsmacht, die sich gemeinsam und selbstständig verteidigen kann, eine Wirtschaftsmacht, die Heimat von Innovation und Wachstum ist statt von Bürokratie, und eine diplomatische Macht, die weltweit ein verlässlicher Partner ist und unsere Interessen und Werte verteidigt.
               

                  Die EU kann jetzt die Fackel der Freiheit von den USA übernehmen und selbst zum Leuchtfeuer für all jene werden, die nach Freiheit und Demokratie streben.
               

Tom Berendsen (PPE). – Voorzitter, als ik tien jaar geleden, op deze dag, tegen iemand gezegd had dat we vandaag oorlog op ons continent zouden hebben, dat de Verenigde Staten ons in de steek zouden laten en dat de Europese industrie in zwaar weer zou verkeren, dan had die persoon op de kalender gekeken en het als een slechte eenaprilgrap beoordeeld.
               

                  Het is echter de harde realiteit. Europese landen zijn extreem naïef geweest. We hebben vanuit onze luie stoel gekeken hoe de Verenigde Staten onze veiligheid zijn gaan waarborgen, hoe Rusland ons van energie is gaan voorzien en hoe China onze spullen is gaan maken en onze grondstoffen is gaan leveren. Het zijn precies die landen die werken aan een wereld waar niet democratie en rechtsstaat voorop staan, maar wel de gedachte van machtsblokken en invloedssferen. Kortom, een wereld waar deze afhankelijkheden als wapen tegen ons gebruikt worden. Dat is de wereld waar zij aan werken.
               

                  Mijnheer Costa, er rust een grote verantwoordelijkheid op uw schouders, op de schouders van nationale regeringen, op al onze schouders, om ervoor te zorgen dat we hier sterker uitkomen. Er is geen nationale boekhoudersmentaliteit nodig, maar leiderschap en daadkracht.
               

                  We kunnen dit, met duidelijke keuzes: als we kiezen voor veiligheid, energie en innovatie als duidelijke prioriteiten, voor een Europese begroting waar deze prioriteiten ook de ruimte krijgen. En als we duidelijk kiezen voor Europese samenwerking, opdat we met 27 landen, en zo'n 450 miljoen mensen, onze positie in de wereld kunnen beschermen.
               

President. – Before I give the floor to the next speaker, I'd like to say that it has been brought to my attention that, following the intervention of Ms Neumann, Mr Droese addressed to her a number of offensive words and gestures, which is absolutely unacceptable. Mr Droese, you keep doing this. I will look into this and launch a sanction procedure if appropriate.

Javier Moreno Sánchez (S&D). – Señora presidenta, querido comisario, querido presidente, señorías, el pasado miércoles celebramos el 68.o aniversario del Tratado de Roma, con el que los europeos iniciamos nuestro camino hacia un destino común, compartiendo con éxito paz, seguridad, democracia y bienestar social.
               

                  Ahora bien, el cambio en la Casa Blanca nos ha llevado a un punto de inflexión, lo que Habermas llama el momento de autoafirmación existencial. La Unión necesita invertir en seguridad para dar el impulso definitivo a su integración y convertirse en una potencia política competitiva con una defensa común.
               

                  Desde la unidad, necesitamos un esfuerzo europeo, en el que el Gobierno de Pedro Sánchez participará con responsabilidad, solidaridad y europeísmo, un esfuerzo al que espero que se sume la oposición en España. Hablo de un esfuerzo en el que la ciudadanía europea se sienta partícipe y no vea mermados ni sus derechos ni el Estado de bienestar ni la protección del planeta; un esfuerzo en inversión en tecnología, para hacer frente a los gigantes estadounidenses, y en cooperación al desarrollo, para ampliar nuestro soft power en el mundo. Ese es el futuro camino de nuestro destino común.
               

Harald Vilimsky (PfE). – Frau Präsidentin, sehr geehrte Damen und Herren! Bevor ich auf die Ratssitzung zu sprechen komme, drei aktuelle Dinge, die wirklich mehr als Sorge bereiten. Nummer eins: das, was sich in Rumänien ereignet, wo eine Nummer eins bei Wahlen über einen Angriff des dortigen deep state einfach aus dem Rennen genommen wird und hier Einfluss in Wahlen genommen wird, was aus meiner Sicht mehr als besorgniserregend ist. Das, was sich gestern in Frankreich ereignet hat, das ist für mich weniger eine Justizgeschichte als mehr ein Angriff des deep state über die Justiz auf die Anführerin in allen Umfragen in Frankreich, wo man der französischen Bevölkerung die Möglichkeit nehmen will, ihre bevorzugte Kandidatin wählen zu können. Der nächste Irrsinn innerhalb der Europäischen Union: Schauen Sie nach Deutschland, wo ernsthaft eine Diskussion geführt wird, die AfD, die in einer sehr, sehr begrüßenswerten, großartigen Entwicklung nach oben ist, verbieten zu wollen.
               

                  Ich frage mich: Was sind denn diese europäischen Werte, die irgendjemand noch hier verteidigt? Wie halten Sie es eigentlich mit Demokratie? Wie ist es, wenn derartige Warnhinweise sich quer durch den Kontinent entwickeln und jeder den Kopf in den Sand steckt?
               

                  Ich komme nun zum Inhaltlichen bei dieser Ratssitzung zu sprechen – wenn Sie was zu sagen haben, kommen Sie am besten nachher raus. Nummer eins: Aus den großen Fehlentwicklungen wird man einfach nicht schlau. Die Migration seit dem Jahr 2015 – die nackte Katastrophe ohne jegliche Lösung, wo Sie den Kontinent langsam in Richtung zweites Marrakesch oder Botswana ändern wollen. Die nächste Geschichte – Ihre Budgetdisziplin, die dazu führt, dass es quer durch den Kontinent so ist, dass wir in eine Schuldensituation übergehen, die kaum mehr stemmbar ist. Und drittens – Stichwort Frieden, wo auch Sie versagen und den Ruf international nicht hören und stattdessen hier Kriegssäbelrasseln betreiben, anstatt Ihre Stimme für den Frieden zu erheben.
               

Johan Van Overtveldt (ECR). – Voorzitter, commissaris, collega's, tijdens de besprekingen in de Europese Raad stonden defensie en concurrentiekracht centraal. Als afzonderlijke thema's, alhoewel ze eigenlijk onlosmakelijk met elkaar verbonden zijn. Zonder veiligheid, geen gezonde economie. Het omgekeerde geldt echter ook: zonder een gezonde economie is een echte uitbouw van defensie die die naam waardig is, onmogelijk. Een sterke economie is geen doel op zich. Het is een voorwaarde voor welvaart en veiligheid.
               

                  Om de broodnodige private investeringen voor defensie te genereren, moet de concurrentiekracht van de Europese bedrijven aangescherpt worden. Dit kan gebeuren via, zoals ook door de Raad aangeduid, drastische vereenvoudiging van regelgeving, verlaging van de energiekosten, versterking van de interne markt, digitalisering en het bevorderen van investeringen en innovatie.
               

                  Ik voeg daar graag aan toe dat een aantal lasten, in het algemeen en specifiek wat betreft privé-investeringen in defensie, het best verlaagd worden. Die privé-investeringen zijn absoluut noodzakelijk om een noodlottige ontsporing van publieke financiën in een aantal Europese landen te vermijden.
               

Marie-Pierre Vedrenne (Renew). – Monsieur le Président, Monsieur le Commissaire, les empires avancent, la démocratie recule. Plus grave encore, nous faisons face à une réalité implacable: notre difficulté à démontrer concrètement notre efficacité pour bâtir des politiques justes.
               

                  Il est temps de cesser de nous étonner, de condamner ou de nous féliciter. Assez d'hésitations et de timidité. Quand allons-nous pleinement assumer notre propre sécurité, garantir notre prospérité et accompagner les transitions décisives qui façonnent l'avenir de nos sociétés? La démocratie doit être une force d'action résolue, pas une lenteur excessive paralysée par ses propres divisions et peurs. Il est urgent d'adopter des décisions rapides et concrètes pour protéger nos ambitions et nos intérêts. L'Europe doit devenir une puissance capable de planifier avec cohérence et de coordonner ses efforts de manière stratégique.
               

                  Monsieur le Commissaire, nous soutiendrons toutes les actions que vous mènerez pour protéger notre économie face aux attaques commerciales dangereuses, ainsi que votre volonté de bâtir des partenariats nouveaux pour renforcer la stabilité internationale. Parallèlement, nous avons l'impérieuse nécessité d'accélérer sur la simplification, pour libérer les énergies et renforcer notre marché intérieur.
               

Reinhold Lopatka (PPE). – Frau Präsidentin, liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Wenn gerade vor mir ein Redner so frontal die französische Justiz angegriffen hat, dann zeigt das, wie wichtig es ist, dass wir zu den europäischen Werten stehen, dass wir unser Rechtssystem verteidigen, und das geht nur, wenn die Europäische Union stark und geschlossen bleibt. Denn wenn in der Tonlage vom Putin-Sprecher Peskow nach dem Missbrauch von 2,9 Millionen Euro hier so getan wird, als ob nichts geschehen wäre, und die Justiz schuldig gesprochen wird und nicht die Schuldige hier zur Verantwortung gezogen wird, dann zeigt das: Manchmal ist es bei Kollegen und Kolleginnen hier schon fünf nach zwölf.
               

                  Da ist es umso wichtiger, dass die Europäische Union bei dieser Ratssitzung klar gezeigt hat, dass bei wesentlichen Punkten hier diese Stärke in der EU nach wie vor gegeben ist, wenn es darum geht, uns wirtschaftlich stark aufzustellen; dass dieser Plan im Juni hier vorgelegt wird, wo der Binnenmarkt gestärkt wird, wo es zu einer vertieften finanziellen Integration kommt und auch eine Investitionsunion auf die Reihe gebracht wird.
               

                  Dann ist es umso wichtiger, wenn morgen ein schwarzer Mittwoch hier kommen wird – wenn Präsident Trump diese Zolllawine lostreten wird. Da braucht es eine starke Europäische Union, die gemeinsam entsprechende Gegenmaßnahmen setzt und die sich an den Werten und am Rechtssystem in Europa orientiert. Das unterscheidet uns von anderen Fraktionen, die hier im Haus sind.
               

Dan Nica (S&D). – Doamnă președintă, domnule vicepreședinte Šefčovič, domnule președinte Costa, avem cu toții nevoia astăzi să luăm măsuri urgente pentru ca industriile strategice ale Uniunii Europene să poată să reziste, să supraviețuiască și să avem cu toții un viitor care să aibă o certitudine, că vorbim de industria oțelului, a aluminiului, că vorbim de industria îngrășămintelor chimice, industria auto, că vorbim de industria energetică, că vorbim de cipuri. Toate sunt supuse unui stres extraordinar, pentru că, pe de o parte, avem prețuri la energie care sunt mult, mult prea mari ca să putem să fim competitivi, iar pe de altă parte toți vin, unii pun taxe vamale, alții încearcă să ne păcălească, având exporturi care vin la un preț de cost care este nerezonabil de scăzut în Uniunea Europeană. Iar toate acestea vin să ne spună un singur lucru: concluziile Consiliului European sunt bune, trebuie să luăm măsuri.
               

                  Perioada de naivitate, de declarații politice și de lipsă de acțiune a trecut. Astăzi trebuie luate aceste măsuri, pentru ca mâine să nu fie prea târziu, ca să salvăm și locurile de muncă și să avem și un viitor pe care noi să-l putem asigura pentru cetățenii Uniunii Europene și pentru Uniunea Europeană.
               

Εμμανουήλ Φράγκος (ECR). – Κυρία Πρόεδρε, οι παράγραφοι 8 και 9 των συμπερασμάτων του Συμβουλίου είναι γελοίες. Όλη η Μέση Ανατολή γελάει με την ευρωπαϊκή αφέλεια και υποκρισία. Η αποδοχή ενός πενταετούς μεταβατικού τζιχαντιστικού καθεστώτος είναι παντελώς γελοία. Όλοι λέμε πως όλα είναι θέμα παιδείας. Πέραν του ότι νιάου νιάου στα κεραμίδια κάνει η γάτα, το καθεστώς al-Julani εφαρμόζει και διδάσκει τον τρομοκρατικό τζιχαντισμό στη Συρία. Τα παιδιά διδάσκονται τη σημασία του να πεθαίνουν για τον Αλλάχ. Η Συρία μετατρέπεται σε καθεστώς Χαμάς, και η κυρία Kallas υπόσχεται 3,4 δισ. EUR άμεσα στο καθεστώς. Κυρία Kallas, χρηματοδοτείτε ένα καθεστώς παραγωγής τρομοκρατών στα νοτιοανατολικά ευρωπαϊκά μας σύνορα, και αυτό θα ήταν γελοίο αν δεν ήταν τόσο φρικώδες. Ζητάμε την ανατροπή του τζιχαντιστικού καθεστώτος άμεσα, ώστε να οδηγηθεί η Συρία σε εκλογές.
               

Ľubica Karvašová (Renew). – Madam President, three years ago, Bucha showed a true face of Putin's brutality. I was there two weeks after Russian troops withdrew, on 8 April 2022, standing at a mass grave together with the Slovak Prime Minister and with President von der Leyen at that time to honour the victims and support Ukraine. But we also delivered the first air defence system, the S-300.
I am a proud Slovak and a European I am still. Today, we prepare to take our defence to a whole new level. Not because we want to, but because there is no prosperity without security.
But some so-called leaders would rather bow to Putin or Trump than work with their European partners. History will remember those who stood up for Europe, for its security and defence and economy, and those who looked away. So, let's lead the way.

Danuše Nerudová (PPE). – Madam President, dear colleagues, do you know how we call a person who forms a relationship with another purely to extract money from them? A gold digger. And in Europe, we all know who that is. Viktor Orbán blackmails us at every single summit. When we want to strengthen our security, he says 'no'. When we want to support a country that has been unjustly invaded, he says 'no'. But when he wants European money for him and his oligarchs, he says 'yes'.
That last leaders' summit shows that Europe is finally taking responsibility for its own defence. We are establishing new defence loans, making national budgets more flexible and ensuring that every unused euro in the EU budget is redirected towards this effort.
But we must go further. It's time to break the taboos. It's time to end Orbán's veto over EU foreign and defence policy. We need a stronger long-term EU budget and a significantly larger European defence fund, and we must be ready to deliver. And we need to say 'no' to this gold digger.

Marta Temido (S&D). – Senhora Presidente, Senhor Presidente do Conselho, Senhor Comissário, quero saudar as conclusões do último Conselho Europeu quanto à centralidade que atribuíram à agenda económica.
               

                  Sabemos bem que o fortalecimento do Pilar Europeu dos Direitos Sociais depende da prosperidade da Europa, que só com mais crescimento podemos criar mais empregos, mais empregos de qualidade, e fortalecer a base industrial e a autonomia europeias. Por isso, apoiamos as três prioridades da nova agenda: simplificar, tornar a energia mais acessível para todos e melhorar a integração nos mercados.
               

                  Lembramos bem os ganhos da agenda da simplificação administrativa em Portugal, mas rejeitamos completamente que se confunda simplificar e desregular. Não podemos esquecer que os mercados têm falhas e que compete ao Estado a sua correção para proteção de todos.
               

                  Como não podemos — ou não queremos — esquecer que a nossa posição no comércio internacional não pode ser conquistada fechando os olhos às violações dos direitos humanos e da ordem multilateral. E quanto a este tema e à voz que a União Europeia precisa de ter na cena internacional, as conclusões do Conselho continuam a ser dececionantes.
               

Anna Zalewska (ECR). – Brak konkurencji, wysokie ceny energii i biurokracja to trzy śmiertelne choroby, które zabijają Unię Europejską. Trzeba znaleźć sposoby i są trzy. Trzeba zmienić trzy dokumenty.
               

                  Po pierwsze dyrektywę, która w 2014 roku zmieniła zasady funkcjonowania rynku ETS. Stał się on rynkiem spekulacyjnym, manipulacyjnym, a tak naprawdę piramidą finansową.
               

                  Oprócz tego trzeba zmienić prawo klimatyczne. Pięć lat temu powstawało prawo klimatyczne i już wtedy wiedzieliśmy, że nie przystaje do rzeczywistości. Rozpoczęła się pandemia. Później przyszła wojna. Świata opisanego w prawie klimatycznym po prostu już wtedy nie było i nie ma.
               

                  I trzeci sposób: trzeba natychmiast zmienić budżet, przemyśleć, w jaki sposób ograniczyć zielone inwestycje (co do których wątpliwości ma już Trybunał Obrachunkowy), by bez pożyczek przygotować się na wypadek wojny, być gotowym, by się bronić.
               

Karlo Ressler (PPE). – Poštovana predsjedavajuća, protekle godine razbile su postmodernističke iluzije. Mir i sigurnost u Europi više se ne uzimaju zdravo za gotovo, a slobodnu trgovinu više se ne vidi kao nekakav čarobni štapić za liberalnu demokraciju. Realpolitika, ponekad i brutalna, tek počinje pisati nova pravila. Istodobno, povijest nas uči da nikada protekcionizam nije ni jednu naciju doveo do blagostanja jer carine štete svima. Svijet se danas mijenja brže nego europski refleksi. Ako želi ostati relevantna, Europa ne smije biti ni naivna, ali isto tako, niti troma. Usprkos poteškoćama, imamo trgovinsku i gospodarsku snagu, potencijal 450 milijuna ljudi. Potrebna nam je sada i korjenita mentalitetna promjena. Manje koreografije, a više konkretnih rezultata i u smanjivanju administrativnog opterećenja, pametnijim ulaganjima u obranu, partnerstvima s trećim zemljama u sprečavanju nezakonitih migracija, kao i zajedničkom tržištu kapitala. Bez izgovora, bez čekanja, bez iluzija.
               

Elio Di Rupo (S&D). – Madame la Présidente, Monsieur le Président, comme vous, je ne veux pas la guerre. Je ne veux pas la guerre, mais tourner le dos aujourd'hui aux réalités que nous vivons serait une grave faute pour chacun d'entre nous et chacun de nos concitoyens.
               

                  Nous devons donc faire ce que vous proposez. L'Europe doit d'urgence prendre son destin en main et, permettez-moi de vous le dire, Monsieur le Président, pas nécessairement à 27. Nous pourrions, dans le domaine de la défense en particulier, trouver d'autres formules. Nous devons, quoi qu'il en soit, avancer pour protéger nos concitoyens. Nous pourrions également trouver d'autres formules dans le domaine économique, avec une stratégie industrielle, dans le domaine des médicaments ou encore dans le domaine de l'énergie. Nous pourrions aussi faire en sorte que, sur le plan social, nos concitoyens vivent mieux, avec des emplois et des revenus. C'est fondamental.
               

                  L'argent que nous allons investir dans la défense doit l'être dans nos territoires, nos entreprises, nos emplois, nos ingénieurs, nos ouvriers et nos chercheurs. Nous ne devons plus dépendre de qui que ce soit. Je pense, Monsieur le Président, Monsieur le Commissaire, que vous en avez la capacité. Nous comptons sur vous.
               

François-Xavier Bellamy (PPE). – Madame la Présidente, aujourd'hui est un jour important pour notre Parlement, puisque ça y est, nous y sommes: nous allons voter ensemble pour suspendre l'effet des directives sur la publication d'informations en matière de durabilité par les entreprises et sur le devoir de vigilance en matière de durabilité, qui constituaient un problème majeur pour nos entreprises et pour leur compétitivité.
               

                  C'est un enjeu essentiel, un enjeu géopolitique essentiel, puisque nos débats de ce matin, Monsieur le Président du Conseil, auront beaucoup été consacrés à cette question de la sécurité de l'Europe. Nous avons parlé de ce qu'il fallait investir pour renforcer la défense de nos pays et nous avons parlé de l'argent public qu'il allait falloir engager pour cela, mais il n'est pas, chers collègues, nous le savons, un seul euro d'argent public qui ne provienne de l'effort des Européens et du travail de nos entreprises. Cela, chers collègues, nous met tous face à nos responsabilités.
               

                  J'entends, par exemple, que nos collègues socialistes pourraient refuser de voter pour suspendre l'effet de ces directives. Écoutez les entreprises, écoutez ce qu'elles vous disent de ce qu'elles connaissent aujourd'hui. Vous voulez mieux défendre l'Europe? Libérez nos entreprises! Vous voulez préserver nos modèles sociaux pour l'avenir? Libérez nos entreprises! Vous voulez protéger l'environnement? Libérez nos entreprises, qui sont celles qui respectent les règles environnementales les plus exigeantes au monde! Vous voulez garantir la capacité de l'Europe à peser dans les nouveaux défis commerciaux qui sont devant nous aujourd'hui? Libérez nos entreprises! Cela, c'est notre message à la Commission européenne.
               

                  Nous avons besoin d'inverser la logique. Depuis trop longtemps, l'Europe s'est abîmée, s'est abîmée elle-même, dans une logique de défiance systématique à l'égard de ceux qui, pourtant, font vivre nos pays, les font prospérer, les font rayonner, sont seuls capables de faire que notre continent gardera, ou retrouvera, la maîtrise de son destin.
               

                  Il n'y a pas d'avenir possible pour l'Europe si nous ne commençons pas d'abord par donner à nos entreprises la capacité d'agir, de travailler, de créer de la valeur et de l'emploi dans nos pays. Cela, c'est notre message, c'est celui de toute notre campagne et c'est celui de l'action qui s'engage aujourd'hui.
               

Aodhán Ó Ríordáin (S&D). – Madam President, the 1916 Proclamation of the Irish Republic hailed support from our exiled children in America and our gallant allies in Europe. We never thought we would have to choose between them, but we do.
We don't know what tariffs may come this week. Workers and businesses in Ireland potentially face the worst economic shock since the crash of 2008. But Europe must stand united.
For too long, Ireland's relationship with the US has been viewed through a lens of nostalgia. But we cannot cling to an administration with such contempt for our values. Ireland's membership of this family of nations has lifted us from the dark ages and moved us forward. Trump wants to drag us back to division, protectionism and hateful nationalism. Ireland is not between Europe and America. We are Europe.
We must face down Trump's America. The US is choking on the vulgarity of what its political system has produced. History demands that Europe resists.

Brando Benifei (S&D). – Signora Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, il benessere dell'Europa è messo duramente a rischio di fronte ai dazi americani che saranno annunciati domani; questo tema è ovviamente al centro del dibattito fra noi e i nostri governi.
               

                  Dobbiamo rispondere subito in maniera coesa, come Unione europea, e dobbiamo farlo in modo netto e senza tentennamenti, perché solo così si potrà sedere al tavolo negoziale alla pari e scongiurare un danno economico incalcolabile per le nostre imprese, ma anche per quelle americane.
               

                  Dobbiamo preparare misure tariffarie come i dazi di risposta e, se sarà necessario, anche non tariffarie, per esempio rafforzando le regole per l'acquisto di beni europei in via prioritaria in alcuni ambiti.
               

                  Un'escalation di conflitti commerciali con l'America non è interesse di nessuno e dobbiamo negoziare ma, per farlo, serve usare il linguaggio della forza. Lo dico anche a Giorgia Meloni, che invoca la calma e si cimenta in una ridicola giustificazione degli attacchi del vicepresidente Vance agli europei. Non è questa la strada.
               

                  Al governo italiano e alla destra europea dico chiaramente che non c'è più tempo da perdere con divisioni e atteggiamenti confusi, serve difendere gli interessi dei nostri cittadini!
               

Catch-the-eye procedure


Dariusz Joński (PPE). – Pani Przewodnicząca! Panie Komisarzu! Dużo dzisiaj na tej sali i w tej kadencji na temat konkurencyjności gospodarki i taniej energii w tym zmieniającym się świecie. I bardzo dobrze. Natomiast popatrzmy, w Stanach Zjednoczonych odchodzą opłaty od porozumień paryskich. Nowy premier Kanady odchodzi od opłat klimatycznych, co będzie skutkowało tym, że ludzie będą mniej płacili za paliwo, choć jednocześnie utrzymują opłaty dla największych emitentów przemysłowych.
               

                  Mówię o tym w kontekście ETSu. Europejskie firmy nie są w stanie w tej chwili sprostać tym zbyt ambitnym celom, a jeszcze szykowany jest ETS2 w 2027 roku. Chcę powiedzieć bardzo wyraźnie, że oprócz zadbania o klimat musimy zadbać o konkurencyjność gospodarki. To jest ten czas, kiedy po prostu musimy to zrobić, bo wołają nas o pomoc i nie możemy być głusi.
               

Vytenis Povilas Andriukaitis (S&D). – Gerbiama Pirmininke, gerbiamas pirmininke Antonio Costa, gerbiamas Komisijos nary Marošai Šefčovičiau. Norėčiau padėkoti už išvadas, pasakyti, kad jos iš tiesų nukreipia teisinga kryptimi. Bet ar galime duoti pažadą, kad šalys narės įgyvendins bankinę sąjungą, įgyvendins kapitalo rinkų sąjungą ir užbaigs vienijimąsi vieningos rinkos per dvejus metus? Ar galime pasakyti, kad daugiametė finansinė perspektyva bus aptarta ir Europos Sąjungos biudžetas bus padidintas dviem procentais nuo dabartinio vieno procento BVP ir mes patvirtinsime didesnį sąrašą nuo šiol nuosavųjų išteklių? Europos Sąjungos biudžetas turi būti autonominis, stiprus, galintis finansuoti visus projektus, įskaitant gynybą ir visus kitus. Ir Ukrainos parama taip pat turi būti ne nulinė, kaip dabar yra, bet bent visos šalys vienodai į tai įdėtų pastangas.
               

Anna Maria Cisint (PfE). – Signora Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, sono rimasta allibita nel sentire, prima, la Presidente von der Leyen affermare che le aziende sono cresciute in questi anni. C'è da chiedersi in quale realtà vivete.
               

                  Questa maggioranza fa finta di non accorgersi che ha devastato l'Europa, mandando sul lastrico migliaia di lavoratori nel settore della pesca, dell'agricoltura, dell'automotive, nel settore marittimo, e tutto nel nome di un folle, ideologico Green Deal che non volete modificare.
               

                  E ora, con la stessa falsa urgenza, inventate un nuovo spauracchio, con tanto di video con ridicole carte da gioco e accendino. Il pericolo imminente della guerra nei nostri paesi: inventato.
               

                  Per anni ci avete detto che non si poteva fare debito ma, improvvisamente, per salvare la Germania dalla tragedia che lei stessa ha creato, ora si può.
               

                  Allora, se si può, quei soldi devono andare alla sanità; devono andare alla scuola, al lavoro, all'economia reale, non a queste strategie ideologiche fallimentari!
               

                  Tre anni di zero assoluto con l'Ucraina: anche noi vogliamo un esercito forte, però voi non siete più credibili. E perché? Perché avete portato al fallimento ogni cosa toccata.
               

Sebastian Tynkkynen (ECR). – Madam President, I like how the tone of Europe is changing at the moment. Europe will not survive if we do not strengthen our security and competitiveness.
I think most European leaders are starting to realise this. Good for Europe.
But when I start to read how European leaders handle climate and energy policy, my positive feelings often disappear. While people are calling for lower living costs and less regulation, Europe is still hanging on to the unrealistic green ideology.
Let's face it, our green goals from the past are not compatible with our current priorities. Overly strict green policies are the very reason European companies and households have been struggling.
To my leftist and green colleagues, you had your time and it didn't work out. Now it's time to do things differently.

João Oliveira (The Left). – Senhora Presidente, Senhora von der Leyen, Senhor António Costa, quando nos falam da reunião do Conselho Europeu, o eco que se ouve neste Parlamento é guerra, guerra, guerra, guerra.
               

                  O plano da União Europeia é fazer da guerra o motor da economia e um negócio tão bilionário que nunca mais tenha fim.
               

                  O futuro não se constrói nem com guerra, nem com militarismo, nem com mais corrida às armas. Constrói-se com soluções de paz e de segurança coletiva que implicam compromisso político e ação diplomática.
               

                  O futuro não se constrói com os privilégios dos grupos económicos e das multinacionais, do Pacote Omnibus, do offshore legal federal do 28.o regime jurídico ou do ataque aos sistemas públicos da Segurança Social, que também consta das conclusões do Conselho.
               

                  O futuro constrói-se com o aprofundamento dos direitos dos trabalhadores, com o apoio às micro, pequenas e médias empresas, agricultores e pescadores, com o desenvolvimento da produção industrial para resolver os problemas sociais.
               

                  Nesta reunião do Conselho Europeu, encontraram 800 mil milhões de euros para acrescentar aos gastos milionários da União Europeia. Não encontraram um cêntimo para a habitação, para a saúde, para a educação ou para os transportes.
               

                  O que estão a fazer é destruir o presente dos povos e ameaçar o futuro das novas gerações.
               

Siegbert Frank Droese (ESN). – Frau Präsidentin! Schade, dass Frau von der Leyen bei der ersten kritischen Anmerkung von meinem Kollegen zu ihrer schändlichen Politik hier aus dem Parlament geflüchtet ist, aber vielleicht übt sie schon für später. Von der Leyen will nun 800 Milliarden in die Aufrüstung der EU stecken. Dabei möchte ich fragen: Wie viel Euro werden am Ende davon in ihrer Tasche landen? Denn schließlich wird sie ja wegen Korruption gejagt.
               

                  Wir müssen Bürokratie und Korruption in der EU bekämpfen; die USA zeigen uns, wie es geht – mit DOGE. Solange das nicht erfolgt, können wir weitere Billionen und Milliarden an Euro der europäischen Steuerzahler in das System kippen, ohne sichtbare Erfolge. Daher hoffe ich als erstes, dass die Europäer Frau von der Leyen aus ihrem Amt vertreiben, und ich hoffe auf Justitia, dass Frau von der Leyen demnächst eine Fußfessel tragen muss.
               

Lukas Sieper (NI). – Madam President, dear people of Europe, at its March meeting, the European Council sent an important signal: support for Ukraine, a clear path for Moldova and Georgia, and a renewed commitment to enlargement as a pillar of peace and stability. That matters, especially in a world where democracies are under pressure.
But what shocks me is how some colleagues here have used this very debate – misused it – to discredit democratic institutions all around Europe: to attack the Romanian Constitutional Court and the Romanian electoral authorities; to question the legitimacy of the French judiciary, even after Marine Le Pen was found guilty in front of a French criminal court; and to suggest that in Germany, a possible ban for the AfD would be an act of political will, rather than a legal proceeding led by the Federal Constitutional Court, which is, by the Constitution, the only institution with that competence.
That irony is breathtaking, and we, the democrats, have to fight back.

Juan Fernando López Aguilar (S&D). – Señora presidenta, señor presidente Costa, señor comisario Šefčovič, a menudo las conclusiones del Consejo de mayor utilidad son aquellas que no han sido puestas por escrito pero pueden ser leídas entre líneas.
               

                  La primera, la insostenible unanimidad en las decisiones de política exterior, que ha obligado a veintiséis Estados miembros a formar una coalición de voluntarios para excluir de nuevo a una Hungría cuyo Gobierno es cada vez más incompatible no solamente con sus responsabilidades como socio de la Unión sino hasta con la Carta de los Derechos Fundamentales de la Unión Europea —como discutiremos en otro punto de este mismo Pleno—.
               

                  La segunda, que cuando se subraya la importancia de la dimensión exterior de la política migratoria siempre se insiste en los retornos y en la instrumentalización, pero nunca lo bastante en que solo será posible negociar con los países de los que provienen las personas desesperadas si existe además una arquitectura diplomática, con acuerdos que sean mutuamente interesantes, además de una política común de visados que incluya los visados humanitarios y vías legales y seguras.
               

                  Y, la tercera, cuando se habla de multilateralismo con normas hay que insistir en que la Unión Europea tiene que tener una estrategia común de reforma del sistema de las Naciones Unidas, cada vez más obsoleto, y, por lo menos, una representación consonante en el Consejo de Seguridad con los dos miembros de que dispone Europa en el Consejo de Seguridad.
               

Bruno Gonçalves (S&D). – Senhora Presidente, Caro Presidente do Conselho, Caro Comissário, em tempos de medo, tenhamos esperança. E sobre as conclusões do Conselho devo dizer que, desde a chegada de Donald Trump, a palavra que mais ouvimos foi a palavra crise. E tivessem os gregos sabido que a palavra crise — krisis — seria empregada com mais vontade para o perigo e com menos esperança da vontade, talvez não a tivessem empregado da mesma forma.
               

                  E é sobre esse otimismo, que não sei se é ou não irritante, que nós devemos olhar para o futuro. O futuro da União Europeia é um futuro de união quando falamos do mercado para a prosperidade. O futuro da União Europeia não é da indústria da guerra, nem da defesa, é da indústria da paz, porque só ela salva os povos e lhes devolve segurança.
               

                  Mas é também um futuro de realismo. E aqui, nas poucas linhas que encontramos do Conselho para a prosperidade, mas também para a sustentabilidade, nós precisamos de garantir que um mundo mais justo é um em que aqueles que podem mais também contribuem com recursos próprios para que a União se possa desenvolver.
               

                  Acabando com Thomas Jefferson, devo dizer: os tempos mudam, as constituições devem mudar com eles. O que não pode mudar é a nossa forma de olhar para a vontade dos povos e, com ela, avançar.
               

Seán Kelly (PPE). – A Uachtaráin, I think both President Costa and President Ursula emphasised how disenchanted we are with the actions of the Trump Administration in picking basically on their friends and allies, but also, rightly so, said we have a strong plan to counter, if necessary, and wisely not implementing that plan immediately, but allowing for a few weeks to discuss matters with the US authorities, which makes sense. That's the way mature people do business.
Also, I was very encouraged to hear both of them speak about new trade opportunities. As a member of the trade committee for many years, we do have opportunities to grow free trade agreements with India, Indonesia, Australia and many more, and that is sensible to diversify supplies.
Finally, if we are now forced, almost, to develop the single market more and complete the capital markets union, then we can say maybe that Donald Trump actually has done us a favour by kick-starting action, which we should have carried out long ago.

(End of catch-the-eye procedure)


Maroš Šefčovič,
Member of the Commission. – Madam President, Mr President of the European Council, honourable Members, first and foremost, thank you very much for the debate and all your interventions.
Let me first address the key questions related to the global trade, which have been very much present in your statements. As we all know, the European Union is the biggest trader on this planet. But I would like to underline that this is not an aim in itself. So let's just recall that almost half of the European GDP and more than 30 million jobs depends on trade, not only for exports or imports, but also for getting the right components, ingredients and critical raw materials to make sure that our industry, our economy, our SMEs can produce, manufacture and generate value added here in Europe. Therefore, in this unstable world, we must work hard to secure new market access and necessary supply for our companies.
Since December, we've been very much focused on this and we delivered on Mercosur, Mexico and Switzerland. We concluded a digital trade agreement with South Korea just two weeks ago, and we are working very hard to advance and conclude our free trade negotiations with Indonesia, Malaysia, Thailand and Philippines. And we welcome renewed interest for FTA negotiations from Gulf countries. Tomorrow we will have another round of negotiations with my partner with the Trade Minister of India, Piyush Goyal, to do our utmost to accelerate our talks and to conclude our agreement this year, as proposed by European and Indian leaders.
To all those who still doubt the importance of free-trade agreements, I would just suggest to compare how our trade patterns looked before and after these FTAs entered into force. And I can reassure you that all of them led to increase of trade, reduction of barriers, new opportunities for our businesses. They simply delivered for European people.
The European Union, as you know, is a strong champion of multilateralism. We are strong supporters of free and fair trade, and therefore we are naturally concerned about the current global trade debate about tendencies to erect new tariff walls. And I can assure you that, clearly, a negotiated solution is a strong preference for European Union. Therefore, we are in close contact with our American partners and we are pushing for the solution. But we are, of course, very clear that if necessary, we also know how to build strong defence for our economy. And therefore, I really wholeheartedly appreciate and would thank to all of you honourable Members who support our multifaceted strategy in these very difficult times.
Madam Vedrenne, Mr Andriukaitis, Mr Kelly, just a few moments ago, Madam Zovko and leaders of most of the political groups have been very clear on that and I very much appreciate it. I also heard loud and clear your calls to be in close touch with the industries of Europe which are or will be most impacted by current global trade instability. We hear you loud and clear and will definitely do so. We will reach out and will be working very closely with them.
To conclude, Madam President, I also would like to thank all of the honourable Members who supported this renewed focus on unchaining the single market. I'm sure that Executive Vice-President Séjourné will come with concrete and bold proposals very soon, and we are already looking forward to our close cooperation on this very important issue. I think that we would all agree that it's high time to complete what Jacques Delors started.

António Costa,
président en exercice du Conseil. – Madame la Présidente, Monsieur le Commissaire, Madame la Haute Représentante, chers membres du Parlement européen, tout d'abord M. Gerbrandy a raison: il y a urgence. L'urgence climatique n'a pas disparu, et donc il nous faut tenir sur nos objectifs: si on veut renforcer notre compétitivité, il faut accélérer la transition énergétique, parce que ce n'est que grâce à la transition énergétique que nous pourrons réduire d'une façon durable les coûts de l'énergie et offrir un cadre plus compétitif pour nos entreprises.
               

                  Nous le savons, la bureaucratie ne sauve pas la planète. La bureaucratie ne fait qu'ajouter des difficultés, des barrières et des charges inutiles pour les citoyens et pour les entreprises. Par contre, il nous faut renforcer le cercle vertueux de l'économie verte pour pouvoir renforcer la recherche, les compétences, l'investissement, les emplois de qualité et notre compétitivité. Si l'on veut renforcer et développer notre souveraineté énergétique, il nous faut intensifier le mix des renouvelables. On ne peut pas multiplier les barrières administratives dès lors que l'on souhaite déployer des éoliennes ou des panneaux solaires.
               

                  Pour être franc, si l'on souhaite faire cesser la déforestation, combattre l'exploitation, l'esclavage et le travail des enfants, il est plus efficace de multiplier les accords de commerce que de démultiplier des rapports tout à fait inutiles qui étouffent la compétitivité de nos petites et moyennes entreprises.
               

                  La politique n'est donc pas seulement un dialogue entre les politiques, elle est surtout un dialogue avec les citoyens, les entreprises, la société. Il nous faut écouter la société. Si l'on veut que le pacte vert perdure, il faut le dépolluer de la bureaucratie inutile. Ça, c'est ce qu'on doit faire si on veut arriver à atteindre notre objectif de réduction de 55 % de nos émissions carbone d'ici 2030 et assurer la neutralité en carbone pour 2050. Le Conseil européen soutient donc fermement les propositions de la Commission visant à éliminer la bureaucratie et à simplifier nos règles.
               

                  L'Union européenne est depuis le début un projet de paix. Toutefois, la paix sans défense est une illusion. Il nous faut donc renforcer notre défense. Aujourd'hui, il n'y a plus de désaccord et il ne fait a plus de doute que, entre ceux qui estimaient qu'il faudrait renforcer le pilier européen et ceux qui voyaient dans ce renforcement du pilier européen une façon de nous distancier vis-à-vis des États-Unis, il n'y a plus de contradiction.
               

                  Je crois qu'il est clair pour tous que, maintenant, la meilleure façon de défendre notre relation transatlantique, c'est d'investir plus dans notre propre défense, ce qui veut dire non seulement investir plus, mais investir mieux, ensemble et dans nos propres capacités. À ce titre, il est faux d'opposer l'investissement dans la défense à l'investissement dans la protection et le développement de notre modèle social. Au contraire, si l'on veut que notre société se mobilise pour nous défendre, il faut protéger notre modèle social. C'est pour cela qu'il est très important que la Commission ait déjà pu présenter des propositions visant à gérer le pacte de stabilité de manière plus intelligente et d'ajouter de nouvelles ressources grâce au programme SAFE.
               

                  Le débat sur ces questions est évidemment loin d'être clos, et nous devons encore réfléchir sur le livre blanc afin de pouvoir prendre de nouvelles décisions en juin, en juillet, et dans les mois ultérieurs, pour qu'on puisse effectivement investir mieux et ensemble.
               

                  Senhora Presidente, gostava de ser claro. Investir na defesa não é investir só nas grandes empresas. Investir na nossa defesa é um contributo importante para a reindustrialização da Europa e em toda a sua cadeia de valor, mobilizando também as pequenas e médias empresas, não só nos grandes Estados-Membros, mas em todos os países.
               

                  E é um conceito que é absolutamente fundamental começarmos a assumir. A coesão é um objetivo tão importante que, para além de uma política de coesão, nós precisamos de ter a coesão em todas as políticas, e também na política de defesa, e também na política industrial.
               

                  No fundo, é aquilo que temos também na indústria automóvel. É verdade que as marcas são alemãs, francesas, italianas, espanholas, mas a indústria automóvel não é francesa, italiana, alemã e espanhola. É uma indústria verdadeiramente europeia e não há uma só viatura que circule na Europa que não seja produzida em vários países europeus e que não tenha componentes produzidos em múltiplos países europeus.
               

                  E aquilo que temos de fazer com a indústria da defesa é aquilo que fizemos também com a indústria automóvel: a capacidade de integrar e de mobilizar na cadeia de valor todas essas pequenas e médias empresas e, com isso, desenvolver as nossas economias, criar empregos de maior qualidade, com salários mais justos, que permitam continuar a progredir e a prosperar.
               

                  Enfin, un mot sur l'immigration. Oui, c'est vrai: pour mieux appréhender ces phénomènes humains ainis que les causes profondes de la migration, il nous faut agir à l'extérieur. Cela passe peut-être, sûrement, par le retour de ceux qui sont illégalement en Europe. Mais il faut surtout comprendre la situation de celles et ceux qui sont obligés de quitter leur maison, leur famille et leur pays, en quête de nouvelles chances, d'une nouvelle vie. Pour cela, nous devons œuvrer en faveur de la paix et promouvoir les droits de l'homme et le développement durable, non seulement à travers l'aide humanitaire, mais aussi grâce à des accords d'échange, afin de garantir un commerce juste entre les uns et les autres.
               

                  Il s'agit là d'une manière puissante de contribuer au développement des pays de départ des migrants. Je suis convaincu que si les pays de départ voient leur niveau de développement croître, il y aura moins de migrations. C'est de cette manière que l'on doit regarder le monde, et c'est pour cela que vous avez raison: il convient d'investir beaucoup dans la réforme du système multilatéral. Nous devons renforcer et réformer les institutions financières internationales. Nous devons contribuer concrètement au développement durable dans le monde entier afin de régler la question des migrations.
               

                  La meilleure façon de combattre l'immigration illégale passera toujours par la mise en place des canaux légaux de migration. Sans quoi nous aurons beau faire des discours, nous ne résoudrons jamais les problèmes de manière efficace. Nos citoyens ne nous demandent pas des discours, mais des solutions effectives.
               

President. – The debate is closed and will go straight to the next one.


Written Statements (Rule 178)



Urmas Paet (Renew),
kirjalikult. – Euroopa peab end kokku võtma ja adekvaatselt iseenda kaitsesse panustama. On inimlik hakata tegutsema alles siis, kui mingi suur jama juba käes on, kuid Euroopa tervikuna peab olema targem ja ettenägelikum ning mitte lihtsalt ootama uut katastroofi. Euroopa on võimeline palju rohkemaks. Selleks aga peavad diplomaatia, kaitsevõime areng, arengukoostöö ja rahvusvaheline kaubandus käima ühte jalga. Lõpuks tuleks loobuda ühehäälsusest välis- ja julgeolekupoliitika otsuste tegemisel, sest see kriisi ajal ei toimi. Eriti mis puudutab näiteks inimõigusi ja sanktsioone. Üles tuleb ehitada tugevad ja toimivad suhted meie liitlastega Suurbritanniast ja Norrast Jaapani, Korea ja Kanadani. Ebaausate rünnakute alla sattunud liikmesriike, nagu praegu Taani, tuleb ühemõtteliselt toetada. Euroopa on potentsiaalselt maailma tugevaim jõud ja seejuures heatahtlik tugevaim jõud. See potentsiaal tuleb lõpuks realiseerida. USA muutunud suhtumine Venemaa agressioonisõtta on vägagi problemaatiline. Katsed nõuda Ukraina liidritelt alistumist agressorriigile Venemaale üksnes nn rahuleppe saavutamise nimel ei ole aktsepteeritavad. Kui saavutatakse rahukokkulepe, mis austab Ukraina sõltumatust, suveräänsust ja territoriaalset terviklikkust, peavad sellega kaasnema Ukraina jaoks kindlad ja usaldusväärsed julgeolekutagatised, mis aitaksid hoida tulevikus ära Venemaa agressiooni.
               

Bogdan Rzońca (ECR),
na piśmie. – W konkluzjach Rady Europejskiej z 20 marca słusznie podkreślono znaczenie odbudowy konkurencyjności gospodarki europejskiej. To krok we właściwym kierunku, ale działania muszą być szybkie, zdecydowane i konkretne. Europa nie może dłużej pozwalać sobie na regulacyjną nadaktywność, która dławi przedsiębiorczość i inwestycje. Zielony Ład, choć powstał z myślą o przyszłości, w obecnym kształcie stał się ciężarem, nie tylko dla przemysłu, ale i dla obywateli. Wysokie ceny energii, skomplikowane procedury i ogromne koszty transformacji osłabiły naszą pozycję wobec globalnej konkurencji. Potrzebujemy nie kolejnych biurokratycznych rozwiązań, ale prostoty, przewidywalności i przestrzeni do działania. Uproszczenie prawa, racjonalizacja celów klimatycznych i ograniczenie obciążeń administracyjnych to warunki niezbędne, by przywrócić Europie siłę gospodarczą. Bez tego nie będzie ani dobrobytu, ani bezpieczeństwa. Wzywam Komisję i państwa członkowskie do odwagi w rewizji dotychczasowego kursu. Europa potrzebuje pragmatyzmu, a nie ideologii. Tylko wtedy będzie mogła konkurować i rozwijać się w sposób zrównoważony i sprawiedliwy.
               
3.   Russia's war crimes in Ukraine: standing with Ukraine and upholding justice (debate)

President. – The next item is the debate on the statement by the Vice-President of the Commission / High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy on Russia's war crimes in Ukraine: standing with Ukraine and upholding justice (2025/2635(RSP)).
I would like to inform members that there will be only one round of political group speakers for this debate. Therefore, as per usual, there is no catch the eye procedure and no blue cards will be accepted.

Kaja Kallas,
Vice-President of the Commission / High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy. – Madam President, honourable Members of the European Parliament, three years ago yesterday, videos and photos began to emerge showing the bodies of civilians scattered around Yablunska Street in the town of Bucha, Ukraine. Children fleeing with their families. Locals shopping for groceries. People trying to get back home on their bicycles.
It was once the case from Bosnia to Sri Lanka, that a single photo or video could expose wartime atrocities in Bucha. The evidence is overwhelming, from photos to phone records and decoded call signs used by commanders of Russian radio channels. There is no denying it. We know exactly who the perpetrators are. With the technology we have at our fingertips today, impunity for war crimes is frankly impossible, so long as we put the work in it. And that is what we must do, because the number of possible crimes committed in this war is simply beyond belief.
The forcible transfer and deportation of Ukrainian children is one of the gravest crimes committed, an extreme violation of human rights. But the impact on children at home in Ukraine is also devastating. According to Save the Children, approximately 4 million school-aged children have experienced educational interruptions since the full scale war began. Close to 4000 education institutions have been damaged. More than 10 % of the country's education infrastructure has been completely destroyed. Attacks on health facilities have endangered the lives of children, including those with chronic diseases.
Birthrates in Ukraine have dropped by 30 % during this war. In fact, fertility rates in Ukraine are now amongst the lowest in the world. Russia is destroying Ukraine's present while denying the country its future. The European Union is part of the International Coalition for the return of the Ukrainian Children. We will do all we can to return the children to their families in Ukraine.
The EU has also imposed sanctions on more than 70 individuals responsible for the deportation and forced transfer of children, as well as the re-education and militarisation of Ukrainian children.
Russia's campaign against human life and dignity truly knows no limits. We also see this in the reports of enforced disappearances, torture, extrajudicial executions, sexual violence against civilian detainees and prisoners of war by Russian armed forces in occupied territories.
The EU will continue raising the cases at every opportunity, wherever we can, because no civilian detainee can be forgotten. We must also continue to advocate for the protection of prisoners of war, and call on Russia to uphold its long-standing international commitments under international humanitarian law. A just, comprehensive and lasting peace, based on the UN Charter and the international law, must include the exchange of prisoners of war and release of civilian detainees, along with the return of forcibly transferred and deported Ukrainian children. Every returnee must be fully accounted for and integrated back to the Ukrainian society.
Honourable Members, the EU has supported Ukraine's efforts on accountability and justice from day one, from evidence collection through the case-building prosecution, preparing claims and reparations for victims. The EU is a firm supporter of the International Criminal Court, which has issued six arrest warrants, including President Putin, Russia's Commissioner for children's rights, Maria Lvova-Belova, former Russian defence minister and current secretary of the Security Council of the Russian Federation, Sergei Shoigu and the general chief of staff, Valery Gerasimov.
Let us remember that the arrest warrants are only issued after gathering the required evidence. Most criminal cases, around 170 000, have been opened now and will be investigated and prosecuted by Ukrainian authorities. This is why the European Union is also supporting the Prosecutor General's Office of Ukraine. We are strengthening its capacity to investigate and prosecute international crimes committed in Ukraine, including through civilian European Union advisory mission. And for the specific crime of aggression, the EU is leading the work on the establishment of a special tribunal. Legal experts recently finalised the technical negotiations for the tribunal. The Council of Europe will soon start the process for political consideration of the documents to establish the tribunal, including its draft statute.
The EU also supports the register of damages established under the auspices of the Council of Europe, and we are actively working with international partners to set up a Claims Commission.
Honourable Members, with every life destroyed in Russia's war against Ukraine, there is a family close by, a family that lives on in pain, searching for a peace of mind. When this war is over and one day it will be, recovery will come not from only a reconstruction of the buildings in Bucha, Bryanca, Bakhmut, Chasiv Yar, Donetsk or Mariupol, it will also come in the pursuit of justice and accountability for the heinous crimes committed by Russia, because only justice will give every Ukrainian family the peace of mind, they need to move on and rebuild their lives.

Sandra Kalniete,
PPE grupas vārdā. – Cienītā priekšsēdētāja, kolēģi! Kopš Krievijas agresijas sākuma 2022. gadā Ukrainas prokuratūra ir reģistrējusi vairāk nekā 150 000 kara noziegumu. Krievijas armija īsteno brutālu koloniālu karu, grauj pilsētas, skolas, slimnīcas, nogalina civiliedzīvotājus, soda ar nāvi karagūstekņus. Iekarotāji spīdzina un izvaro pieaugušos un bērnus.
               

                  Kara noziegumi, ko Krievija ir pastrādājusi pret Ukrainas bērniem, ir neizsakāmi cietsirdīgi. Vairāk nekā 5 miljoni bērnu ir devušies bēgļu gaitās. Nogalināti ir 669 un ievainoti 1854 bērni. Vairāk nekā 20 000 ir deportēti. Kremlis lielākos bērnus ievieto pāraudzināšanas nometnēs un piespiedu kārtā reģistrē Krievijas pilsonībā. Mazākos ar mainītu identitāti nodod adopcijai.
               

                  Ukraiņiem ir zināmi kara noziedznieku vārdi, un starptautiskās sabiedrības pienākums ir saukt vainīgos pie atbildības. Putinam un viņa rokaspuišiem ir jāapzinās, ka kara noziegumiem nav noilguma. Nebūsim naivi! Putina mērķis ir iznīcināt Ukrainas valsti un ukraiņu tautas identitāti, sagrābt tās teritoriju un resursus, un tas nav mainījies. Krievija turpina bombardēt Ukrainas pilsētas un nogalināt civiliedzīvotājus. Jaunā 160 000 mobilizācijas pavēle apliecina, ka Kremlim miers nav vajadzīgs, tā ir izlikšanās. Miers ir vajadzīgs mums, un visvairāk taisnīgs miers ir vajadzīgs Ukrainai.
               

                  Mums ir jānodrošina, lai miera līgums garantē Ukrainas suverenitāti, teritoriālo vienotību un brīvību izvēlēties savu nākotni. Līgumam jānodrošina, ka Krievija vairs nespēj atsākt agresiju.
               

Thijs Reuten,
on behalf of the S&D Group. – Madam President, High Representative, colleagues, on behalf of the S&D Group, I thank you, High Representative, for your efforts to protect Ukraine's interests, which align with Europe's security and shared destiny.
We have a shared common concern: the current US-led push for a ceasefire tramples upon vital principles on the international rules-based order and on Ukraine's independence, sovereignty and territorial integrity. Accountability for Russian crimes should be central to such discussions. Yet, this is missing from the US statements.
Europe understands that without truth and justice – you just said it – there is a risk of history repeating itself. No justice means no lasting peace and it will haunt us. We must expedite the tribunal for the crime of aggression, support the ICC and its investigations, and back all efforts to preserve evidence and prosecute war crimes.
But for this to work in practice, we circle back to issues this Parliament has raised before. How can we ensure full EU involvement to safeguard such principles?
And additionally, I'd like to hear your stance on proposals to enhance both the EU's relevance and Ukraine's negotiating strength, expanding the sanctions, including on fertilisers, lowering the oil price cap and price and import caps on LNG, strengthening measures against sanction circumvention, especially shadow fleet activity, ensuring complete alignment between the existing and new US, UK and EU sanctions, realising equitable Member State spending to support Ukraine, including rapid and crucial military aid, and last but not least, confiscate the frozen assets and let Ukraine use them.
Dear High Representative, no peace without justice and no peace without decisive European strength and solidarity for Ukraine.

Anders Vistisen,
on behalf of the PfE Group. – Madam President, there is not any real doubt that Russia have committed atrocities, war crimes and crimes against humanity during their occupation of Ukraine. The big question for this debate should then be, how do we hold them responsible for that? And the fact of the matter, when we look throughout history, is that we have not been able to prosecute war crimes unless there has been a military victory ahead of it. Lots of war criminals all around the world have gotten away with atrocities simply because conflicts have ended with their victory or with a frozen conflict of sorts.
So, therefore, I think it's all very good that we can sit in this room, debate the issue, and agree that it would be good if all war criminals around the world were captured and kept responsible for their actions. but I think for this to matter for the Ukrainians on the ground, we should instead use our time debating how we are going to end up in a situation where that is possible. And at the moment, I don't see any realistic prospects of Ukraine invading Moscow. And in that sense, it becomes a little bit redundant to have this debate. So let's focus on helping Ukraine with preserving what they have instead of having lofty debates that will lead nowhere.

Michał Dworczyk,
w imieniu grupy ECR. – Pani Przewodnicząca! Pani Komisarz! Sposób, w jaki traktowani są przebywający w niewoli Ukraińscy jeńcy wojenni i cywile, którzy bezprawnie pozbawieni zostali wolności i znajdują się w rosyjskich więzieniach lub może bardziej katowniach, jest bez wątpienia zbrodnią wojenną oraz zbrodnią przeciw ludzkości.
               

                  O znacznym wzroście przypadków tortur, gwałtów i egzekucji oraz innych rosyjskich zbrodni informuje opublikowane w tym miesiącu sprawozdanie Wysokiego Komisarza Narodów Zjednoczonych do spraw Praw Człowieka. Rosyjskie zbrodnie dotykają bez wyjątku wszystkie grupy społeczne zwykłych obywateli, bez względu na wiek i płeć, przedstawicieli władzy, artystów i dziennikarzy. Niestety, rosyjskie bestialstwo dotyka również ukraińskie dzieci, które uprowadzane są i wywożone w głąb Rosji.
               

                  Jako Parlament Europejski nie możemy przejść wobec tych informacji zdawkowo, poprzestając tylko na pojedynczych wystąpieniach. Uważam, że temat jest tak ważny, iż powinien stać się przedmiotem szerokiej debaty oraz przyjęcia stosownej rezolucji. Dlatego w imieniu ECR zwracam się z apelem o włączenie go do agendy majowej sesji Parlamentu Europejskiego.
               

Petras Auštrevičius,
on behalf of the Renew Group. – Madam President, Madam High Representative, dear colleagues, the open war against sovereign Ukraine and Ukrainians, conceived and declared by the Russian leadership and waged by the Russian military, is lasting 1133 days.
During this long nightmare, the crime of aggression and war crimes have taken the most brutal forms, from the deportation of civilians and theft of children, to the torture and rape of civilians, the execution of prisoners of war, the destruction of Ukraine's civil infrastructure, and other incomprehensible crimes. Bucha itself became a symbol of infinite cruelty.
We must say firmly that Russia will not escape a new Nuremberg Tribunal. This applies equally to the Russian political leadership, which makes the decisions, and to the militaries, which carry out the criminal acts. The special tribunal must take place regardless of any ceasefire or other negotiations. Impunity must be a thing of the past.
I hope the European Union will take a strong stance and will follow the principle that we have to name and punish the perpetrators, protect the interests of victims and ensure a victory for humanity.

Villy Søvndal,
for Verts/ALE-Gruppen. – Fru formand! Ifølge FN har over 12 300 civile, heraf 650 børn, mistet livet, og over 40 000 er blevet såret. Det er kun tal, kun statistik, og de repræsenterer sønderrevede familier, bristede drømme og en generation præget af traumer. Hvad, der sker i Ukraine, er en forfærdelig forbrydelse begået af et aggressivt og uansvarligt russisk regime med en magtsyg Vladimir Putin.
               

                  Hver dag, hver time bliver ukrainske civile ofre for Putins aggressive ambitioner. Ruslands bomber og missiler rammer ikke kun militære mål, men hospitaler, skoler og boliger, der nu ligger i ruiner. Det er en skændsel for os alle sammen, at det her får lov til at ske. Udover de civile tab sker der frygtelige forbrydelser begået af russiske soldater på ukrainsk jord. Vilkårlige henrettelser, tortur, seksuelle overgreb, bortførelse af børn – det er ikke isolerede hændelser, det er en systematisk kampagne af terror rettet mod den ukrainske befolkning.
               

                  Det er krigsforbrydelser af enorme dimensioner, og vi skal kræve, at det ophører. Derfor til jer Kommission og kolleger: Lad os gennemføre yderligere skridt, der svækker Rusland og styrker Ukraines selvstændighed og deres grænser. Vi kommer til at spille en større rolle i Ukraine, både for at sikre Ukraine, men også for at sende klar besked til Putin og hans kriminelle regime. Europa ser, hvad der sker. Europa ved, hvad der sker, og vi vil ikke lade det gå ustraffet hen.
               

Martin Schirdewan,
im Namen der Fraktion The Left. – Frau Präsidentin! Hohe Repräsentantin Kallas, die Weltpolitik bewegt sich rasant und gibt uns kaum eine Atempause, und da wäre es durchaus sehr willkommen gewesen, Sie hätten in den letzten Monaten hier auch die eine oder andere Erklärung vor dem Europäischen Parlament gemacht.
               

                  Russlands völkerrechtswidriger Angriffskrieg hält unvermindert an und betrifft die ukrainische Zivilbevölkerung ebenso wie die Infrastruktur des Landes. Währenddessen werden aber in Saudi-Arabien diplomatische Gespräche zwischen den USA und Russland einerseits und den USA und der Ukraine andererseits geführt. Ich frage mich immer: Wo ist da eigentlich die EU? Warum sitzen wir nicht, warum sitzen Sie nicht mit am Tisch? Es geht bei diesen Gesprächen um einen Waffenstillstand im Schwarzen Meer und ein Ende der Angriffe auf die Energieinfrastruktur. Ich will ganz deutlich sein: Jeder Schritt hin zu einem umfassenden Waffenstillstand in der Ukraine und einem dauerhaften und gerechten Frieden muss von der EU unterstützt und mitgetragen werden. Diese Klarheit, Frau Hohe Repräsentantin, habe ich in Ihrer Erklärung leider vermisst.
               

                  Putins Armee ist immer noch auf dem Vormarsch, und er scheint in dem US-amerikanischen Präsidenten einen Verbündeten gefunden zu haben, der ihn zurück auf die politische Bühne der Großmächte holt. Die autoritäre Neuaufteilung der Welt schreitet rasant voran und in diesem Fall vor allem auf Kosten der Ukraine und auch auf Kosten der Europäischen Union, die nicht einmal mit am Katzentisch sitzen darf, während es um die Bedingungen der Beendigung eines Krieges auf europäischem Boden geht. Das ist wirklich unfassbar.
               

                  Deshalb frage ich mich: Wo bleibt die europäische Initiative zur Beendigung dieses Krieges, damit auch die EU über die europäische Friedensordnung zumindest mitverhandeln kann? Wo ist Ihre Strategie, Frau Kallas, für eine Friedensordnung, die nicht mit Panzern und Drohnen und Jets beginnt und endet, sondern die das Völkerrecht und internationale Institutionen schützt und stärkt? Für ein Europa, das seine Sicherheit auf wirtschaftlicher Stärke, internationaler Zusammenarbeit und der Glaubwürdigkeit seiner Werte aufbaut. Das ist die Idee eines Europas, in dem die Diplomatie die Waffe der Wahl ist und das seine Zukunft nicht ausschließlich durch einen Gewehrlauf sichert.
               

René Aust,
im Namen der ESN-Fraktion. – Frau Präsidentin! Wir trauern um die Opfer des Krieges, und wir verurteilen den völkerrechtswidrigen Angriffskrieg und genauso die Kriegsverbrechen, die damit einhergehen. Unser Blick darf nicht beim Heute stehen bleiben. Wir brauchen eine dauerhafte europäische Friedensstrategie jenseits des Ukrainekrieges. In den letzten Wochen war immer öfter die Rede von einem großen Krieg in vier, fünf Jahren gegen Russland – ein Albtraum, denn im Zeitalter der Nuklearwaffen ist der Krieg der Feind selbst. Darum braucht es jetzt einen Plan für eine dauerhafte künftige Friedensordnung in Europa.
               

                  Erstens: Viele Staaten haben der NATO über Jahre Scheinarmeen gemeldet – auf dem Papier da, aber nicht einsatzbereit. Diese Staaten müssen ihre bis 2020 gemeldeten Truppen tatsächlich einsatzbereit machen, aber nicht darüber hinaus aufrüsten, wenn Russland im Gegenzug bereit ist, seine Truppenstärke nach dem Ende des Ukrainekrieges ebenfalls auf das Niveau von 2020 zurückzuführen. So verhindern wir eine Rüstungsspirale.
               

                  Zweitens: Europa muss unmissverständlich klarstellen: Kein Millimeter eines EU-Mitgliedstaates darf in Frage gestellt werden. Darum braucht es eine entmilitarisierte Zone auf russischem Staatsgebiet, insbesondere zum Schutz des Baltikums. Und auch eine klare Ansage an Russland: Wir lassen uns nicht unter Druck setzen, auch nicht durch nukleare Drohgebärden im russischen Staatsfernsehen.
               

                  Drittens: Russland steckt in einer Kriegswirtschaft. Der Einstieg ist leicht in eine solche, der Ausstieg schwer. Europa muss im Gegenzug zu einer entmilitarisierten Zone eine wirtschaftliche Perspektive aufzeigen: Ende der Sanktionen und Wiederaufnahme der Import-Export-Beziehungen, nicht als Geschenk, sondern als Anreiz, aus der Aufrüstung auszusteigen, auch um Russland überhaupt die Chance zu geben, aus der Kriegswirtschaft herauszukommen und nicht dauerhaft auf Aufrüstung angewiesen zu sein, um den wirtschaftlichen Zusammenbruch zu verhindern.
               

                  1 000 Stunden umsonst zu verhandeln sind besser als eine einzige Minute aufeinander zu schießen. Wir haben die Pflicht, jetzt jede diplomatische Initiative zu ergreifen, um den Frieden dauerhaft in Europa zu sichern.
               

Kaja Kallas,
Vice-President of the Commission / High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy. – Madam President, I wish to thank the honourable Members for their interventions. There are a few comments that I want to make. First, to MEP Reuten on, right now, what we are doing, the EU's relevance in this process, we have many things that are in our hands to make Ukraine stronger. Sanctions weaken Russia, but also giving Ukraine the aid that they need, because the stronger they are on the battlefield, the stronger they are behind the negotiation table.
Then, on the comments about the accountability and that the debate should be wider, I also think that we should have a debate about international law, because every time when we have had in history a really big international crisis, then we have developed international law further. If you think about a the Second World War, then we actually agreed to have the UN Charter, to have the United Nations, so that there wouldn't be any wars either in the future. The UN Charter, the principles, are still standing and we need to defend them. That is very clear. But it is also clear that accountability for crimes of aggression – that means leadership crime, when somebody decides to attack another country, and also the war crimes that are stemming from the leadership crime – should be also more automatic. If these things are conducted, then there is accountability for those crimes to prevent those crimes happening in the future.
On the ceasefire, of course we welcome the talks about the ceasefire and also, you know, the first steps on this, but what really bothers me in this case is that the ceasefire talks are all about not attacking things. It's not about attacking people. It's not about attacking civilians. It's not about the killing to stop. And I think we have to be very firm on this.
So we have a plan. We are respecting the principles of international law, which also means the UN Charter, the territorial integrity of a country, sovereignty and independence of a country. We are supporting that and, of course, what are these tools in our hands? They are the tools of sanctions to put the pressure on Russia, which is the aggressor here, so that they would stop this war. They are also not able to wage this war forever. We have to be on the side of Ukraine here, because there is very clearly one aggressor, one victim.
Now, to the MEP who was talking about the nuclear threat, if presenting the nuclear threat works, then what we will see in the world is more nuclear proliferation, because all those countries which are afraid of their neighbours will want to have a nuclear weapon, because this is the only thing that protects them. And all those countries which have an appetite for their neighbours' territories will also want to have a nuclear weapon, because this is the only thing, by threatening to use this weapon, that gets you what you want.
That's why I think the European Union is the credible, reliable partner in the world, which really has to stand for international law to be applicable, because it is for all the countries in the world. It is for the peace and security of the world. So that's why our response here, in Russia's war against Ukraine, is very important. We have to stand firm, and the EU must be unwavering in its commitment for accountability for all violations of international law committed in connection with Russia's war of aggression against Ukraine.
Thank you again for this exchange of views.

President. – Thank you very much, High Representative Kallas, for those words. We will pause for a few moments before the vote.
4.   Amendment of the agenda

President. – Before that, I have one announcement.
Pursuant to Rule 164(2), and with the agreement of the political groups, I would like to propose to the House to postpone to the Thursday voting session the following vote that is currently scheduled for Wednesday: motions for resolutions on energy-intensive industries.

(Parliament approved the request)


(The sitting was suspended at 11:54)


IN THE CHAIR: ESTEBAN GONZÁLEZ PONS


Vice-President

5.   Resumption of the sitting

(The sitting resumed at 12:01)

6.   Voting time

President. – The next item is the vote.

(For the results and other details concerning the vote: see minutes)

6.1.   Amending Directives (EU) 2022/2464 and (EU) 2024/1760 as regards the dates from which Member States are to apply certain corporate sustainability reporting and due diligence requirements (vote)

President. – The first vote is on the request by the EPP Group for the urgent procedure to amend Directives (EU) 2022/2464 and (EU) 2024/1760 as regards the dates from which Member States are to apply certain corporate sustainability reporting and due diligence requirements (see minutes, item 6.1).
I give the floor to Mr Tobé to speak in favour of the request for an urgent decision.

– Before the vote:


Tomas Tobé,
on behalf of the PPE Group. – Mr President, colleagues, global instability is on the rise, and I would argue that many European companies are falling behind.
We must start to act now. We need to strengthen our competitiveness. The Omnibus package is a first good step in the right direction. This is not only about protecting jobs in Europe; it is to make sure that we again can have growth – growth which is needed to secure that we have wealth in our continent.
The EPP Group calls on all constructive forces of this House to support the 'stop-the-clock' proposal. Clarity and breathing room are needed for our SMEs so they can grow and innovate. That is basically what is on the line in the vote today.
So please vote 'yes' and make sure that we can work together to make Europe competitive again.

Manon Aubry (The Left). – Monsieur le Président, chers collègues, qui, dans cette salle, peut affirmer que la priorité des priorités, aujourd'hui, c'est de casser les seuls textes de progrès social et écologique qui ont été votés lors du précédent mandat? Qui, dans cet hémicycle, peut sérieusement penser que le plus essentiel, aujourd'hui, c'est de jeter à la poubelle des régulations qui empêchent les multinationales de massacrer les peuples et la planète?
                  

                     Pour protéger l'environnement, pour améliorer la vie des gens, ce n'est jamais le moment. Il faut toujours attendre, remettre à plus tard, ‘on verra quand on aura le temps’. Mais, quand il s'agit de déréguler, voilà le PPE en grand seigneur: ‘Surtout, vite, vite, vite! Il y a urgence pour faire des cadeaux aux grandes entreprises, encore et toujours plus. Il faut s'y mettre tout de suite, immédiatement, séance tenante, en procédure d'urgence!’ – vous qui, d'habitude, aimez tant les procédures d'évaluation de la Commission européenne pour faire perdre du temps.
                  

                     La réalité, c'est que vous n'avez pas eu cette idée tout seuls, chers amis du PPE. Les grandes entreprises qui veulent continuer à faire des profits sur l'exploitation des travailleurs et de la nature, ce sont elles qui l'ont suggéré, et c'est en réalité à la demande de leurs lobbys que vous faites aujourd'hui cette demande de procédure d'urgence. C'est un véritable scandale!
                  

                     Par ailleurs, Monsieur Tobé, vous parlez de prévisions pour les grandes entreprises, mais ce texte a été adopté à la fin du mandat précédent. Qu'est-ce qu'on va faire pendant ce mandat, ici, tous les députés européens? On va détricoter des textes qui ont été adoptés par notre Parlement européen? À quoi bon siéger ici, alors, si c'est pour défaire ce qui vient d'être adopté?
                  

                     J'aimerais aujourd'hui que vous pensiez à toutes les victimes des crimes des multinationales et que vous leur disiez en face que leur sort n'est pas urgent. Allez dire, chers députés de droite et d'extrême droite qui vous apprêtez à voter cette procédure d'urgence, allez dire aux 100 000 personnes expropriées par Total en Ouganda et en Tanzanie qu'obtenir réparation n'est pas urgent. Allez dire aux familles des 6 500 morts sur les chantiers de la Coupe du monde au Qatar que faire payer les responsables n'est pas urgent. Allez dire aux esclaves ouïghours exploités par Shein qu'arrêter leur supplice n'est pas urgent. Allez dire aux proches des 1 135 employés morts dans les décombres du Rana Plaza qu'accéder à la justice n'est pas urgent.
                  

                     Alors oui, ce texte sur le devoir de vigilance dans le paquet Omnibus n'est pas le plus révolutionnaire, mais il a le mérite d'exister. Nous l'avons arraché après cinq ans de bataille face aux lobbys et nous sommes fiers que la gauche, unie dans cet hémicycle, ait réussi à le défendre et à le faire voter, pour enfin mettre un terme à l'impunité des multinationales. Le cynisme de ceux qui proposent cette procédure d'urgence pour établir l'impunité totale des grands patrons qui ont du sang sur les mains est une honte, et il vous rend directement complices.
                  

                     Alors, chers collègues, à vous de prendre vos responsabilités. Ne permettez pas ce retour en arrière déshonorant et défendez cet acquis essentiel pour les droits de l'homme!
                  

President. – The request for an urgent decision is adopted.
The vote will be on Thursday, 3 April. The deadlines will be as follows:






—


amendments: Wednesday, 2 April at 13:00;










—


split and separate votes: Wednesday, 2 April at 19:00.




6.2.   Request for waiver of the immunity of Jana Nagyová (A10-0029/2025 - Krzysztof Śmiszek) (vote)

President. – The next vote is on the report by Krzysztof Śmiszek on the request for the waiver of the immunity of Jana Nagyová (see minutes, item 6.2).
6.3.   Request for waiver of the immunity of Petr Bystron (A10-0030/2025 - Dominik Tarczyński) (vote)

President. – The next vote is on the report by Dominik Tarczyński on the request for waiver of the immunity of Petr Bystron (see minutes, item 6.3).
6.4.   Request for waiver of the immunity of Maciej Wąsik (A10-0031/2025 - Mario Furore) (vote)

President. – The next vote is on the report by Mario Furore on the request for waiver of the immunity of Maciej Wąsik (see minutes, item 6.4).
6.5.   Request for waiver of the immunity of Mariusz Kamiński (A10-0032/2025 - Mario Furore) vote

President. – The next vote is on the report by Mario Furore on the request for waiver of the immunity of Mariusz Kamiński (see minutes, item 6.5).
6.6.   Partial renewal of a member of the Court of Auditors – Lucian Romașcanu (A10-0039/2025 - Tomáš Zdechovský) (vote)

President. – The next vote is on the report by Tomáš Zdechovský on the partial renewal of a member of the Court of Auditors – Lucian Romașcanu (see minutes, item 6.6).
6.7.   Common data platform on chemicals, establishing a monitoring and outlook framework for chemicals (A10-0018/2025 - Dimitris Tsiodras) (vote)

President. – The next vote is on the report by Dimitris Tsiodras on the common data platform on chemicals, establishing a monitoring and outlook framework for chemicals (see minutes, item 6.7).

– After the vote on the Commission proposal:


Dimitris Tsiodras,
rapporteur. – Mr President, first of all, I would like to thank my colleagues for their vote. According to Rule 60(4), I request the referral back for interinstitutional negotiations.

(Parliament approved the request for referral back to committee)

6.8.   Re-attribution of scientific and technical tasks to the European Chemicals Agency (A10-0019/2025 - Dimitris Tsiodras) (vote)

President. – The next vote is on the report by Dimitris Tsiodras on re-attribution of scientific and technical tasks to the European Chemicals Agency (see minutes, item 6.8).

– After the vote on the Commission proposal:


Dimitris Tsiodras,
rapporteur. – Mr President, also according to Rule 60(4), I request a referral back for interinstitutional negotiations.

(Parliament approved the request for referral back to committee)

6.9.   Re-attribution of scientific and technical tasks and improving cooperation among Union agencies in the area of chemicals (A10-0020/2025 - Dimitris Tsiodras) (vote)

President. – The next vote is on the report by Dimitris Tsiodras on re-attribution of scientific and technical tasks and improving cooperation among Union agencies in the area of chemicals (see minutes, item 6.9).

– After the vote on the Commission proposal:


Dimitris Tsiodras,
rapporteur. – Mr President, also according to Rule 60(4), I request a referral back for interinstitutional negotiations.

(Parliament approved the request for referral back to committee)

6.10.   Macro-financial assistance to Jordan (A10-0038/2025 - Céline Imart) (vote)

President. – The next vote is on the report by Céline Imart on macro-financial assistance to Jordan (see minutes, item 6.10).
Before the vote, as the issue has not been discussed in plenary, I would like to give the floor to Commissioner McGrath.

– Before the vote:


Michael McGrath,
Member of the Commission. – Mr President, the European Commission confirms its commitment to transparency towards the European Parliament and the Council in the context of the macro-financial assistance (MFA) operations.
Its proposal for MFA support to Jordan, COM/2024/159, includes the provision under which the Commission shall regularly inform the European Parliament and the Council of developments regarding the Union's macro-financial assistance, including disbursements thereof, and shall provide those institutions with the relevant documents in due time.
In relation to this, the Commission commits to regularly informing the European Parliament and the Council of the following:






a)


progress towards implementation of the economic policy conditions to be agreed in a memorandum of understanding, which could include reforms addressing public finance, management and tax administration, governance and fight against corruption, social and labour market policy, utility, energy sectors and business environment;










b)


the fulfilment of relevant preconditions for disbursement, specifically of the political precondition whether Jordan respects effective democratic mechanisms – including a multi-party parliamentary system and the rule of law – and guarantees respect for human rights;










c)


the satisfactory implementation of an IMF programme.




The Commission will submit the relevant information notes to the European Parliament and the Council immediately after the adoption of the Commission implementing decisions, releasing the instalments of the available MFA.
6.11.   Macro-financial assistance to Egypt (A10-0037/2025 - Céline Imart) (vote)

President. – The next vote is on the report by Céline Imart on macro-financial assistance to Egypt (see minutes, item 6.11).
As we did before, before we move to the vote, I would like to give the floor to Commissioner McGrath, because the issue has not been discussed in plenary.

– Before the vote:


Michael McGrath,
Member of the Commission. – Mr President, the European Commission confirms its commitment to transparency towards the European Parliament and the Council in the context of macro-financial assistance (MFA) operations.
Its proposal for MFA support to Egypt, COM/2024/461, includes the provision under which the Commission shall regularly inform the European Parliament and the Council of developments regarding the Union's macro-financial assistance, including disbursements thereof, and shall provide those institutions with the relevant documents in due time.
In relation to this, the Commission commits to regularly inform the European Parliament and the Council of the following:






a)


progress towards implementation of the economic policy conditions to be agreed in a memorandum of understanding, which could include reforms addressing macroeconomic stability and resilience, the business environment and competitiveness, and a green transition;










b)


the fulfilment of relevant preconditions for disbursement, specifically, a positive assessment of concrete and credible steps having been taken by Egypt towards respecting effective democratic mechanisms – including a multi-party parliamentary system and the rule of law – and guaranteeing respect for human rights;










c)


the satisfactory implementation of an IMF programme.




The Commission will submit the relevant information notes to the European Parliament and the Council immediately after the adoption of the Commission implementing decisions, releasing the instalments of the available MFA. To propose the MFA underpins the EU's commitment to support Egypt's substantive reform agenda and to help restore macroeconomic stability in the country and, more broadly, resilience in the southern European neighbourhood in view of Egypt's crucial role in the region, building on the excellent relations between the EU and Egypt.
The Union's macro-financial assistance package aims to support the restoration of a sustainable external financing situation for Egypt, thereby supporting its economic and social development, promoting structural reforms aimed at supporting sustainable and inclusive growth and employment creation, in line with the EU-Egypt Association Agreement and the Strategic and Comprehensive Partnership.

– After the vote on the Commission proposal:


Céline Imart,
rapporteure. – Monsieur le Président, conformément à l'article 60, quatrième alinéa, du règlement intérieur du Parlement européen, je vous demande de soumettre au vote le renvoi pour démarrer les négociations interinstitutionnelles du rapport portant sur l'assistance macrofinancière à l'Égypte.
                  

(Parliament approved the request for referral back to committee)

6.12.   Customs duties on imports of certain products originating in the USA (A10-0034/2025 - Bernd Lange) (vote)

President. – The next vote is on the report by Bernd Lange on customs duties on imports of certain products originating in the USA (see minutes, item 6.12).

(The vote closed)


(The sitting was suspended at 12:27)


IN THE CHAIR: SABINE VERHEYEN


Vice-President

7.   Resumption of the sitting

(The sitting resumed at 12:31)

8.   Approval of the minutes of the previous sitting

President. – The minutes of yesterday's sitting and the texts adopted are available.
Are they any comments? I see that is not the case.
The minutes are approved.
9.   CFSP and CSDP (Article 36 TUE) (joint debate)

President. – The next item is the joint debate on:






—


the report by David McAllister, on behalf of the Committee on Foreign Affairs, on implementation of the common foreign and security policy – annual report 2024 (2024/2080(INI)) (A10-0010/2025);










—


the report by Nicolás Pascual de la Parte, on behalf of the Committee on Foreign Affairs, on implementation of the common security and defence policy – annual report 2024 (2024/2082(INI)) (A10-0011/2025).





David McAllister,
rapporteur. – Madam President, High Representative/Vice-President, ladies and gentlemen, dear colleagues, our Interinstitutional Agreement stipulates in part two, section G, paragraph 43, that each year, the Council Presidency will consult the European Parliament on a forward-looking Council document, which will be transmitted by 15 June for the year in question, setting out the main aspects and basic choices of a common foreign and security policy.
Since 2010, this task has been delegated to the HR/VP. Dear Kaja Kallas, welcome therefore, to your first debate on the main aspects and the basic choices of our CFSP and the CSDP in plenary.
Dear colleagues, tomorrow at noon, we will hopefully adopt Parliament's CFSP report, reacting to the assessment of the former High Representative, and we do so amidst rapid and radical uncertainty. A world where authoritarian actors are trying ever more aggressively to mark out their zones of influence through military might, political pressure, and economic control.
Our report comprehensively analyses these shifting dynamics. In fact, with 1 019 amendments at the committee level, and another 167 at the plenary level, the negotiation team was compelled to conduct an even more meticulous review than initially expected. I would like to thank everyone who has been involved in this extraordinary task.
As a result, the text has expanded to, let me put it this way, unprecedented lengths. For those who actually take time to unpack it, this CFSP report is much more than a mere review of last year's events. It also outlines a strategic direction and sets clear expectations from our side for our executive. These expectations are structured along four distinct priorities.
First, addressing the consequences of the Russian war of aggression against Ukraine. Let me be very clear, any attempt to blackmail Ukraine into surrendering for the sake of a peace deal will only empower the aggressor. Putin must not achieve through negotiation what he failed to secure on the battlefield. In the coming weeks and months, we will stand united together as steadfast partners of Ukraine. We will ensure Ukraine has the means to liberate its people and deter further Russian aggression.
Second, resolving conflict and supporting peace in the Middle East. Our current strategy in the Middle East is obviously not fit to account for the political realities of the region. The atrocious attacks committed by Hamas on 7 October set the entire region on fire. An arc of instability has since settled from Khartoum to Baghdad, and Europe is not left untouched.
Thirdly, asserting interests through strategic partnerships. Whether it be Mr Putin's imperialism or the escalation in the Middle East, all these developments significantly increase the pressure on the European Union to build alliances and to mobilise partner countries, from our closest neighbours to those who are far away but need us most.
And finally, let's not forget that we are, as a European Union, the undisputed world champion in development cooperation. Yet, recent developments have highlighted the poor understanding of the EU's perspective in some of our partner countries around the world and this therefore limits our political influence. So it is time to act with confidence. Our actions must speak as loudly as our words and they must be seen.
I look forward to an interesting debate this noon. Once again, I would like to thank the shadow rapporteurs and all those involved behind the scenes for working on this extensive report.

Nicolás Pascual de la Parte,
ponente. – Señora presidenta, señora Kallas, queridos amigos, me cabe el honor de presentar el informe de la política común de seguridad y defensa europea del año 2024. Es un informe que, por su naturaleza, es un poco especial. Primero, porque refleja no solamente las prioridades del Parlamento Europeo en estos temas, sino también las de la Comisión y las del Servicio Europeo de Acción Exterior por ser el primer informe de esta legislatura. Pero es que, además, es un informe de transición, porque se recoge precisamente el reto geopolítico, el cambio de paradigma que se está produciendo en el mundo. Ante ese cambio de paradigma y ante esos nuevos retos, la Unión Europea tiene que dar una respuesta a la altura de las circunstancias.
               

                  Este informe se centra en esta transición de ser dependientes de otros a ser políticamente y estratégicamente autónomos. Ha incorporado la inmensa mayoría de las modificaciones de los distintos grupos políticos, pero al final hemos sido capaces de presentar —gracias al trabajo de todos los servicios del Parlamento, de la Secretaría, de los ponentes alternativos y demás— un informe coherente y un informe centrado en las prioridades de las instituciones europeas y no solamente del Parlamento Europeo.
               

                  ¿Cuáles son estas prioridades? La primera, que Europa, como digo, tiene que empezar a tomar las riendas de su futuro en sus propias manos y ser capaz de defender su modelo de vida, sus valores, sus convicciones y sus principios ahora y en el futuro. Para eso necesitamos tiempo. Y, aunque queramos crear la Europa de la defensa del futuro en los próximos cuatro o cinco años, necesitamos que los Estados Unidos de América estén con nosotros en la OTAN y fuera de la OTAN para crear una disuasión creíble con respecto a Rusia, para que a Putin no se le ocurran nuevos aventurerismos militares de nuevo. Necesitamos crear una disuasión fuerte y, para eso, Europa necesita tiempo. En el mejor de los escenarios, es decir, si tenemos la voluntad política, movilizamos los recursos financieros necesarios y mostramos unidad y determinación para crear esa Europa de la defensa, necesitaremos como mínimo cuatro o cinco años. Por tanto, hemos de ser conscientes de que necesitamos mientras tanto la asistencia y el apoyo de los Estados Unidos y de la OTAN. No queremos hacer nada sin los estadounidenses, siempre y cuando quieran participar como nosotros. Pero tenemos que dotarnos de esos medios y de esos recursos para defendernos en las crisis de nuestros vecindarios este, sur y más allá.
               

                  Evidentemente, hacemos también un repaso geográfico de todos los conflictos en los cuales Europa tiene que tener una posición única, empezando por Ucrania. Ahí repetimos, como ha dicho antes mi amigo David, que nosotros apoyaremos financiera, política y defensivamente a Ucrania todo el tiempo que sea necesario. Y aquí lo haremos incluso sin los Estados Unidos de América. Hemos de estar al lado del pueblo y del Gobierno ucraniano tanto tiempo como nos necesiten y, para eso, tenemos que articular los mecanismos financieros y políticos que lo permitan. Pero han de contar siempre con nuestro apoyo, en tanto en cuanto estén defendiendo nuestra libertad, nuestra integridad territorial, nuestra independencia y nuestro modelo de vida en el campo de batalla de Ucrania.
               

                  En segundo lugar, nos pasamos al conflicto de Oriente Próximo, en el cual, tras la visita de la alta representante, se han mandado los mensajes claros de que necesitamos proseguir y reanudar la tregua, de que la tregua negociada entre Hamás e Israel no se puede romper, porque necesitamos todavía el intercambio de rehenes y de prisioneros, y de mantener un espacio de paz y de diálogo que permita reanudar el diálogo político para sentar en la mesa de negociación a Israel y a los palestinos para buscar un futuro que asegure a Israel la tranquilidad y la prosperidad y el futuro a los palestinos. Y eso solamente se puede hacer dentro de la perspectiva de dos Estados viviendo back to back y en paz. Por supuesto, hemos hecho también un repaso de otros conflictos: el de la República Democrática del Congo, el de los uigures, el de Birmania. Pero hemos hecho especial hincapié, como digo, en estos dos grandes conflictos en Ucrania y en Oriente Próximo.
               

                  En resumen, tenemos un informe a partir del cual podemos empezar a aplicar una agenda de implementación de estas conclusiones que, como insisto, ha intentado integrar no solamente las prioridades del Parlamento Europeo, sino también de la Comisión y del Servicio Europeo de Acción Exterior. Estoy esperando con mucho deseo el debate a continuación sobre esta propuesta.
               

Kaja Kallas,
Vice-President of the Commission / High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy. – Madam President, honourable Members of the European Parliament, the two reports which provide the basis for our exchange today are comprehensive and an integral part of the European Union's work on foreign policy. I want to thank the rapporteurs, Mr McAllister and Mr Pascual de la Parte and every Member who contributed to these reports.
You have not only looked in depth at what we have already done on foreign policy, but also looked where we could go. And I think this is extremely important. I'm very grateful for your important insight in this regard.
As this is the first time I'm here to discuss this annual reporting by the European Parliament, let me start with a promise – a promise with the support of the European External Action Service to make the best use of the foreign policy toolbox at our disposal and to continue defending the rules-based international order, including on a multilateral level.
This year will be a big year of multilateralism, with the EU-African Union summit and the summit with the Latin American and Caribbean states. But there are three clear challenges that dominate our agenda, which the rapporteurs also pointed out: first, our own security and defence; second, Ukraine and third, the Middle East.
On the first, Europe must take greater responsibility for our own defence. We have done a lot to boost European defence in 2024. However, more work lies ahead in 2025. The white paper on defence – Readiness 2030 – sets out what the European Union can do, including freeing up EUR 800 billion for defence, pooling resources for joint defence projects and working closer with our partners.
The same goes for preparedness. Our new preparedness strategy paves the way for a more resilient Union to face the widest range of crises and threats against our territory and interests. And I count on the European Parliament to contribute to turning these plans and strategies into concrete action. Like my colleague Commissioner Kubilius likes to say, it's all about 'implementation, implementation, implementation'. This includes supporting the necessary financing to get the job done.
With regards to Ukraine, from the earliest days of Russia's full scale war of aggression, the European Union has stood shoulder to shoulder with Ukraine. We have provided EUR 138 billion, including close to EUR 50 billion of military assistance. We have trained more than 72 000 Ukrainian soldiers through the EU Military Assistance Mission to Ukraine.
Our civilian mission, EUAM, has continued to support Ukraine's security, helped to stabilise liberated areas and strengthen accountability for war crimes. We have recently adopted the 16th package of sanctions to put more pressure on Russia. We are now discussing the 17th package and there is already a clear consensus: we need this.
Yesterday marked three weeks since Ukraine agreed to an immediate a 30-day ceasefire. Since then, Putin has stalled, obstructed and evaded efforts for peace. Ukraine has shown it wants peace, but Moscow is not negotiating in good faith. We need to keep supporting Ukraine as much as we can to strengthen their hand at the negotiation table when the time comes.
European leaders have decided to urgently step up efforts to address Ukraine's pressing military needs. I've proposed a way to make that happen: two million rounds of ammunition worth EUR 5 billion. This is also what President Zelensky asked for. We are adamant that no agreement on Ukraine's fate and Europe's security will work without Europe or Ukraine at the table.
In the Middle East, the situation is very grave. Now we must be doing everything to stop this spiral of violence. As I underlined to every interlocutor during my recent visit to the region, the EU's priority is permanent ceasefire and a hostage release deal and the resumption of humanitarian aid and deliveries into Gaza.
We will discuss this in more detail later, but the EU's positive contribution is already very clear. Since October 2023, we have provided over EUR 1 billion for Palestine and UNWRA, both through our humanitarian assistance and through our support to the Palestinian Authority. During the temporary ceasefire, our Border Assistance Mission in Rafah has helped more than 4 000 people across the border, including more than 1 600 requiring medical attention. I regret that this has been stopped now.
We are also committed to raising our concerns at the highest level. Last month, I chaired a frank EU-Israel Association Council. This month we will hold a high-level dialogue with the Palestinian Authority. Diplomatic work must continue. This is why we have also increased our political engagement to sustain the ceasefire agreement between Lebanon and Israel. We have also increased our humanitarian assistance and, in December 2024, our financial support through the European Peace Facility to the Lebanese Armed Forces in the sum of EUR 60 million.
In Syria, where hope is hanging by a thread, we have suspended some sectorial sanctions to give a boost to Syria's nascent economy. We also organised the 9th Brussels Conference on Syria, raising EUR 5.8 billion to support the Syrian people. Work now continues towards the Syrian-led and Syrian-owned inclusive transition process.
These two examples show that the EU can be a relevant security provider across multiple crises in parallel. But none of this important work would be possible without our network of EU delegations around the world. As MEPs, you witness the value added by our delegations firsthand when you go on missions in the field. In the current geopolitical context, I'm committed to strengthening our network of delegations and making them as efficient as possible and as modern as possible, because in times like these, the world needs more Europe, not less.
I count on your support in this crucial exercise, including through securing adequate budget for the remainder of the current MFF and also the next one. These discussions will be very hard.
I also believe that none of the EU's progress on foreign policy would be possible without the European Parliament and the work you do through parliamentary democracy. This is also a key component of our foreign policy. So, thank you, dear Members of the European Parliament, for all the work you do. Thank you for the exchange and I'm also looking forward to hearing your views.

Michael Gahler,
im Namen der PPE-Fraktion. – Frau Präsidentin, Hohe Beauftragte, liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Es ist gut, dass wir eine verbundene Debatte zur Außen-, Sicherheits- und Verteidigungspolitik haben, denn wir sind in einer Weltlage, die wir seit Ende des Zweiten Weltkrieges so nicht erlebt haben – auch gerade als Europäer. Und deswegen ist es so wichtig, dass wir nicht nur hier im Europäischen Parlament zusammenstehen, bei den großen Mainstream-Fraktionen mit großer Mehrheit die Politik unterstützen, die unsere Kommission, die der Rat betreibt gegenüber der Ukraine, sondern auch bei den anderen Fragen.
               

                  Deswegen ist es wichtig, dass wir hier auch die Maßnahmen weiterhin unterstützen, die langfristig angelegt sind – das eine geht in Richtung Sicherheit und Verteidigung, was wir dort debattieren, und das andere in der Tat im Hinblick auf die Ukraine. Und deswegen sollten wir auch das ansprechen, was hier an Störfeuer funktioniert oder versucht zu instrumentalisieren und zu aktualisieren in der Art und Weise, wie man hier blockiert. Und da müssen wir den Namen auch nennen: Da ist es leider Ungarn, was hier sowohl die Peace Facility blockiert in der Auszahlung, aber auch den Beginn des ersten Clusters der Verhandlungen mit der Ukraine.
               

                  Und da sage ich ganz deutlich: Der ungarische Ministerpräsident dient nicht der ungarischen Minderheit in der Ukraine, wenn das Ergebnis wäre, dass diese Menschen wieder unter russische Kontrolle kämen. Es ist eine Schande, wie sich diese Regierung hier verhält. Und ich bin auch überzeugt, dass die Mehrheit der Ungarn diesen unverantwortlichen Kurs nicht unterstützen. Wir werden Mittel und Wege finden, um hier dafür zu sorgen, dass diese Politik keine Blockade auf die Dauer bewerkstelligen kann.
               

Sven Mikser,
on behalf of the S&D Group. – Madam President, High Representative, colleagues, Europe's security situation obviously is extremely serious. Russia's aggression against Ukraine has brought large-scale conventional war back to our continent and its outcome, if negative, threatens to overthrow the international rules-based order altogether.
Certain first steps by the Trump administration in the US have further exacerbated this already dire situation and, in this situation, Europe will have to emerge as an anchor of stability in our immediate neighbourhood as well as a defender of the rules-based order globally. For this to happen, two things are needed.
First, the EU will have to unwaveringly support and uphold international law, support the inviolability of international borders, sovereignty and territorial integrity of states, but also accountability for war crimes and crimes against humanity everywhere, from Russia to Palestine.
Secondly, we have to back up our principal positions by real capabilities. That involves real money. On the level of Member States, we simply have to get rid of these huge discrepancies when it comes to defence spending and the military support for Ukraine. On the EU level, it means providing adequate budgetary means for all the noble instruments we have created for supporting our industries and filling the existing capability gaps. And obviously, real money is also needed if we want to fill some most critical gaps left by the US withdrawal from the international cooperation.
Finally, we need to take a holistic approach to security, making sure that while we rightly focus on external threats, we do not leave our own societies more vulnerable to rising illiberal and populist sentiment on our continent.

Kinga Gál,
a PfE képviselőcsoport nevében. – Tisztelt Elnök Asszony! Ijesztő, hogy az EU egyfajta háborús pszichózist propagál. Ebben a szellemben született a közös kül- és biztonságpolitikáról szóló éves jelentés is, ami igencsak elfogult szövegnek sikerült. Ha ezzel a külpolitikai stratégiával haladunk előre, akkor nem csoda, hogy az Unió magára marad az új geopolitikai erőtérben. Az uniónak a pánikkeltés helyett sokkal inkább a béketeremtő diplomácia és az európai védelempolitika megerősítésén, valamint a polgárok felé közvetített intézményi hitelesség kiépítésén kellene dolgoznia.
               

                  Az Európai Bizottság eszkalációs narratívát gyárt. Legújabb készenléti stratégia javaslata, hogy az európai polgárok halmozzanak fel 72 órára elegendő vészhelyzeti tartalékot, félelmet kelt, azt az üzenetet közvetíti, hogy a háború eszkalálódik, a katasztrófa bármikor bekövetkezhet, folyamatos veszélyérzetet keltve. Pedig az EU-ban nincs háború, és reméljük, nem is lesz.
               

                  Az Uniónak el kellene ismernie az amerikai vezetés tűzszünet és béke irányába tett erőfeszítéseit, hogy véget érjen végre a pusztítás Ukrajnában. Európának a béke hangján kell szólnia, hiszen békeprojektként jött létre, nem működhet katalizátorként háborús gépezetben.
               

                  A jelentés elfogadhatatlan nyomást gyakorol Magyarországra, amiért nem támogatjuk a fegyverszállítást Ukrajnába. A szöveg támadja a miniszterelnök békemisszióját, holott azóta számos akkori kijelentése beigazolódott. Őszintén kéne beszélni arról is, hogy mivel jár a választóknak, az európai polgárok számára a csatlakozása Ukrajnának a mezőgazdaság, a biztonság, a munkaerőpiac terén?
               

Adam Bielan,
on behalf of the ECR Group. – Madam President, dear High Representative, both reports rightly acknowledge the increasingly dangerous strategic environment Europe faces today.
Russia's aggression against Ukraine continues. New hybrid threats are emerging and our neighbourhood remains volatile. In this context, the European Union must be firm, united and realistic in how it responds.
This year's CFSP and CSDP reports reflect many of my group's priorities. They strongly condemn Russia's war of aggression and express unwavering support for Ukraine's sovereignty and Euro-Atlantic future, and adopt a firm stance on Iran's destabilising actions.
We also welcome the clear recognition of NATO as the cornerstone of European security, and the emphasis of on strengthening transatlantic cooperation. We particularly support the call to reinforce EU-NATO coordination, improve military mobility, particularly in frontline states like Poland, and bolster hybrid defence while encouraging defence spending above 2 % of GDP.
However, there are serious concerns. Once again, we see proposals to abandon unanimity in foreign defence policy. We firmly believe that these decisions must remain in the hands of sovereign Member States, not be centralised in Brussels. We also caution against the push for a fully-fledged defence union and the vague propulsion of strategic autonomy, which risks duplicating NATO structures and distracting us from our most important ally, the United States.
And that is why we cannot support these reports. European security must be based on responsibility, strong NATO cooperation and clear strategic vision.

Urmas Paet,
on behalf of the Renew Group. – Madam President, dear High Representative Kaja Kallas, we have Russian war against Ukraine, hybrid war against Europe, strong turbulence in the relations between traditional allies. What else needs to happen for Europe to finally put itself together and to contribute adequately to its own defence, to the realisation of its international potential and to the development of its own economic space?
It is human to start acting only when some big mess is already in the offing. But Europe as a whole must be wiser, have more foresight and not simply wait for another catastrophe. Europe is capable of much more. But for this to happen, diplomacy, defence capability, development cooperation and international trade must all go hand in hand.
We must finally abandon the demand for consensus in foreign and security policy, because it does not work in times of crisis. We must build strong and functioning relations with our allies from Great Britain and Norway to Japan, Korea, Canada and others. Member States that have come under unfair political attacks, such as Denmark, must be strongly supported.
Europe is potentially the strongest power in the world and at the same time the kindest power.

Marc Botenga,
on behalf of The Left Group. – Madam President, dear colleagues, High Representative, first of all, you're the minister of foreign affairs – a little bit – of the European Union. You know that the International Criminal Court asked for the arrest of Israeli leaders, yet you go to Israel and your first words are: 'We are very good partners.'
Ms High Representative, what 'very good partners'? In crime, in genocide, in ethnic cleansing? These words are a shame for the European Union. They should never be uttered again.
Ensuite, soyons clairs: ici, avec l'Union européenne, nous sommes en train de créer un monde plus dangereux. Pourquoi? Parce que nos actes ne suivent pas nos paroles.
Nous parlons souvent des droits des enfants, mais comment en parler quand, en même temps, nous soutenons Israël, qui kidnappe chaque année des centaines d'enfants palestiniens? Comment parler de démocratie quand nous n'avons pas un mot de critique par rapport à une élection présidentielle au Rwanda qui voit le président se faire élire avec plus de 99 % des voix? Comment parler de justice quand nous nous taisons sur l'Arabie saoudite, qui exécute des centaines de prisonniers? Comment parler de souveraineté quand nous n'osons pas dénoncer l'illégalité de la présence américaine en Syrie, pas plus que l'illégalité de la présence israélienne au Liban et en Syrie? Comment, enfin, parler de paix quand nos pays ont eux-mêmes envahi de nombreux pays africains ou arabes?
Nous parlons d'un monde fondé sur des règles, mais en réalité nous sommes en train de saper tout le droit international, ce qui, non content d'être absolument inacceptable, est dangereux pour nos citoyens. En effet, comment pouvons-nous demander aux autres pays de respecter les règles quand nous-mêmes nous les violons ou acceptons leur violation par nos alliés, parce que, tout compte fait, ils garantissent des profits à nos multinationales?
C'est inacceptable! L'Union européenne a besoin de fondamentalement changer de politique étrangère pour une politique de paix et de justice dans le monde.

Станислав Стоянов,
от името на групата ESN. – Г-жо Председател, визията за европейската външна политика, представена в доклада за 2024 г., е погрешна. Тя е остаряла, небалансирана и несвързана с интересите на гражданите на Европейския съюз.
               

                  Докладът ни връща във времената на Студената война, когато като пренебрегва сложната геополитическа динамика на съвременния свят, обсебеността от Русия и Китай подхранва ненужна ескалация, измествайки фокуса и ресурсите от жизненоважни въпроси като икономическата стабилност и енергийната сигурност. Той изисква неограничена военна подкрепа за Украйна, държава извън Европейския съюз и извън НАТО, като същевременно пренебрегва бремето върху европейските данъкоплатци. Още по-лошо, докладът тласка Европейския съюз към ролята на глобален полицай, призовавайки за намеса в региони като Тихият океан.
               

                  Ние отхвърляме този подход. Европейският съюз трябва да даде приоритет на прагматичното сътрудничество, а не на поляризацията. Съюзът трябва да защитава дипломацията, а не ескалацията и безкрайната война. Европейският съюз е създаден като проект за мир. Време е външната му политика да отрази това.
               

Rasa Juknevičienė (PPE). – Madam President, dear colleagues, populists are manipulating peace and saying that the EU should not take on defence issues. On the contrary, precisely to bring lasting peace to the European continent, we need a strong European defence while maintaining the transatlantic bond.
The democratic world is much stronger than Putin's Russia. We could have already won if the aid to Ukraine had been sufficient when the Ukrainians pushed the Russians out of Kherson and Kharkiv, but then there was a fear of Putin's blackmail and fear to defeat Putin.
Now, Trump has fragmented the power of democracies, and we have a much more complicated situation.
What do we need? First, common threat perception in Member States. Second, solidarity and trust – first of all, the ability to implement ReArm EU in solidarity and help Ukraine with this instrument. Third, geopolitical thinking. Despite being from the Baltics, I would like to particularly emphasise the importance of the Black Sea region for European security. Fourth, the ability to include non-EU countries in the defence format: Great Britain, Norway, Canada, Türkiye.
Putin helped the EU understand the importance of security. Maybe Trump will help the EU regain self-confidence to create a strong European defence for peace.

Tobias Cremer (S&D). – Madam President, dear colleagues, we have to be crystal clear. Europe is facing today the greatest geopolitical challenge in a generation. According to the latest assessment of Germany's security services, Russia will be in a position to attack NATO and EU territory by the end of this decade. I myself received this latest report during a trip to Washington DC last week, and while the tone of the discussions was friendlier, it was no less sobering in terms of content.
For the first time in 80 years, we have to confront this threat without the certainty of America doing the heavy lifting for us. And this new reality of Russian aggression and American retreat requires a fundamental reassessment of our strategic priorities. This is the aim of the CSDP, but this report is also the chance to develop a positive and forward looking strategic vision of the Europe we want to live in, in the Europe we want to defend. Because here in Europe, security has never been just about military strength. Our security is built on social cohesion, economic fairness and solidarity between Member States just as much as it is built on military progress. This is the foundation of our resilience and the true source of our soft power. And that's why defence spending must always go hand in hand with investment in infrastructure, competitiveness and the social fabric of our societies.
Colleagues, at this geopolitical turning point, Europeans rightly expect their governments and the EU to protect their physical safety, but they also expect us to invest in a future that is worth defending.

António Tânger Corrêa (PfE). – Madam President, High Representative, dear colleagues, well, as the shadow rapporteur for the Patriots for Europe, I feel compelled to express a fundamental concern. This is not a political disagreement, but a procedural and democratic failure.
Every single amendment, Mr McAllister, that I proposed was rejected without debate, without engagement. Not because they were extreme, but because they came from the wrong family. I hope it is not nothing personal against me, of course.
So, I give you some examples. The persecution of Christians all over the world, which is probably the group more persecuted these days. The Balkans who live a very sensitive situation right now, mainly in Bosnia, where the Islamisation is in full process. EU funds and human rights violations, I mean, demanding EU funding must never support regimes or organisations to violate basic freedoms and that's not what's happening.
So, this has been a report with a lack of democracy, a lack of participation from everybody. Mr McAllister, you are not marginalising me. You are marginalising millions of European citizens who voted for us, for the parties who composed the Patriots for Europe in this Parliament. This Parliament is supposed to be the House of democracy, and my person, the votes on me are the same as the votes on anybody else in this House.

Alberico Gambino (ECR). – Signora Presidente, signora Alta rappresentante, onorevoli colleghi, questa relazione ci impone una riflessione: vogliamo un'Europa forte o solo più burocratica?
               

                  La cooperazione è necessaria, ma non può sacrificare la sovranità degli Stati membri. L'accordo con l'Albania, ad esempio, sui rimpatri è qualcosa di concreto; contrastare l'immigrazione illegale si può, servono coraggio e pragmatismo. La Commissione ha confermato che è pienamente conforme al diritto dell'Unione. Basta ideologie, servono soluzioni concrete.
               

                  Sostenere l'Ucraina è doveroso ma non dimentichiamo l'obiettivo: costruire una pace giusta e duratura, non alimentare un conflitto senza fine.
               

                  E basta con l'illusione di un'Europa alternativa alla NATO, o in contrapposizione agli Stati Uniti: l'Occidente si difende insieme, con equilibrio e una visione comune.
               

                  L'Europa torni ad essere protagonista senza complessi, e senza rinunciare alla propria identità.
               

Bart Groothuis (Renew). – Madam President, colleagues, dear Vice-President/High Representative, the biggest victim of the past months of Trump being in office is, of course, Russia.
For the past 108 years, generations of Russians have been told that everything wrong in Russian society is to blame on the United States. It's the fault of the Americans. But now that Russia has gloriously won the second Cold War and increasingly has an ally in Washington, Russia needs a new enemy. And you and I, dear Commissioner, know what enemy that's going to be. It will be Europe.
So we need to rebuild deterrence comparable to NATO's deterrence in the 1980s, re-arm Europe, not individually but collectively with the friends we have in Norway, the United Kingdom and even Canada.
But what is not yet in today's reports, and what should be, is the acknowledgement that the United States also competed with Russia in Africa, in the Global South, between its intelligence services, in space, on military bases, etc. Europe should now take on that effort too or the autocratic order will grow.
So I urge you to vote in favour of the defence report I had the honour of co-negotiating, but this is merely the beginning.

Hannah Neumann (Verts/ALE). – Madam President, colleagues, what a time to shape European foreign policy. Russia and China are launching one hybrid attack after another on the one side, the US Government preoccupied with weakening us through trade wars and bullying on the other – both trying to tear European unity apart. And here we stand between a rock and a hard place, or we finally wake up and become a power of our own.
We hold all the cards, dear colleagues: the people, the money, the skills. We are seen as the reliable, the predictable partners. So many governments, so many individuals are waiting for us to rise to the challenge. So let us stand united – united in our commitment to the values this Union is built upon: democracy, international law and the burning desire for freedom.
But what credibility do we have if we only help the most vulnerable when their governments accept forced returns? When the same people that demand the ICC to act more forcefully against Putin attack it over its arrest warrants against Netanyahu? When the Commission deepens security cooperation with Türkiye while Erdoğan jails his main opponent?
Like many, dear colleagues, I am ready to defend this Union with weapons if need be. Not the territorial notion, but the vision of its founding fathers and mothers, the values enshrined in the first articles of the Lisbon Treaty: freedom, justice, democracy.
Dear colleagues, let's not lose sight of what we are here to protect in the days, weeks and years to come.

Özlem Demirel (The Left). – Frau Präsidentin! Es war die europäische Geschichte, die uns lehrte, was Krieg bedeutet. Unser kollektives Gedächtnis lehrte uns, dass der Weg zu Sicherheit und Frieden gegenseitige Abrüstung, Entspannungspolitik und Diplomatie ist. Die EU nannte sich mal eine Diplomatiemacht, doch das Wort Diplomatie erscheint nur noch beiläufig.
               

                  Kollegen, Sie reden nur noch von Aufrüstung und Kriegstüchtigkeit – auch der Bericht über die Gemeinsame Außen- und Sicherheitspolitik folgt dieser Logik. Für Waffenschmieden und den Krieg mobilisieren Sie in einem rasanten Tempo Milliarden, während bei der Armutsbekämpfung, für Umweltschutz oder die Daseinsvorsorge vorgeblich kein Geld da ist. Sie sagen, zum Schutze der Demokratie müsse man aufrüsten, doch im Zuge der weltweiten Aufrüstung geraten liberale Freiheiten immer weiter unter Druck. Autokraten bleiben Ihre Premiumpartner, solange sie Ihren geopolitischen Interessen entsprechen, Ihnen ihre Märkte öffnen und Ressourcen zugänglich machen.
               

                  Diese Doppelmoral schadet – so verlieren Sie nicht nur Glaubwürdigkeit im Ausland, sondern auch hier. Einhergehend mit dem Militarismus erstarkt auch der Rechtspopulismus und Nationalismus – eine fatale Entwicklung. Militarismus ist auch schädlich für das Klima. Jetzt wollen Sie auch im Raumfahrtprogramm der EU militarisieren. An Universitäten wollen Sie jetzt quasi Forschungseinrichtungen für Kriegsfähigkeit schaffen.
               

                  Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen, wir verteidigen die Lehren, unser kollektives Gedächtnis. Wir sagen Nein zu diesem total falschen Kurs der EU. Wir brauchen Frieden und Diplomatie, nicht Kriegstüchtigkeit.
               

Marcin Sypniewski (ESN). – Pani Przewodnicząca! Można dostrzec powtórkę z historii. Cesarstwo Rzymskie upadło przez kryzys moralny, ekonomiczny i inwazję barbarzyńców. I dzisiaj Europa popełnia te same błędy. Europa jest zagrożona, bo przez lata wierzyliśmy w koniec historii i wyższość naszego modelu. Porzuciliśmy realną politykę, rozbroiliśmy się i otworzyliśmy drzwi dla masowej migracji. I ta migracja dzisiaj rozsadza naszą cywilizację od środka. Dlatego ochrona granic to jest najwyższy priorytet. Mówimy tutaj o granicach zewnętrznych Unii Europejskiej, a przede wszystkim, z mojej perspektywy, o zaporze skutecznej, realnej zaporze na wschodzie.
               

                  Wsparcie w tym zakresie Polski to jest interes Unii Europejskiej. Jest to konieczność wobec hybrydowych ataków Łukaszenki i Putina na nasz kraj, a tym samym na Unię Europejską. Sami pod sobą kopiemy dołki. Musimy wzmacniać nasz przemysł, bezpieczeństwo energetyczne, porzucić ideologię Zielonego Ładu, żebyśmy byli też mocni gospodarczo. I mówimy też stanowcze ‘nie’ dla superpaństwa europejskiego. Przeciwko temu protestujemy. Europa suwerennych narodów to przyszłość Europy.
               

Monika Beňová (NI). – Vážená pani predsedajúca, chápem dôvody, pre ktoré je potrebné obnoviť vojenské kapacity Európy, a najmä po politickom rozhodnutí, že všetku kľúčovú vojenskú techniku poskytneme Ukrajine.
               

                  Nedávne dáta Eurobarometra však ukazujú znepokojujúcu realitu. Viac ako jedna tretina našich občanov očakáva zhoršenie kvality života v dôsledku narastajúcej krízy životných nákladov. Ako dlho si môžeme dovoliť, aby toto pokračovalo, keď teraz prichádza návrh, že potrebujeme takmer 800 miliárd, ktoré budeme dávať na obranu? Členské štáty momentálne konsolidujú svoje rozpočty a častokrát dochádza k ostrej kritike zo strany opozičných strán, vidíme to aj na Slovensku, napriek tomu, že tá konsolidácia je nevyhnutná. Je preto mimoriadne znepokojujúce, a dokonca nebezpečné riskovať vznik finančnej krízy na úkor bežných Európanov len preto, aby profitovali vojenské spoločnosti a prehlbovala sa vojenská dilema spôsobená náhlym nárastom vojenských kapacít.
               

                  Vždy som vystupovala proti globálnej militarizácii. EÚ musí ostať verná svojim základom a svojej základnej identite, diplomatickej sile a mieru.
               

Łukasz Kohut (PPE). – Pani Przewodnicząca! Pani Komisarz! Jesteśmy tutaj dla obywateli. Obywatele w tych niestabilnych czasach muszą czuć, że instytucje europejskie działają sprawnie i że Unia się rozwija. Ludzi naprawdę nie interesuje konflikt polityczny między Parlamentem, Radą czy Komisją Europejską. Ludzi interesuje konkret, bezpieczeństwo i rozwój.
               

                  I tak w tych trudnych czasach Islandia rozważa wznowienie negocjacji dotyczących akcesji do Unii Europejskiej. Trzymamy kciuki za Islandię. Bardzo ciekawie jest także w Norwegii. Oslo od lat uczestniczy w Europejskim Funduszu Obronnym czy w PESCO, a także hojnie wspiera Ukrainę i nakłada sankcje na Rosję. Nie ma bliższego sojusznika Unii w polityce bezpieczeństwa od Norwegii. Doceńmy to i życzmy sobie, aby nastroje prointegracyjne w Norwegii rosły w siłę.
               

You may say that I am a dreamer. Ale kto by jeszcze trzy lata temu przypuszczał, że Szwecja i Finlandia będą w NATO? Więc nie dajmy sobie wmówić prawicowym populistom i rosyjskim trollom, że my, Europejczycy, jesteśmy gorsi. Nie jesteśmy. My nie musimy czynić Europy ponownie wielką. Europa jest wielka. Tylko mniej biurokracji, więcej deregulacji, szybkie działania w sprawie Węgier, Orbana, artykuł 7 i unifikacja polityki obronnej w całej Unii Europejskiej. Do przodu Europo!
               

Γιάννης Μανιάτης (S&D). – Κυρία Πρόεδρε, αγαπητοί συνάδελφοι, η Ευρώπη βρίσκεται αντιμέτωπη με σημαντικές γεωπολιτικές προκλήσεις. Οι προτεραιότητες της νέας αμερικανικής κυβέρνησης διαφέρουν σημαντικά από αυτές της Ευρώπης. Οι δύο εκθέσεις του Κοινοβουλίου για την εξωτερική πολιτική, την ασφάλεια και την άμυνα τεκμηριώνουν την ανάγκη, σε αυτό το νέο και ασταθές περιβάλλον, η Ένωση να έχει ισχυρή παρουσία. Με μια αυτόνομη εξωτερική πολιτική και με ολοκληρωμένη στρατηγική τόσο για τη Μεσόγειο όσο και για τη Μέση Ανατολή. Με ισχυρή αποτρεπτική παρουσία, ώστε να είναι ικανή να προστατεύσει τα κράτη μέλη της από αυταρχικούς ηγέτες με αυτοκρατορικούς αναθεωρητισμούς, τόσο στα ανατολικά σύνορα και την περιοχή της Βαλτικής όσο και στην περιοχή της Ανατολικής Μεσογείου. Με κοινά εξοπλιστικά προγράμματα για την ενίσχυση της ευρωπαϊκής αμυντικής βιομηχανίας σε όλα τα κράτη μέλη που θα χρηματοδοτηθούν με φρέσκο ευρωπαϊκό χρήμα. Όχι δάνεια που επιβαρύνουν τους εθνικούς προϋπολογισμούς. Όχι περικοπές στο Ταμείο Συνοχής που υπονομεύουν τις κοινωνικές μας αντοχές. Μια Ευρώπη-πυλώνας σταθερότητας σε έναν όλο και πιο ασταθή κόσμο.
               

Pierre-Romain Thionnet (PfE). – Madame la Présidente, le contexte international que nous vivons est en pleine recomposition. Les nations européennes n'ont plus le droit à la faiblesse et à la naïveté. Au-delà du nécessaire réarmement militaire que chaque État doit fournir, c'est à un réarmement moral que nous devons procéder.
               

                  On le sait, le XXIe siècle ne sera pas seulement le siècle de la puissance, il sera aussi celui de l'identité, celui de la capacité à défendre ce que nous sommes, ce en quoi nous croyons. Pour être crédible sur la scène internationale, l'Europe ne doit pas prêter le flanc à des déstabilisations internes. Elle doit éviter à tout prix de dire ou d'agir de telle manière à offrir à nos adversaires et compétiteurs l'occasion de nous affaiblir et de nous discréditer.
               

                  C'est pourquoi, chers collègues, je veux dénoncer ici les profondes atteintes à la démocratie opérées par nos propres nations, ici, au cœur du continent qui a donné vie à la démocratie. Après la Roumanie, c'est la France qui a décidé hier de priver ses citoyens de leur liberté de vote en éliminant la principale candidate à l'élection présidentielle. Je crains, chers collègues, que cette dérive antidémocratique n'entache gravement notre réputation, et donc notre capacité à faire entendre notre voix de liberté dans le monde.
               

Rihards Kols (ECR). – Madam President, dear colleagues, the EU's credibility as a geopolitical actor depends on three things: coherence, speed and resolve.
First, we must strengthen the EU's External Action Service with the political weight, intelligence capabilities and coordination tools needed to act, not just react.
Second, conditionality must not be optional. Every euro, every agreement – from trade to development aid – must reinforce our strategic goals and core values. No more partnerships à la carte.
Third, we must expand trade agreements with like-minded partners, reducing dependency on systematic rivals.
And finally, enlargement. The process must move faster with clear criteria, yes, but without letting internal blockers sabotage the will of candidate countries determined to join our Union. Power unused is power lost.
And, Madam High Representative, please break this curse that for seven years in a row, the High Representative hasn't paid respect in person the CFSP conferences. That is a disgrace.

Hilde Vautmans (Renew). – Voorzitter, collega's, hoge vertegenwoordiger, alle brandhaarden in de wereld hebben één iets gemeenschappelijk: Europa zit niet mee aan tafel als er over vrede wordt gesproken. Europa speelt niet mee, niet in Oekraïne, niet in het Midden-Oosten.
               

                  Wat de Europese buitenlandmachine nu nodig heeft, is een geopolitieke motor. Hoe moet die motor er dan uitzien? Wel, drie dingen: eerst en vooral moet onze voet van de rempedaal af. Schaf de unanimiteitsregel af. Ten tweede: creëer die eengemaakte defensiemarkt. Verplicht mensen om te investeren in Europese goederen, los van Amerika. Ten derde: integreer onze Europese diplomatie in die Europese defensie, zodat onze soft power steunt op geloofwaardige afschrikking.
               

                  Het debat over wat ons Europees buitenlands beleid nodig heeft, gaat niet over thema's, noch over regels. Het moet gaan over het systeem, over het oplossen van de systeemfouten die veto's belonen en actie voorkomen. Eigenlijk is het heel eenvoudig. In de jaren negentig hebben we één gemeenschappelijke markt gecreëerd voor goederen, personen en diensten. Laten we vandaag ook één veiligheids- en defensiebeleid in Europa tot stand brengen.
               

Jaume Asens Llodrà (Verts/ALE). – Señora presidenta, señora Kallas, su discurso del miedo —los búnkeres, los kits de supervivencia en caso de guerra— es un despropósito. Ustedes no solo nos toman el pelo sino que quieren manipularnos e inocularnos miedo para anestesiar nuestras conciencias, porque saben que una sociedad con miedo, en estado de shock, es una sociedad que puede aceptar cualquier recorte, resignada, que puede firmar ese cheque en blanco de 800 000 millones de euros para el rearme masivo, que se queda en casa y no sale a la calle a protestar.
               

                  Pero nuestra obligación es quitarle el miedo a la ciudadanía y recordarle que de lo único de lo que debemos tener miedo es del propio miedo, como decía Roosevelt en la Gran Depresión. Porque ahí donde hay miedo, no hay esperanza, ni libertad, ni conciencia social. Hay egoísmo, odio, nacionalismo, racismo, fascismo y extrema derecha.
               

                  Lo que necesitamos, señora Kallas, no es miedo, sino una reflexión serena sobre el modelo de seguridad. Necesitamos información, no propaganda. Necesitamos una economía social, no de guerra. Un kit de derechos, no de recortes. Casas para vivir, no búnkeres.
               

Lynn Boylan (The Left). – A Uachtaráin, I'd like to welcome VP Kallas here today, given her notable absence at recent debates. And today I want to compare what Israel says with what Israel does, seeing as the Commission is unable to make that distinction.
Israel claims it facilitates humanitarian aid entering Gaza. Yet all entry points into Gaza are closed for cargo since early March. At the border, food is rotting, medicine is expiring and vital medical equipment is trapped. Israel originally denied bombing the Al-Ahli Arab Hospital. It has now attacked all hospitals in Gaza. Israel denies targeting journalists, yet they've killed over 200 journalists in Gaza. Israel denies killing humanitarian workers, yet they've murdered 15 paramedics and aid workers one by one and buried them in a shallow grave, some of them with their hands bound.
Under the EU's watch, Israel has normalised genocide and contempt for international law. When will the EU find its humanity and stand up to this rogue state. Sanction Israel, free Palestine!

Hans Neuhoff (ESN). – Frau Präsidentin! Die Außen- und Sicherheitspolitik der Union ist ein Wirrwarr aus verzerrter Wahrnehmung und moralischer Verstiegenheit. Der Islamismus ist den Berichterstattern bei der EVP nicht eine Silbe wert. In Deutschland müssen Weihnachtsmärkte, Karnevalsumzüge, Bahnhöfe vor islamistischen Gewalttätern geschützt werden, nicht vor russischen Infanteristen. Was macht die EU? Sie finanziert ein Taliban-Emirat in Syrien.
               

                  Russland ist nicht der Feind Europas. Russland ist ein defensives Imperium, das sich durch die Erweiterung der NATO bis in den Donbass und den Südkaukasus existenziell bedroht sieht. Wer das nicht versteht und zum Heiligen Krieg gegen Russland rüstet, der führt uns ins Verderben.
               

                  Ceterum censeo: Die ESN-Fraktion lehnt die Mitgliedschaft der Ukraine in der NATO und in der EU ab. Die Zukunft der Ukraine kann allein in ihrer Rückkehr zur Neutralität bestehen.
               

Francisco José Millán Mon (PPE). – Señora presidenta, yo felicito, en primer lugar, a los ponentes por sus completos informes, que ofrecen un diagnóstico de nuestra política exterior y de seguridad y que trazan también una hoja de ruta a seguir. Vivimos en un nuevo escenario global marcado por una profunda incertidumbre. Quiero detenerme en tres ideas breves.
               

                  En primer lugar, debemos continuar nuestro firme apoyo a Ucrania. Necesitamos la paz, pero tiene que ser una paz justa y duradera. Rusia es el agresor, y ahora pone todos los obstáculos para la paz. No negocia con buena fe, como acaba de advertir la alta representante.
               

                  En segundo lugar, en el contexto mundial actual es imprescindible reforzar la defensa europea, como piden nuestros ciudadanos según el último Eurobarómetro. Esto requiere aumentar el gasto en defensa e incrementar nuestras capacidades, mejorar la estandarización y la coordinación, reforzar nuestra base industrial y reducir dependencias.
               

                  En tercer lugar, en un mundo tan convulso, debemos intentar preservar el vínculo transatlántico sustentado en una profundísima integración de nuestras economías y en valores también comunes. Pero también tenemos que diversificar nuestras relaciones, como por ejemplo ahora profundizándolas con Mercosur.
               

                  Este es el momento de tomar decisiones en materia de política exterior y, en especial, de defensa.
               

Nacho Sánchez Amor (S&D). – Señora presidenta, intentaré concentrar en un minuto tres asuntos.
               

                  En primer lugar, una falta de ajuste entre nuestras expectativas en política exterior y los medios que empleamos. Hay una crónica infrafinanciación del Servicio Europeo de Acción Exterior pero, al mismo tiempo, hay una crónica inflación de las expectativas. A usted todos le pedimos de todo y hay que preocuparse para que, en el nuevo marco financiero, no siga esa situación: que haya que mendigar cada pocos meses en la Comisión un refuerzo financiero.
               

                  En segundo lugar, su obligación es siempre tratar de acordar a veintisiete, de tener a todos a bordo. Ese es su papel. Pero, si no se consigue en un plazo razonable para llegar a tiempo a las crisis, hay que normalizar trabajar a veintiséis o a veinticinco. No insisto en la idea del diputado Gahler. Cualquier medida salvo seguir dando una impresión de parálisis o de llegar tarde.
               

                  En tercer lugar, los dobles estándares son el cáncer de nuestra política exterior. Y ya sé que no siempre es posible conseguir la unanimidad pero, usted, con sus declaraciones públicas, sí puede tratar de limitar el daño que nos hace aparecer ante el mundo en unos casos alzando mucho la voz y, en otros casos, siendo muy tímidos.
               

Αφροδίτη Λατινοπούλου (PfE). – Κυρία Πρόεδρε, αγαπητοί συνάδελφοι, δεν μπορεί να υπάρξει καμία απολύτως συζήτηση για κοινή εξωτερική πολιτική και φυσικά για πολιτική ασφαλείας και άμυνας αν δεν ξεκαθαριστούν οι βασικές διαφορές μας. Η Τουρκία είναι φίλη ή εχθρός της Ευρωπαϊκής Ένωσης; Για εμάς δεν υπάρχει δίλημμα, γιατί πολύ απλά και ξεκάθαρα είναι εχθρός της χώρας μου αλλά και της Ευρωπαϊκής Ένωσης, ειδικά όταν κατέχει παράνομα για 51 χρόνια το 38 % της Κύπρου. Συμφωνούμε όλοι σε αυτό; Πώς θα υπάρξει λοιπόν ενιαία πολιτική ασφαλείας αν δεν ξεκαθαρίζονται τα σύνορα της Ευρωπαϊκής Ένωσης; Δηλαδή, εάν υπάρξει θερμό επεισόδιο Ελλάδας-Τουρκίας ή Τουρκίας-Κύπρου, λόγου χάρη, θα επέμβει ο ευρωπαϊκός στρατός υπέρ της Ελλάδας ή της Κύπρου, χωρίς ναι μεν και αστερίσκους;
               

                  Τα οπλικά συστήματα ενός ευρωπαϊκού στρατού θα πρέπει να διασφαλιστεί πως θα φτιάχνονται αποκλειστικά εντός της Ευρωπαϊκής Ένωσης, με συμμετοχή όλων των κρατών μελών. Και φυσικά η Τουρκία θα πρέπει να αποκλειστεί από οποιοδήποτε ευρωπαϊκό πρόγραμμα. Αν αυτά δεν εξασφαλίζονται ως ελάχιστες προϋποθέσεις, τότε αυτή η συζήτηση εδώ δεν έχει πραγματικά το παραμικρό νόημα. Η Κύπρος είναι Ελλάδα και τα σύνορα της Ελλάδας είναι το νοτιότερο άκρο της Ευρωπαϊκής Ένωσης. Απλά, λιτά και ξεκάθαρα.
               

Nathalie Loiseau (Renew). – Madame la Présidente, je n'ai qu'une minute et je n'irai pas par quatre chemins. Si l'Europe veut rester en paix, il n'y a qu'une voie: nous devons soutenir l'Ukraine militairement, massivement et immédiatement. Hélas, l'heure de la paix n'a pas encore sonné en Ukraine. Les cessez-le-feu boiteux proposés par Washington n'ont fait qu'enhardir Vladimir Poutine.
               

                  Si nous voulons une paix juste et durable, nous devons permettre à Kiev de négocier en position de force. Il nous faut bien sûr renforcer notre défense européenne face à la menace russe, mais nous devons aussi amoindrir cette menace en soutenant mieux la résistance ukrainienne contre la Russie, et le faire vite.
               

                  Que le Conseil européen du 20 mars, chère Madame la Haute Représentante, ait échoué à s'accorder sur un surcroît d'aide militaire à l'Ukraine est une erreur historique. Affaiblir la Russie aujourd'hui en Ukraine est beaucoup plus efficace et moins coûteux que de se défendre demain contre une menace russe décuplée.
               

                  Enfin, cessons de commenter les dernières saillies de Donald Trump. Nous ne pouvons plus compter sur Washington, qui négocie sans nous et mal. L'Ukraine et le reste du monde se demandent si nous sommes enfin devenus adultes, enfin capables d'aider nos alliés seuls. Si nous en donnons la preuve, nous serons pris au sérieux; si nous échouons, plus personne ne comptera sur nous.
               

Hanna Gedin (The Left). – Fru talman! Förra veckan avrättades 15 sjukvårdare och räddningsarbetare av israeliska styrkor. ‘Vi gräver upp dem i sina uniformer med handskarna på. De var här för att rädda liv. Istället hamnar de i en massgrav’, berättar en FN-chef.
               

                  Samtidigt som detta hände åkte Sveriges utrikesminister Maria Malmer Stenergard till Israel på en ren propagandaresa. Och Israels utrikesminister hyllade naturligtvis besöket och prisade Sverige för att ha brutit sitt stöd till livsviktiga UNRWA. Det är en ofattbar skam.
               

                  Utrikesminister Maria Malmer Stenergard! Kommissionär Kallas! Ni har makten att stoppa folkmordet. Ni har en skyldighet att stå upp för internationell rätt. Er flathet mot den brutala israeliska regimen kommer att gå till historien som ett exempellöst svek.
               

Salvatore De Meo (PPE). – Signora Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, in un contesto geopolitico sempre più instabile la sicurezza e la difesa comune non sono un'opzione, ma una scelta obbligata.
               

                  L'Europa ha bisogno di una capacità di deterrenza credibile, che mostri al mondo un'Unione forte, coesa e capace di proteggere i propri cittadini, i propri interessi e i propri valori.
               

                  Per questo dobbiamo rafforzare il pilastro europeo all'interno della NATO, con cui dobbiamo essere in sinergia e non in competizione, assumendoci la nostra parte di responsabilità e rendendo l'Alleanza atlantica e l'Occidente tutto ancora più forte.
               

                  Ma è fondamentale anche un cambio di percezione culturale, perché quando parliamo di difesa i cittadini non vanno spaventati, né possiamo pensare solo alla dimensione militare.
               

                  Oggi difesa significa anche cibersicurezza, tutela delle infrastrutture critiche, delle rotte commerciali, dell'approvvigionamento energetico; significa controllo dell'immigrazione irregolare e supporto nelle attività di protezione civile.
               

                  La sicurezza non è un costo. Investire nella difesa non significa fare la guerra, ma è il presupposto della nostra stabilità sociale ed economica, della nostra libertà, della nostra credibilità internazionale.
               

                  O diventiamo attori globali, o continueremo a essere solo spettatori di decisioni altrui.
               

Hana Jalloul Muro (S&D). – Señora presidenta, señora Kallas, señorías, la Unión Europea se encuentra ante una encrucijada geopolítica que exige claridad estratégica. La guerra de agresión rusa sigue socavando el orden europeo mientras la rivalidad global se intensifica. Incluso alianzas históricas como la transatlántica son inestables. Ya no basta con proclamar principios, debemos dotarlos de fuerza política y coherencia exterior.
               

                  En Oriente Próximo la crisis humanitaria, con la pérdida de decenas de miles de vidas y la destrucción de ciudades en su totalidad, exige más que silencios o declaraciones. Nuestra ambigüedad ha tenido consecuencias. Hemos perdido peso en una región que fue central en nuestra acción exterior y que debe serlo. Si queremos recuperar esa voz, debemos dejar atrás la ilusión de neutralidad entre partes iguales y los dobles estándares que comentaba antes mi compañero Nacho Sánchez Amor. La neutralidad ante el sufrimiento no es equilibrio, es complicidad.
               

                  Debemos defender activamente el respeto del orden internacional basado en normas y utilizar con decisión los instrumentos de los que ya dispone la Unión, como condicionar nuestras asociaciones al respeto de los derechos humanos y el Estado de Derecho. Al mismo tiempo tenemos que tejer alianzas más sólidas con América Latina, África y Asia y también con algunas regiones emergentes como el Golfo.
               

Claudiu-Richard Târziu (ECR). – Doamnă președintă, stimați colegi, discutăm astăzi despre apărare și securitate în Uniunea Europeană. Foarte bine, pentru că sentimentul de nesiguranță și teama de o posibilă agresiune sunt fenomene sociale devastatoare pentru orice comunitate.
               

                  Dar care este astăzi cea mai mare amenințare la adresa Uniunii Europene? Au fost vremuri în care o amenințare militară sau de tip hibrid la adresa Uniunii Europene era de neconceput. Vorbesc de timpul în care credința cetățenilor în valorile și în viitorul acestei construcții politice era de nezdruncinat. Astăzi vorbim despre amenințări externe și despre nevoia de a întări forța armată. Este esențial să fim pregătiți pentru orice, dar în calitate de oameni politici responsabili, trebuie să fim mai întâi realiști.
               

                  Cea mai mare amenințare la adresa Uniunii Europene vine astăzi din interior, din deciziile pe care oamenii le înțeleg din ce în ce mai puțin din decalajele între statele Uniunii Europene și din sistemul decizional tot mai concentrat la vârful Uniunii. Este din nou vremea fabricanților de arme și muniții. Dacă vom găsi înțelepciunea și curajul să ne amintim marile lecții, vom (…)
               

(Președintele a retras cuvântul vorbitorului)


Petras Auštrevičius (Renew). – Madam President, Madam High Representative, dear colleagues, more than ever before, Europeans have clearly and highly rightly made the EU's foreign and security policy an existential priority, making it a central theme in the last European Parliament elections. We must respect this and respond without undue delay.
Let us not forget that those who have challenged our way of life have not changed and intend to continue their destructive actions.
Above all, the European Union must strengthen its foreign policy, security and defence instruments and its financial capacity to implement them. It is clear that the sanctions imposed must be implemented at the level of the Union and have real leverage on third countries that violate United Nations or EU values.
Ensuring the security of our citizens cannot be subject to any reservations and therefore Member States must agree on how to coordinate national military planning and procurement in a realistic and more coordinated way, optimising the total cost of defence.

Davor Ivo Stier (PPE). – Madam President, I'm glad that the CFSP report begins with the Western Balkans, because if there is a place where the EU is expected to have a leading role in fostering peace, it is exactly in this region.
Our ambition is to integrate all the six countries in the EU on an individual and merit-based approach. As the biggest of the six, Serbia has an important position, but the Commission and the Council should be much clearer and firmer in conveying the message that progress depends on the full alignment with the EU's CFSP, the respect of the rule of law, as well as the implementation of the Brussels and Ohrid Agreements for the normalisation of relations with Kosovo. It is also time for the EU to lift sanctions to Kosovo and accept its candidacy.
We welcome the progress made by Albania and encourage it to strengthen the rule of law. We strongly support the EU aspirations of Montenegro, and we caution about the forces wanting to undermine its sovereignty. We look forward to the constitutional changes that will allow North Macedonia to unblock accession negotiations.
And we strongly condemn the separatist policies of Milorad Dodik and support the territorial integrity of Bosnia and Herzegovina, the equality of its three constituent peoples and all its citizens, and we urge it to make the final steps to open accession negotiations.

(The speaker agreed to take a blue-card question)


Diana Iovanovici Șoșoacă (NI),
întrebare adresată conform procedurii ‘cartonașului albastru’
                     . – Nu știu dacă am înțeles eu bine, dar dumneavoastră ați spus ca Serbia să nu mai solicite Kosovo? Bunicii mei paterni sunt din Serbia și din Macedonia, bunicul chiar născut lângă Kosovo. Aveți idee despre istoria Serbiei? Știți că Kosovo este Serbia? Știți că o astfel de mișcare poate duce și la probleme în Spania, în Italia și în România, cu Transilvania, care dintotdeauna a fost a României și o vrea Ungaria?
               

Davor Ivo Stier (PPE),
blue-card answer. – What we know is that both Serbia and Kosovo have accepted obligations under the Brussels and Ohrid Agreements.
Kosovo has its part of obligations with the Association of Municipalities in the north, and Serbia has voluntarily accepted the obligation not to block Kosovo's membership in regional and international organisations.
What we are asking both countries is to fulfil the obligations they freely accepted.

Tonino Picula (S&D). – Madam President, Madam High Representative, colleagues, both documents are a complex reflection of a very challenging, uncertain and changing international environment, requiring constant updates as we wake up every morning with the new uncertainties.
The indispensable importance of transatlantic partnership should be enhanced with the more realistic approach after all the threats and offensive statements from the new Trump administration.
There is also the fundamental dilemma on how to redefine our relationship with China in this new environment. Enhanced cooperation and coordination with like-minded partners is essential too.
The grave state of the world can be also a chance for Europe to take the lead in fighting for democracy, security and the rules-based order. In that sense, we must not forget about our immediate neighbourhood and the fragility of many candidate countries.
Lastly, the common security and defence policy should finally become a reality not only through ReArm Europe, but also by coordinating better.

Lucia Yar (Renew). – Vážená pani predsedajúca, Rusi zbroja, akoby už nič pozajtra nemalo existovať. Ak Putina nezastavíme spolu, pôjde ďalej. Tieto slová mi v sobotu v Kyjeve na mojej ceste povedal zástupca ministra obrany. A viete, mňa naozaj šokuje, že kolegovia aj v tomto pléne žijú stále v ilúzii, že nás sa to netýka.
               

                  Obe správy, o ktorých tu dnes rokujeme, konštatujú, že jedinou cestou, schodnou cestou k obnoveniu ukrajinskej suverenity je mier. Ale vy, ktorí voláte po rýchlom mieri bez záruk a ešte si chodíte aj po inštrukcie do Moskvy, tak sa už konečne choďte spýtať aj do Kyjeva! Ukrajinci už mali rýchlokvasený ruský mier na stole veľakrát. A kam ich to priviedlo? Nevoláte po skutočnom mieri, ale po kapitulácii. Takýto mier by bol len prestávkou, ktorú Putin potrebuje na prípravu na ďalší útok, a tentoraz už priamo na Európsku úniu.
               

                  Vám, pani Kallas, chcem ešte poďakovať, že rovnako hlasne podporujete Ukrajinu, stojíte za ňou a čelíte kritike napriek tomu, že nazývate Rusko pravým menom: agresor.
               

Βαγγέλης Μεϊμαράκης (PPE). – Κυρία Πρόεδρε, ακόμη μια χρονιά καλούμαστε να ψηφίσουμε την ετήσια έκθεση για την Κοινή Εξωτερική Πολιτική και Πολιτική Άμυνας της Ευρωπαϊκής Ένωσης, την οποία υπερψηφίζω. Αυτή τη φορά όμως η σημασία της είναι μεγάλη, καθώς η Ευρώπη έχει θέσει την άμυνα και την ασφάλεια στην κορυφή των προτεραιοτήτων της, σε συνέχεια και της υιοθέτησης της Λευκής Βίβλου από το Ευρωπαϊκό Κοινοβούλιο. Προς την κατεύθυνση αυτή, αναγκαζόμαστε λοιπόν να κάνουμε άλματα τεράστια για να κερδίσουμε τον χρόνο που χάσαμε. Γιατί εδώ και χρόνια και εγώ και άλλοι συνάδελφοι επαναλαμβάνουμε στην Ολομέλεια του Κοινοβουλίου ότι χρειαζόμαστε περαιτέρω εμβάθυνση στον τομέα της άμυνας, ώστε η Ένωση να μπορεί να δρα με μία ενιαία φωνή και με ενισχυμένη θέση στο τραπέζι των διαπραγματεύσεων. Λόγω των συνθηκών, τώρα κατανοούμε και καταλήγουμε στο ότι πρέπει να δράσουμε γρήγορα, βρίσκοντας πόρους για την αμυντική μας θωράκιση. Ωστόσο, αντί αυτό να είχε γίνει σταδιακά, με σωστές προβλέψεις και χρονοδιαγράμματα, τώρα πρέπει να κάνουμε θαύματα, και οι έκτακτοι αυτοί πόροι να λείψουν από άλλους τομείς. Το συμπέρασμα λοιπόν είναι ένα και πρέπει να γίνει κατανοητό: καλύτερα να προλαμβάνεις και να προετοιμάζεσαι βήμα-βήμα, παρά να φαίνεται ότι στο επιβάλλουν οι συνθήκες και να επιβάλλεις ελλιπείς πολιτικές, οι οποίες δείχνουν πολλές φορές προχειρότητα, ενώ απαιτείται σύνεση και αποτελεσματικότητα.
               

(Ο αγορητής δέχεται να απαντήσει σε ερώτηση με γαλάζια κάρτα)


Petras Gražulis (ESN),
pakėlus mėlynąją kortelę pateiktas klausimas. – Gerbiamas pranešėjau, Jungtinės Amerikos Valstijos, Ukraina ir Rusija, tarpininkaujant Amerikai, veda derybas, taikos derybas. Kaip jūs žiūrite į šitas derybas? Ir vis tiktai, Europos Sąjunga pažadėjo 40 milijardų paramą Ukrainai, bet nerado nei penkių milijardų. Kas čia per politika Europos Sąjungos?
               

Βαγγέλης Μεϊμαράκης (PPE),
απάντηση σε ερώτηση με γαλάζια κάρτα. – Έχει γίνει κατανοητό ότι αυτός ο πόλεμος πρέπει να λήξει με ειρηνευτικές πρωτοβουλίες. Αλλά νικητής πρέπει να είναι εκείνος ο οποίος δεν προσπαθεί βιαίως να επιβάλει την διαφορά των συνόρων, αλλά ο πολιτισμός και η ειρήνη. Και για αυτό ακριβώς εμείς πιστεύουμε ότι η Ευρωπαϊκή Ένωση πρέπει να είναι στο τραπέζι των διαπραγματεύσεων, ταυτόχρονα με ειρηνευτικές πρωτοβουλίες, ώστε να μπορούμε να τελειώσουμε αυτόν τον πόλεμο με νίκη του πολιτισμού, νίκη της ειρήνης.
               

Thijs Reuten (S&D). – Madam President, High Representative, colleagues, if generally, the EU was as principled, firm and engaged about other geopolitical issues as it has been about Russia's full-scale invasion, we would be in a better place. It also shows us once more we need a truly common foreign and defence policy without unanimity, led by you, the HR/VP. But let's be honest: while the EU has indeed led on Ukraine, not all Member States have followed, and we – you, HR/VP and us – are allies here. We understand the difficulty of your role. We must make the capitals understand how serious the situation is. The conversation at the kitchen table in Finland or Estonia should not be different from that in Portugal, Italy or Ireland. It affects all of us alike if we don't get it right.
Double standards, a tendency to appeasement and overly passive and soft approaches harm our values and strategic interests. So, this Parliament was right about Ukraine, to quote the Commission presidents. Let's live up to our obligations to Ukraine and ourselves and do what you refer to and look at the numbers that the Kiel Institute presented on spending for Ukraine.

Marta Wcisło (PPE). – Pani Przewodnicząca! Pani Komisarz! Szybsze debatowanie i szybsze działanie. Kraje Europy Wschodniej, takie jak Polska, są dziś na pierwszej linii obrony przed zagrożeniami ze Wschodu. Dlatego inicjatywy takie jak Tarcza Wschód i Bałtycka Linia Obrony są dzisiaj konieczne. Polscy europosłowie EPL złożyli kolejne poprawki, aby wzmacniać obronność na lądzie, powietrzu, morzu i w innych dziedzinach. Ponadto składamy poprawkę dotyczącą odblokowania 450 mln euro dla Polski za przekazany Ukrainie sprzęt wojskowy. Pieniądze te są blokowane przez Węgry.
               

                  Wzywamy Komisję Europejską oraz państwa członkowskie do zniesienia węgierskiego embarga czy blokady. Wzywam też wszystkich europosłów z Polski, bez względu na barwy polityczne, o działanie na rzecz bezpieczeństwa. Unia Europejska nie może uzależniać bezpieczeństwa wspólnoty od zgody prorosyjskich polityków. Nasze bezpieczeństwo, Pani Komisarz, w naszych rękach.
               

Riho Terras (PPE). – Madam President, High Representative, the European response to the existential threat from Russia has been insufficient for too long. I wish I could say that our focus has shifted, and we have a common understanding with regard to the security and defence. Unfortunately, that is not the case.
Even today, when there is no doubt that Russia's aim is to destroy our security architecture; even today, when the signals from across the Atlantic are absolutely clear that we must invest in our own defence ourselves; even today, we have countries in Europe that spend less than 2 % on defence, there are countries that spend less than 1 % and saying that they are neutral. We do not have time to play with the option to spend or not to spend. We should agree upon the Union-wide mandatory minimum for defence spending.

Antonio López-Istúriz White (PPE). – Señora presidenta, cuando se trata de garantizar la seguridad y la defensa de nuestros intereses europeos y españoles, más vale prevenir que curar. Y encima sale más barato prevenir que curar.
               

                  En Europa se está previniendo. Tenemos una política ya de defensa que se está implementando. Tenemos ya un Libro Blanco sobre la defensa, un comisario de defensa. Tenemos ya una Comisión de Seguridad y Defensa en el Parlamento Europeo. En algunos de nuestros países, por ejemplo, en Letonia, en Lituania, en Polonia, en Grecia, se duplica ya el gasto para alcanzar los niveles de la OTAN e incluso ir un poco más allá.
               

                  Es desgraciadamente en mi propio país, en España, donde no un debate de la oposición con el Gobierno, sino uno dentro del propio Gobierno, entre los elementos radicales, más radicales, de ese Gobierno, impide que España esté en estos momentos con todos participando de esa seguridad y defensa comunes.
               

                  Yo pido al Gobierno de España que cambie de actitud inmediatamente y que estemos con todos cumpliendo los compromisos de seguridad y defensa que esta Unión Europea necesita.
               

Mārtiņš Staķis,
on behalf of the Verts/ALE Group. – Madam President, this report should mark a turning point. We welcome the progress made: higher defence budget, stronger EU- NATO cooperation and increased support for our defence industry. But it is not enough. 2 % GDP target for defence is a peacetime goal. There is a war in Europe. Shouldn't we invest much more in defence? Countries on Russia's border, we allocate at least 5 %. Latvia, for example, is doubling its army and building Eastern Shield and Baltic Defence Line to secure our borders with Russia and Belarus.
We are asking for more support, not for ourselves, but to defend European borders and our shared values, peace and democracy. Russia must be defeated right now in Ukraine. If we fail, we will be forced to stop Russia within our own borders. Ukraine needs 0.25 % of GDP on military aid, as it was proposed by Ms Kallas.
Thank you for supporting this target in this report. But now every European country must act. This is not just about individual nations. It is about defending all of Europe. Winter is coming. Ukraine has already found ways to create a smart and efficient military industry that produces cost-effective, advanced technology. This means Europe can follow this example. More investment, more cooperation and stronger defence. Europe must act now before it's too late.

Sebastian Tynkkynen (ECR). – Madam President, according to the latest Eurobarometer survey, 36 % of Europeans named security and defence as the EU's top three priorities to focus on. This was the highest vote share amongst all the options given. The results are clear: the European people want their leaders to focus on providing safety first and foremost.
Is this body acting accordingly? It is not. Have we seen a total overhaul of Europe's immigration policy? No, we haven't, even though past mistakes are now risking our security. Or have we been strong enough to push Russia away from Ukrainian soil? No, we haven't.
Now it's time to do what the people are asking us to do: focus on solving security problems, not creating them by repeating our previous mistakes.

Catch-the-eye procedure


Tomislav Sokol (PPE). – Poštovana predsjedavajuća, proces proširenja ima ključnu ulogu u jačanju stabilnosti, sigurnosti i demokracije u Europi. Stoga je dobro što izvješće prepoznaje stvarne izazove, a jedan od njih svakako je destabilizirajući utjecaj Srbije na cijeli prostor jugoistočne Europe, o čemu sam već više puta govorio. Srpska hegemonistička politika ostaje najveća prepreka proširenju. Ona se najjasnije ogleda u odnosima unutar Crne Gore gdje Beograd, kao jedan od saveznika Moskve, sve snažnije utječe na političke i društvene procese. Svjedoci smo sustavnih pokušaja potkopavanja crnogorskog suvereniteta poput ideja o izmjenama Zakona o državljanstvu, koje bi u praksu označile kraj neovisne Crne Gore. Također, jedan od vođa vladajuće koalicije u Crnoj Gori, srpski političar Milan Knežević, zaziva vojni savez sa Srbijom i širi dezinformacije o nekakvoj uroti protiv pravoslavaca na Balkanu, čime izravno doprinosi destabiliziranju ovog prostora. Takvi pokušaji destabilizacije, kao dio koncepta Srpskog sveta, predstavljaju ozbiljnu prijetnju sigurnosti cijelog europskog kontinenta. Zato je ključno da se Europska unija konačno jasno odupre ovoj politici i stavi Srbiju tamo gdje joj je mjesto.
               

João Oliveira (The Left). – Senhora Presidente, Senhora Comissária Kaja Kallas, os povos precisam de relações internacionais orientadas para a paz, para a cooperação, para a solidariedade, para a solução política dos conflitos, para o desanuviamento das tensões internacionais e para o respeito pelos princípios do Direito Internacional.
               

                  Nenhum desses objetivos está presente na Política Externa e de Segurança Comum e Defesa, nem nas resoluções que hoje aqui discutimos.
               

                  Estas resoluções que hoje discutimos são o verdadeiro tratado belicista, orientado para o militarismo, para a guerra, para a política de ingerência e de confrontação. E são também um exercício despudorado de hipocrisia e desprezo pelos princípios do Direito Internacional, por uma União Europeia que recusa condenar Israel e o seu genocídio contra o povo palestiniano, sempre cúmplice dessa política de genocídio. Uma União Europeia que foi cúmplice de guerras de agressão na Síria, na Líbia, no Iraque ou no Afeganistão.
               

                  Senhora Comissária, este não é o sentido que serve os interesses dos povos. A política que serve os interesses dos povos é a política contrária à ação que a União Europeia tem desenvolvido em matéria de Política Externa, Segurança Comum e Defesa.
               

Željana Zovko (PPE). – Poštovana predsjedavajuća, zahvaljujem Davidu McAllisteru na sveobuhvatnom izvješću kojim je obuhvatio i moje amandmane na ključni problem koji ostaje da se riješi u Bosni i Hercegovini. Stoga pozdravljam konačnu odluku visoke povjerenice da ide u Bosnu i Hercegovinu i adresira pitanje svih pitanja, a to je izmjena Izbornog zakona, gdje bi tri naroda, nakon Daytona – trideset godina nakon Daytona – konačno svi dobili svoju jednakopravnost, što je garantirano u Daytonu i potpisano u Parizu prije 30 godina. Srbi, Hrvati i Bošnjaci moraju u Bosni i Hercegovini imati puna prava ustavno, što im je garantirano mirovnim sporazumom. To je ključna točka mosta sa Sjedinjenim Američkim Državama i sa Trumpovom administracijom, gdje možete poentirati i konačno napraviti mir na zapadnom Balkanu. Bez toga nema napretka niti u jednoj zemlji na zapadnom Balkanu, u jugoistočnoj Europi. Bez toga nema napretka ni u Ukrajini. Bez toga, ukoliko se ne poštuje mirovni sporazum, ne možemo očekivati da ćemo imati mir i sigurnost na granicama Europe.
               

Lukas Sieper (NI). – Frau Präsidentin, liebe Mitmenschen! Da stellt sich der Kollege Neuhoff von der AfD doch heute hier wirklich hin und nennt Russland ein defensives Imperium. Ein defensives Imperium, das einen Angriffskrieg führt und das nunmehr seit mehr als drei Jahren Kriegsverbrechen begeht, das die Souveränität anderer Staaten mit Füßen tritt. Und das ist der Staat, den die selbsternannten Patrioten und nationalistischen Politiker in diesem Parlament hier verteidigen.
               

                  Wenn Sie mich fragen, erklären sich diese Leute damit zu den Feinden unserer Demokratie, zu den Feinden unseres Systems, und vielleicht sollten wir sie genau so behandeln. Allein der Kollege Bystron, über dessen Immunität wir heute abgestimmt haben und die wir aufgehoben haben, wird deshalb strafrechtlich verfolgt, weil er sich von den Russen hat bestechen lassen.
               

                  Und nur zum Ende: Das ist die gleiche Partei, mit der – leider – der Vorsitzende der Konservativen, Herr Weber, den ich eigentlich sehr schätze, heute ein nettes Pläuschchen gehalten hat. Lassen Sie uns diese Leute nicht als unsere Freunde behandeln!
               

Michał Szczerba (PPE). – Pani Przewodnicząca! Pani Komisarz! Donald Tusk zwrócił się bezpośrednio do Donalda Trumpa z takimi słowami: współpraca jest zawsze lepsza niż konfrontacja. Cały czas mamy nadzieję, że te słowa znajdą zrozumienie po drugiej stronie Atlantyku. Chcemy bardzo wyraźnie powiedzieć, mamy absolutną świadomość, że nasze relacje, relacje transatlantyckie, znalazły się na zakręcie i te filary, jakimi są z jednej strony bezpieczeństwo, z drugiej strony współpraca gospodarcza, są bardzo zagrożone i również mogą uderzyć w europejską gospodarkę, która buduje swój potencjał obronny.
               

                  Pani Komisarz, jest druga sprawa: jest nadzieja. Tą nadzieją jest praca, którą również podejmują instytucje europejskie, szczególnie Pani, Komisja, w obszarze przyszłego Paktu Bezpieczeństwa i Obrony z Wielką Brytanią. Chcielibyśmy, żeby szczyt Unia Europejska – Wielka Brytania zakończył się konkretami, wspólnym sukcesem i wzmocnieniem naszego sojuszu obronnego z naszym europejskim partnerem.
               

President. – I will now give the floor to the Vice-President/High Representative, but before that I want to explain that those who were here during the debate got the floor under catch-the-eye. If you are not here during the debate, there is no right to have the catch-the-eye due to the rules.

(End of catch-the-eye procedure)


Kaja Kallas,
Vice-President of the Commission / High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy. – Madam President, thank you, honourable Members, allow me to thank you for your continued support to the EU's common foreign and security and defence policies, and few very specific comments and questions that were addressed.
So, many of you on the left addressed this, that we shouldn't talk about what is going on – although, with the war in Ukraine and what threat it poses, what Russian threat poses to the whole of European Union – because it makes people afraid. But we have to be honest with the people. If you listen to what the intelligence services are telling us, what the chief of staff of armies are telling us, this threat is real. Russia is spending more than 9 % of its GDP on the military. They will want to use it again. That's why we need to prepare because if we prepare, then it acts as a deterrence, then we don't need it.
The problem with defence spending is that you need to do these decisions before you actually need it. You need to do those decisions when you have peace time and when it comes to fear – no, we don't need fear – but how you address the fear is that you are prepared and then you are not afraid because you know what to do. That is why we prepare for this, that it would act as a deterrent, that we would never have a war in Europe again. That is why we are doing these things.
Now, I encourage you to not only listen to the first sentence, but actually to listen to the whole speech and all addresses that I had in the Middle East. I also got criticism from Israel, so maybe that shows that the approach has been a balance. But what I want to stress is that I'm in the position to represent the European Union. That means 27 Member States. That's why we have to focus on those things that we agree on and we agree on a lot.
We agree on the two-state solution. That's why we are pushing this and we are part of the coalitions for the two-state solution, in order to have a balanced approach to talk about the security of Israel, but also the rights of Palestinians. Then, we also agree that humanitarian law must be followed. That means that civilians and civilian infrastructure cannot be targeted. We also insist on stopping the killing in Gaza. We also insist on the hostages being released. We also insist on the humanitarian aid not being politicised and humanitarian aid reaching the people in need. So, there are many things we agree on.
That's why I'm also representing the 27 Member States that, you know, also from this Chamber, we have very different views. Engaging with Israel, we have to do that because we also need to address all these issues. Otherwise we don't have the possibility to do that. That's why we had the EU-Israel Association Council, where 27 Member States were also able to raise all these issues.
Then, whoever asked on the Black Sea, we have the Black Sea strategy coming out the end of May. Then, somebody also talked about the quality of life deteriorating if we invest in defence. I can assure you, if you watch the news, then the quality of life will be much worse when there is a war. That's why we need to do this, to preserve our quality of life.
Then, when it comes to Syria, yes, there is this balance we have to do. We need to be in a position where this process is Syria-led, Syria's own. We welcome the Assad regime falling. So the people of Syria also need to have new opportunities. That's why we were lifting sanctions so that there will be jobs and no radicalisation in Syria. Of course it presents risks, but I think we need to avoid also the mistakes we did in Afghanistan, where we don't have the right and possibilities to address the issues that are common or are important to Europe. We are not helping the leadership. We are helping the Syrian people. That is also very important to understand.
Then, on budget: I thank you, also the European Parliament, to have been really pushing for the budget of the European External Action Service to be taken into account and especially you, Mr Sánchez Amor, for working on this. I think this is extremely important. On our side, we are working with making the delegations more effective and more modern. I think this is also a needed from our side.
On the Western Balkans, I agree with those who are speaking. This is definitely a very important region. It's in Europe, so we shouldn't overlook them. Our neighbours' problems today are our problems tomorrow, so we will work with that.
And in the end, on the EU-UK security pact, I work towards to have that for the summit. I hope that everybody will also come on board.
To conclude, I think we must do more for our own security and defence, and we must take greater responsibility to become stronger. I really thank you for your continued support to making Europe stronger.

David McAllister,
rapporteur. – Madam President, I would just like to thank the shadow rapporteurs, all the involved staff members and also the team of the High Representative and Vice-President for the constructive cooperation on this report and also today's open debate.
I have listened carefully to all the members who took the floor in the last 90 minutes. My impression is that most of the political groups and the majority of colleagues in this House want to act in concert towards a stronger common foreign and security policy. I do hope to see this reflected during the final vote tomorrow.
The High Representative and the Commission, dear Kaja Kallas, are both explicitly invited to use this report as a guide for their priorities. Rest assured that we in the European Parliament will try to follow up also on your expectations.

Nicolás Pascual de la Parte,
rapporteur. – Madam President, thank you very much indeed. I, as well as my colleague, have been listening very carefully to all the interventions I think I can draw four main ideas.
The first one is that we have to face a new geopolitical paradigm. This new paradigm changes from the multilateralism that helps everybody to a zero-sum geopolitics scenario in which the powers like the US, China and Russia are comfortable, but we are not.
The second idea is that security is a common global good. If it is a common global good, it is a matter not only for those in uniform, but the whole society at large. And then we have to mobilise our society to convince and seduce them that we are defending the lever to the freedom in order to have the support, because the politicians alone will not be able to get through it.
The third idea I have felt here with all the interventions is a sense of urgency. We have to react quickly because Europe has in front of us a great challenge, which is to keep our own defence and security in our own hands, and to rise up to the challenges ahead.
That means not only to have the political will, but to find the political leadership, to mobilise the funding necessary for that and to row in the same direction. We will be strong if we are united and we will be strong if we have our people, our voters, behind us.
The fourth idea is that there cannot be peace in Ukraine without justice. If the peace has to be sustained, it has to be fair. It will not be sustained if it's not fair. And for that, we have to support our Ukrainian friends in order to go with a strong hand to the negotiating table, in which the European Union, by all means, has to be present.

President. – The debate is closed.
The vote will take place tomorrow.


Written Statements (Rule 178)



Michał Dworczyk (ECR),
na piśmie. – Szanowni Państwo, tak, w sprawozdaniu o WPBiO są elementy pozytywne, jak np. jednoznaczne stanowisko wobec rosyjskiej agresji i innych bezprawnych działań Kremla czy też wspomnienie o Tarczy Wschód.
               

                  Niestety jest to swego rodzaju zasłona dymna, bo sedno tego dokumentu stanowi coś zupełnie innego.
               

                  To kolejny krok w stronę odbierania państwom członkowskim ich traktatowych uprawnień. Nie zgadzam się z próbami ograniczania zasady jednomyślności w polityce bezpieczeństwa i obrony. To dla Polski absolutna czerwona linia. Jeśli pozwolimy, by o naszym bezpieczeństwie decydowano większością głosów, to oddamy kluczowe decyzje w ręce tych, którzy jeszcze niedawno nazywali Rosję strategicznym partnerem. Tych, którzy ignorowali ostrzeżenia państw mojego regionu, prowadzili naiwną politykę wobec Kremla, a własne interesy z Putinem przedkładali nad solidarność i bezpieczeństwo Europy.
               

                  Dlatego równie stanowczo odrzucam postulat europejskiej unii obrony. Nie potrzebujemy fikcji ‘strategicznej autonomii’. Dublowanie struktur NATO nie wzmocni naszego bezpieczeństwa, a je osłabi, rozbijając jedność i więzy transatlantyckie.
               

                  Szkoda, że zamiast jasno wezwać do wypełniania naszych sojuszniczych zobowiązań wobec NATO, w tym przeznaczania co najmniej 2% PKB na obronność, sprawozdanie skupia się na działaniach, które tworzą jedynie iluzję bezpieczeństwa. Niestety propozycje zawarte w dokumencie w praktyce prowadzą do rozmycia odpowiedzialności za obronność w nowych strukturach UE, osłabiając przy tym jedność Sojuszu.
               

Λουκάς Φουρλάς (PPE),
γραπτώς. – Αγαπητοί συνάδελφοι, δυστυχώς δεν μπορώ παρά να εκφράσω την έντονη μου ανησυχία όσον αφορά την απόσταση μεταξύ των αρχών που διακηρύσσουμε στην εξωτερική μας πολιτική και των πράξεων μας. Η Ευρωπαϊκή Ένωση έχει καθήκον να λειτουργεί ως δύναμη ειρήνης και να προασπίζεται το διεθνές δίκαιο και τα ανθρώπινα δικαιώματα. Ωστόσο, 50 χρόνια μετά την τουρκική εισβολή στην Κύπρο, η κατοχή συνεχίζεται, τα ανθρώπινα δικαιώματα των Κυπρίων παραβιάζονται σε καθημερινή βάση, και η ΕΕ εξακολουθεί να αποφεύγει να θέσει την Τουρκία προ των ευθυνών της.
               

                  Η ΚΕΠΠΑ και η ΚΠΑΑ πρέπει να αποτελούν εργαλείο προάσπισης των αξιών αλλά και των συμφερόντων μας, ξεκινώντας πρώτα από την εδαφική ακεραιότητα των κρατών μελών μας. Ως Κύπρος, βρισκόμαστε στην πρώτη γραμμή γεωπολιτικών εξελίξεων. Αντιμετωπίζουμε προκλήσεις, όχι μόνο με στρατιωτικούς όρους, αλλά και μέσω υβριδικών απειλών, εργαλειοποίησης μεταναστευτικών ροών, παραβιάσεων του δικαίου της θάλασσας και άλλες. Η στρατηγική μας αυτονομία πρέπει να εντατικοποιηθεί, και η ΚΠΑΑ να ενισχυθεί, πάντα με σεβασμό στις εθνικές μας θέσεις και εμπειρίες. Η Κύπρος μπορεί και πρέπει να είναι ενεργός εταίρος στην οικοδόμηση μιας πιο ισχυρής Ευρώπης στον κόσμο.
               

György Hölvényi (PfE),
írásban. – Az Európai Uniónak nagyobb szerepet kell vállalnia saját védelmében, mindezt szoros együttműködésben a NATO-val. A kérdés most az, hogy Európa hogyan reagál a megváltozott geopolitikai helyzetre. Az európai védelmi képességek fejlesztését úgy kell végrehajtanunk, hogy tiszteletben tartjuk a tagállamok sajátos biztonságpolitikai érdekeit. A védelempolitika tagállami hatáskörbe tartozik.
               

                  Fontos leszögezni, hogy Európa védelmének megerősítése nem Ukrajnáról szól. Nem engedhetjük meg, hogy a háború finanszírozása tovább merítse ki a tagállamok készleteit. A forrásokat saját védelmi iparunk fejlesztésére kell fordítanunk, nem pedig Ukrajnának adnunk. Elfogadhatatlan tehát, hogy minden tagállam a GDP 0,25%-ának megfelelő katonai támogatást nyújtson Ukrajnának. A romokban álló ország uniós csatlakozása vállalhatatlan anyagi terheket róna Európára, ezért helytelen az európai emberek megkérdezése nélkül kvázi tagállamként kezelni.
               

                  Ehelyett olyan közös fellépésekre kell összpontosítanunk, amelyek valóban hatékonyak: a terrorizmus elleni fellépés, a határvédelem, az illegális migráció elleni küzdelem és a kiberbiztonság.
               

                  Európa erősítése a cél – de ez Európa jövőjéért történik, nem Ukrajnáért. Az EU nem kapott felhatalmazást a háborús felfegyverkezésre. A helyes irány a béke fenntartása. Az Unió ereje éppen abban rejlik, hogy képes volt megteremteni és fenntartani a békét egy olyan kontinensen, amelyet évszázadokon át háborúk szaggattak. Európa biztonságát nem a háborús logika fenntartása biztosítja, hanem a versenyképesség és gazdasági fejlődés erősítése.
               

Erik Kaliňák (NI),
písomne. – Výročná správa o spoločnej zahraničnej a bezpečnostnej politike za rok 2024 je výkrikom do tmy. Nie je dôvodom na hrdosť, ale dôkazom odtrhnutia bruselskej elity od reality a jej posadnutosti centralizáciou moci, ignorujúc vôľu národov.
               

                  ‘Strategická autonómia’ znamená viac moci pre byrokratov a menej pre štáty. Odmietam to. Svet nie je hračka eurokratov – štáty označené za hrozby sa smejú, kým my sa hádame o neuskutočniteľnú jednotu. Národná suverenita je základom silnej Európy, nie prekážkou. Oslavovať Európsku službu pre vonkajšiu činnosť je výsmech. Je to drahý klub diplomatov bez kontaktu s ľuďmi. Zahraničná politika patrí národným vládam, nie úradníkom. Zameranie na militarizáciu a ignorovanie hrozieb, ako je nelegálna migrácia či ochrana hraníc, ukazuje slepotu EÚ. Obrana áno, ale nie pod diktátom Bruselu snívajúceho o európskej armáde. Skutočná bezpečnosť začína doma. Hlasovanie kvalifikovanou väčšinou je útokom na právo národov rozhodovať. Jednomyseľnosť je sila, nie slabosť. Správa to nechápe – slúži elitám, nie ľuďom.
               

                  Táto správa je hanbou. Žiadam jej zamietnutie a návrat k Európe národov – silnej a slobodnej.
               
10.   Human rights and democracy in the world and the European Union's policy on the matter – annual report 2024 (debate)

President. – The next item is the debate on the report by Isabel Wiseler-Lima, on behalf of the Committee on Foreign Affairs, on human rights and democracy in the world and the European Union's policy on the matter – annual report 2024 (2024/2081(INI)) (A10-0012/2025).

Isabel Wiseler-Lima,
rapporteure. – Madame la Présidente, l'Union européenne est fondée sur des valeurs essentielles: le respect de la dignité humaine, la liberté, la démocratie, l'égalité, l'état de droit et le respect des droits de l'homme. Ces principes sont non seulement inscrits dans nos traités, mais ils sont également le fondement de notre cohésion et de notre identité en tant qu'Union. Ce Parlement, maison de la démocratie européenne, veut donner une voix à ceux qui ont été réduits au silence, à ceux dont la vie est menacée simplement parce qu'ils défendent ce qui est juste.
               

                  Les droits de l'homme sont universels et indivisibles, et il est de la responsabilité de ce Parlement de condamner fermement toutes leurs violations. Aujourd'hui, il est plus que jamais urgent de rappeler ce principe fondamental. Malheureusement, ces violations, qui traduisent une régression générale des droits de l'homme, sont de plus en plus perceptibles à travers le monde. L'ordre multilatéral, fondé sur des règles, est menacé par des régimes de plus en plus autoritaires. Ce constat n'est pas qu'une inquiétude théorique, il est en effet une réalité quotidienne, et cette menace s'accompagne d'un phénomène tout aussi préoccupant: les guerres hybrides, qui déstabilisent les sociétés par la désinformation et manipulent l'opinion publique, attisant ainsi les tensions et fragilisant nos démocraties.
               

                  Dans ce contexte, le combat pour les droits de l'homme, pour la démocratie, la liberté et la justice est plus que jamais une priorité. Ces principes ne sont en aucun cas à prendre pour acquis. La démocratie et la liberté ne doivent jamais, au grand jamais, être considérés comme des acquis. D'ailleurs, les développements mondiaux montrent que, malheureusement, c'est de plus en plus la loi du plus fort, et non celle des lois internationales, qui cherche à s'imposer. Nous ne l'accepterons jamais.
               

                  Le rapport que nous présentons aujourd'hui est aussi une réponse collective à cette urgence. Il porte nos valeurs, nos luttes et nos convictions. Il est le fruit de négociations et traduit aussi la volonté commune de défendre, au-delà de nombreux clivages politiques, l'universalité des droits de l'homme et la démocratie. Il vise à souligner l'importance de l'Union européenne en tant qu'actrice mondiale de premier plan et la nécessité d'un consensus dans la gestion des crises liées aux droits de l'homme et de la démocratie.
               

                  L'un des défis majeurs que je souhaite souligner est la crise croissante de la responsabilité, celle de l'impunité généralisée pour les violations des droits de l'homme commises dans le monde entier. Les responsables de ces violations doivent rendre des comptes. Il est crucial que l'Union européenne plaide activement pour la justice et la fin de l'impunité. À cet égard, je me félicite que, dans le rapport, nous réaffirmions notre soutien indéfectible à la Cour pénale internationale et à la Cour internationale de justice, qui sont les piliers essentiels d'une justice internationale impartiale et indépendante.
               

                  Ensuite, nous le savons, dans notre époque où l'accessibilité et la rapidité d'internet ainsi que la prolifération des réseaux sociaux nous submergent de flux d'informations incessants, il devient de plus en plus difficile de faire le tri dans cette avalanche de données. Aussi le rapport prête-t-il une attention particulière à la protection des droits de l'homme à l'ère des technologies numériques. On y condamne les menaces présentes dans la sphère numérique, telles que la surveillance de masse en ligne et les fermetures d'internet.
               

                  Le rapport souligne également la nécessité d'un contrôle, d'une transparence stricte et de mesures de protection appropriées. Il fait en outre état de la détérioration de la liberté de la presse dans le monde et condamne la censure exercée sur les journalistes et les défenseurs des droits de l'homme, notamment au moyen de lois à l'encontre de prétendus ‘agents de l'étranger’. Les journalistes indépendants sont en première ligne dans la lutte contre la désinformation, qui sape les démocraties. Il est de notre devoir de les protéger, car les protéger eux, c'est garantir l'accès à une information juste pour les citoyens.
               

                  En conclusion, nous devons être clairs et déterminés. Le combat pour les droits de l'homme, pour la démocratie et pour la justice doit rester au cœur de nos priorités. Ce rapport, en tant qu'expression de notre engagement collectif, est un appel à l'action, un outil pour affirmer nos valeurs et une occasion de renforcer notre rôle d'acteur mondial dans la défense des droits de l'homme et de la démocratie. Ensemble, nous avons la responsabilité de ne jamais céder face aux forces qui cherchent à affaiblir ces droits qui mettent au centre la dignité humaine.
               

Kaja Kallas,
Vice-President of the Commission / High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy. – Madam President, honourable Members, let me thank the rapporteur, Ms Wiseler-Lima, the shadow rapporteurs and the other Members who have contributed to the policy on human rights and democracy.
I would like to share with you what I said three weeks ago in the United Nations Security Council. The rules-based international order enshrined in the UN Charter is a set of universal principles that create the conditions for peace, prosperity, human rights, dignity and development for all. Yet, 80 years on, we see these principles under heavy fire. We witness blatant violations of international law, the erosion of democracy, backsliding of human rights, and a strong pushback against gender equality, invasions of sovereign states and the silencing of media and human rights defenders.
We see attempts to replace the rule of law with the rule of force. As close to home as it can get, Russia's unprovoked and full-scale war of aggression against Ukraine is a direct challenge to the rules-based international order and an assault on sovereignty. Human rights are continuously trampled on in this war.
In the Middle East, the conflict between Israel and Gaza is another reminder of how fragile human rights are in times of violent conflict. And as your 2024 report underlines, the threat from authoritarian and illiberal regimes on human rights is only increasing.
I will spare you with listing too many recent examples, we all know and see what is happening throughout the world, from our direct neighbourhood to all other directions. But hope is never lost. Now the fall of the Assad regime in December 2024 ended 54 years of brutal dictatorship for the people of Syria. Yes, I agree there are immense challenges ahead. For the transition to succeed, the rights of all Syrians without distinction must be guaranteed and protected. But there is hope nonetheless. The European Union must do what it can, wherever it can, to keep this hope alive, not least because defending human rights and democracy is not only a Treaty obligation, but a strategic interest and an investment in peace and prosperity.
Over 10 000 high risk human rights defenders received EU support in 2024. We have supported over 80 000 people since 2015. At a time of shifting policies, funding cuts and growing unpredictability, the EU remains a steadfast and predictable partner on human rights and democracy. We have renewed our commitment by extending the Action plan on human rights and democracy until 2027. Two weeks ago, the European Union adopted a 349 million package for worldwide human rights and democracy funding up to 2027, and we will counter the pushback against gender equality, the rights of women, girls and LGBTIQ+ people.
As your report shows, the European Union remained an active supporter of the UN's work to protect human rights in 2024. We advocated for adequate funding of the UN human rights pillar, supported the High Commissioner for Human Rights, and pushed for fact finding and accountability.
The EU has always underlined that the respect of the international humanitarian law by state and non-state actors, and accountability for violations committed, are the cornerstone for peace and security. This is why the European Union also stands by the International Criminal Court and the principles enshrined in the Rome Statute. We are all aware of the growing urgency of supporting the court, both financially but also diplomatically, and we are exploring available tools and possible measures that could be put in place to protect the court and its personnel and mitigate the risks. I met the president of the court last month to reiterate the support of the European Union.
We also have the EU global human rights sanctions regime established in 2020, which enables the European Union to impose restrictive measures on individuals or entities that commit serious human rights violations or abuses. In 2024, we moved fast to impose several restrictive measures under the sanctions regime, in particular in Russia, the Middle East and North Korea.
This demonstrates our determination to strengthen our role in addressing serious human rights violations and abuses worldwide. Last year, it was a super election year, with over 75 countries holding elections. The EU election observation missions remained essential for enhancing the integrity of electoral processes and reinforcing democratic governance.
We will continue to support strong parliaments, independent media journalists and democratic actors at the frontline in the most challenging contexts, and I will definitely work with the European Parliament in this field.
I also look forward to publishing my own annual report on human rights and democracy for 2024, so I look forward to the discussions.

Abir Al-Sahlani,
rapporteur for the opinion of the FEMM Committee. – Madam President, Madam High Representative, the world is in turmoil. In the heart of all that are the attacks on human rights: war, sexual violence, crimes against humanity, climate crisis, man-made disasters, state-capturing oligarchs that tear down humanitarian aid. The ICC is being threatened; the ICJ is undermined; international law as we have known it is no longer existing. Nobody is coming to the rescue either. This fight will have to be ours to take.
There is much to talk about defence now, but if we cannot even defend our fundamental human rights, what are our armies going to be defending?
The fight back must start now, and this is how: put the right to abortion in the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union; create a consent-based definition of rape; prohibit discrimination across the EU; strip anti-democrats like Viktor Orbán of powers.
Enough of democratic backsliding, anti-gender backlash and racism. The buck must stop now.

Antonio López-Istúriz White,
en nombre del Grupo PPE. – Señora presidenta, la democracia y el respeto a los derechos humanos en el mundo están en declive. Es un hecho. No lo digo yo, lo dicen los informes del Freedom House y otras renombradas organizaciones que estudian la materia. Podría citar muchos casos, como Rusia, Cuba, Venezuela, Irán, Nicaragua. Los sospechosos habituales: autocracias que persiguen a sus ciudadanos, dentro y fuera de sus fronteras, y promueven deliberadamente un proceso de erosión democrática en el mundo. Y todo ello ante el silencio de la extrema izquierda en este Parlamento y en Europa. Silencio cómplice y a veces de colaboración.
               

                  Lo que me preocupa es cómo actuamos ante el proceso de erosión democrática en nuestro propio mundo occidental. No podemos aceptar que se persiga a jueces por intentar cumplir la ley. No podemos permitir que se persiga a los medios de comunicación por hacer su trabajo de investigación e información. No podemos callar ante políticos que justifican el terrorismo y se callan ante el antisemitismo, políticos que utilizan el reto migratorio y la tragedia humana que todo ello conlleva con fines políticos.
               

                  ¿Y saben dónde suceden estas cosas? En mi propio país, en España.
               

Francisco Assis,
em nome do Grupo S&D. – Senhora Presidente, Senhora Vice-Presidente da Comissão, este é um momento particularmente importante da vida deste Parlamento.
               

                  Não podemos ignorar que os direitos humanos, perspetivados como direitos universais, tiveram a sua origem precisamente aqui na Europa, no ano de 1789, aquando da grande Revolução Francesa. Foi esse o primeiro momento em que nós definimos que os direitos humanos, embora aplicados a um país, tinham verdadeira dimensão universal.
               

                  De então para cá, fizeram um longo caminho, mas a verdade é que, no último ano, assistimos a um gravíssimo retrocesso dos direitos humanos praticamente em todo o mundo.
               

                  Olhando para o que se passou, podemos referir, podemos enunciar vários problemas graves.
               

                  As democracias estão em recuo. Há hoje muito mais autocracias do que democracias por esse mundo inteiro e, sobretudo, o valor da democracia é amplamente questionado em várias partes do mundo.
               

                  As execuções têm aumentado. Os condenados à morte têm aumentado. A violência que é exercida sobre as mulheres em algumas zonas do mundo tem aumentado de forma assustadora e tenho aqui que referir, em particular, essa forma extrema de violência que é a violência sexual exercida sobre as mulheres. Em torno da corrida às matérias-primas críticas, que são fundamentais para o nosso próprio desenvolvimento tecnológico, para as transições digitais e climáticas em que estamos empenhados, em torno disso também se estão a criar novas situações que põem em causa os direitos humanos.
               

                  As grandes companhias tecnológicas que operam um pouco por todo o mundo criam novos problemas de desrespeito pelos direitos humanos no universo digital. O Tribunal Penal Internacional, como foi ainda agora aqui, e muito bem, referenciado, é hoje objeto de uma contestação e de um ataque sem precedentes que pode pôr em causa a sua própria viabilidade.
               

                  Por isso mesmo, não temos razões para estar otimistas. Temos a obrigação de estar atentos e de continuar a apoiar todos aqueles que, nos mais diversos pontos do mundo, lutam heroicamente pela afirmação dos direitos humanos.
               

Christophe Bay,
au nom du groupe PfE. – Madame la Présidente, je me félicite que le Parlement européen puisse chaque année se pencher sur la situation des droits de l'homme et de la démocratie. Toutefois, je me dois de dire que ce rapport est incomplet.
               

                  Connaissez-vous, en effet, un pays où le double degré de juridiction, principe fondamental des droits de la défense, est supprimé? Connaissez-vous un pays où un juge s'autorise à écrire dans un jugement que son objectif est d'empêcher une candidate de se présenter à l'élection présidentielle? Connaissez-vous un pays où le principe de proportionnalité, c'est-à-dire le rapport entre le niveau de sanction et la faute supposée commise, n'est pas appliqué? Eh bien, ce pays, je suis triste de le dire, c'est mon pays, c'est la France.
               

                  En effet, ce qui s'est passé hier est extrêmement grave, et, depuis le jugement rendu à l'encontre de Marine Le Pen et d'autres élus, la France a hélas toute sa place dans ce rapport consacré aux violations des droits de l'homme dans le monde.
               

Arkadiusz Mularczyk,
w imieniu grupy ECR. – Pani Przewodnicząca! Przed nami raport, który jak wiele podobnych dokumentów zawiera zapisy godne poparcia, jak i takie, które wymagają korekty i uzupełnienia. Jako kontrsprawozdawca chciałbym podkreślić kilka istotnych kwestii, które powinny być uwzględnione w dalszych pracach nad tym dokumentem. Zachęcam państwa szczególnie do poparcia zapisów dotyczących obrony praw mniejszości religijnych na świecie. Przypomnę, że najbardziej prześladowaną dotychczas grupą religijną są chrześcijanie, i dlatego podczas głosowania będę solidaryzował się z ich sprawą, popierając odpowiednie fragmenty raportu. Zwracam się również o poparcie poprawki nr 75, w której podnoszone są niepokojące doniesienia o przypadkach, w których fundusze instytucji międzynarodowych, w tym agencji Stanów Zjednoczonych ds. rozwoju międzynarodowego i nawet Unii Europejskiej, miały wspierać grupy angażujące się w aktywizm polityczny wymierzony w demokratycznie wybrane rządy, w tym w moim kraju, w Polsce.
               

                  Wzywam Unię do pełnej współpracy z Parlamentem, dziennikarzami i opinią publiczną w celu wyjaśnienia tych sytuacji oraz ustanowienia przejrzystych zasad i skutecznych mechanizmów kontroli wydatkowania tych funduszy. Zgodnie z artykułem 21 Traktatu o Unii Europejskiej wspólnota musi opierać relacje z państwami trzecimi na demokracji, poszanowaniu prawa i godności człowieka. Niestety nie wszyscy partnerzy Unii Europejskiej, tak jak między innymi Kuba, wypełniają te zobowiązania, mimo iż od lat korzystają z preferencji wynikających z umów z Unią Europejską. Zbliżające się wysłuchanie publiczne w podkomisji DROI powinno być początkiem szerszej debaty i, mam nadzieję, rezolucji w tej sprawie. Apeluję o rozsądną, zrównoważoną ocenę raportu oraz poparcie poprawek, które wzmacniają nasze wartości i chronią suwerenność oraz interesy Unii Europejskiej i jej państw członkowskich.
               

Barry Andrews,
on behalf of the Renew Group. – Madam President, High Representative Kallas, 193 member states have signed the UN Universal Declaration of Human Rights. And yet, as the rapporteur pointed out in her opening remarks, human rights is in retreat.
Everywhere, human rights defenders are under siege, and this report seeks to position the European Union at the centre of the defence of human rights, not just because it's the right thing to do, there is extensive evidence which asserts that while rights are protected, poverty and inequalities decrease, where women are afforded economic opportunities, poverty rates decline. These are the principles that define this European Union.
But we must also get our own House in order. And I am concerned about the extent to which our external action, in particular our bilateral agreements, do not contain adequate human rights assessments. For example, the MoU with Tunisia. For example, the Critical Raw Materials Agreement with Rwanda.
I thank the rapporteur and all of the fellow shadows for their good work and cooperation and I strongly recommend this report to the House.

Catarina Vieira,
on behalf of the Verts/ALE Group. – Madam President, dear colleagues, dear Ms Kallas, we look back on a year marked by the disregard of international law, kerbs on freedom of expression, shrinking civic spaces and a setback for women's rights. Human rights defenders face growing threats while discrimination against LGBTQi+ people persists. Huge issues like forced labour, torture and the death penalty continue to go on.
So, the question is: how is the world reacting? Well, from the White House we see a prime example of selfish foreign policy and transactionality. And here in the EU, some seem tempted to sing to the same tune, because, let's face it, our leaders are happy to turn a blind eye on human rights if our trade or migration interests are at stake, or if it means we get access to critical raw materials.
International law violations are being met with deafening silence from the EU and from the international community if they are considered to be done by our partners, like Israel. We tolerate attacks on the ICC and ICJ from the other side of the Atlantic and do very little in their defence. We criticise the unjustifiable cuts to USAID, while some of our Member States, led by the far right, slash their own development corporation budgets, and we stand here and we regret the downwards trend and we call for a better future.
If the EU starts to give up on human rights, how do we expect others to uphold them? Do we want to live in a world where international law is just a suggestion? If we don't want to be here next year talking again about the further deterioration of human rights in the world, the road is very clear: we must reject a transactional foreign policy approach and stop our double standards.

Kathleen Funchion,
on behalf of The Left Group. – A Uachtaráin, across the globe, we are witnessing an increasing assault on international humanitarian law and human rights. This must be challenged regardless of where it takes place, and this Parliament must set the highest of standards when it comes to upholding the values of human rights and democracy.
For us in Ireland, this Parliament must firmly oppose any rollback on justice for victims of the conflict in the north of our country. The British Government must respect the rulings of the European Court of Human Rights, as it is an essential part of our human rights architecture.
Given that Britain has signed up to the European Convention on Human Rights, we in this Parliament must demand that they abide by rulings of the court. We need a victim-focused approach when it comes to the legacy of our past, so that families can finally have the justice that they are entitled to.

Petr Bystron,
im Namen der ESN-Fraktion. – Frau Präsidentin, liebe Kolleginnen, liebe Kollegen! Wir sprechen heute über die Verletzungen von Menschenrechten und Gefahren für die Demokratie, und das ist gut so, das ist ein sehr wichtiges Thema. Die Kollegin Wiseler-Lima, die Berichterstatterin, hat auch gesagt, man sollte alle diese Verletzungen ahnden. Wir sind aber nicht die United Nations, wir sind das EU-Parlament, also lassen Sie uns uns einfach erst mal auf unser Gebiet konzentrieren; auch hier gibt es einiges, was schiefläuft.
               

                  Oft wird Justiz missbraucht zur Unterdrückung der Opposition – ein Kollege hat das hier schon angesprochen; Marine Le Pen ist das aktuellste Beispiel in Frankreich. Aber die Regierung Tusk in Polen verfolgt den Kollegen Marcin Romanowski so, dass er um Asyl in Ungarn ersuchen musste. In Deutschland hatten wir Michael Ballweg, den Anführer der außerparlamentarischen Opposition, neun Monate im Knast ohne ein Gerichtsurteil, und jüngst jetzt in Rumänien wurde Călin Georgescu daran gehindert, an der Präsidentschaftswahl teilzunehmen. Das sollten wir aufarbeiten.
               

Reinhold Lopatka (PPE). – Madam President, the EU is not only an economic and political union. Two of our cornerstones are human rights and democracy.
Looking around the world, we see increasing threats to these principles. Authoritarian regimes are suppressing civil society, independent media and political opposition. But the misuse of EUR 2.9 million, as it was done by Le Pen and her party members, that has nothing to do with political oppression. It is justice if someone is doing criminal acts that he is sentenced or she is sentenced, in this case.
The space for human rights defenders is shrinking worldwide. Therefore, we must remain a force that protects human rights in its Member States and we have to fight around the globe as our High Representative Kaja Kallas mentioned it.

Elisabeth Grossmann (S&D). – Frau Präsidentin, Frau Kommissarin, werte Damen und Herren! Ich kann gleich an meinen Vorredner und Kollegen Lopatka nahtlos anschließen. Ich möchte auf die Frage eingehen, was das europäische Lebensmodell ist, was die Europäische Union ausmacht. Da bekommt man eigentlich als Erstes die Antwort: der Einsatz für Menschenrechte und Demokratie.
               

                  Wie der Bericht zeigt, sind weltweit echte Demokratien, die Menschenrechte achten, eher die Ausnahme als die Regel, mit besorgniserregender Tendenz nach unten. Insbesondere Menschenrechte von Frauen geraten immer mehr in Bedrängnis; das Selbstbestimmungsrecht über den eigenen Körper, die Art und Weise zu leben, sich zu kleiden – etwa wenn im Iran oder in Afghanistan Frauen selbst bei einfachen Verstößen gegen die Kleiderordnung per App angezeigt werden können, oder wenn in den USA Abtreibungsrechte aufgehoben werden und auch in Europa immer mehr in Frage gestellt werden – selbst hier im Haus.
               

                  Wachsam müssen wir auch sein, wenn die sexuelle Orientierung Grund für Diskriminierung und Verfolgung …
               

(Die Präsidentin entzieht der Rednerin das Wort.)


Silvia Sardone (PfE). – Signora Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, siamo qui a esaminare la relazione sui diritti umani e la democrazia nel mondo e quello che leggiamo è spesso sconcertante: ideologia ovunque e omissioni gravissime.
               

                  C'è un intero capitolo dedicato ai diritti degli immigrati, in cui si parla di crescita della xenofobia, del razzismo e della discriminazione contro i migranti, vittime di una crescente disumanizzazione; nessun accenno alla necessità di fermare l'immigrazione irregolare e al ruolo di alcune ONG complici del traffico di uomini.
               

                  Silenzio sul trattamento orribile verso le donne in numerosi paesi islamici che, ricordo, non hanno firmato la Carta universale dei diritti dell'uomo; ne hanno creata una diversa, una Carta araba dei diritti dell'uomo, in cui all'articolo tre addirittura si parla di discriminazioni positive, previste in favore delle donne dalla sharia islamica.
               

                  Non una parola, inoltre, sui 360 milioni di cristiani perseguitati nel mondo.
               

                  Bisogna concentrarsi sulle vere emergenze per l'Europa: l'espansione dell'islamismo, che mina i nostri valori e i nostri diritti, e il dilagare dell'insicurezza nelle nostre città, spesso aggravata da un'immigrazione fuori controllo.
               

Sophie Wilmès (Renew). – Madame la Présidente, Madame la Haute Représentante, en 2024 la démocratie et les droits de l'homme ont encore reculé dans le monde. Vous l'avez dit, Madame la rapporteure, notre Union est fondée sur des valeurs – l'article 2, qui guide aussi ses relations extérieures, l'article 21 –, et ce Parlement y contribue également: de par son travail politique, bien sûr – une soixantaine de textes en un an –, à travers le Groupe de soutien à la démocratie et de coordination des élections et ses nombreux instruments, ou encore grâce au prix Sakharov et à ses initiatives, qui aident les défenseurs des droits de l'homme depuis l'année de leur création.
               

                  Alors, quand j'entends certains collègues estimer par exemple que la liberté d'expression, c'est aussi la liberté de tromper, la liberté d'arnaquer, ou que les élections sont libres alors qu'elles ont été clairement manipulées – et que dire de ces deux derniers jours, où l'on entend à l'envi que certaines personnes sont au-dessus des lois – eh bien, je dois vous le dire, c'est un sérieux avertissement pour tous les démocrates.
               

                  Le rapport soumis au vote incarne bien les valeurs et les idéaux qu'a toujours portés notre Parlement. Il est censé être le bilan de l'année écoulée, mais il est aussi, certainement, devenu une boussole pour les années à venir.
               

Mounir Satouri (Verts/ALE). – Madame la Présidente, chers collègues, Madame la Haute Représentante, le monde s'effondre, en silence, sous nos yeux, et l'Europe se tait. Face à l'impérialisme et aux populismes, l'Union européenne donne l'impression de s'excuser au lieu de résister. On hésite à dénoncer Trump de peur de provoquer un caprice ou une réaction malsaine. Au contraire, l'Union européenne devrait s'ériger fièrement comme un contre-modèle, hurler au monde le droit à la justice, à la diversité et à la dignité!
               

                  Mais que redoutez-vous encore? Il piétine déjà le droit international, il soutient déjà les criminels de guerre, il affaiblit déjà l'aide humanitaire, la santé, l'éducation… Madame Kallas, l'Europe doit cesser de murmurer, elle doit affronter son projet avec fierté, avec détermination! Elle doit défendre la Cour pénale internationale, revendiquer la lutte contre toutes les dominations et gérer ses frontières avec humanité. Face à la loi du plus fort, soyez la justice!
               

Alvise Pérez (NI). – Señora presidenta, bueno, primero, antes que nada, ¡bravo! Admiro la capacidad teatral de los que venís aquí a sermonearnos sobre derechos humanos en el mundo. Pero si luego, cuando os pregunto a algunos en comisión, no tenéis ni idea de la mayoría de guerras que hay hoy día fuera de la Unión Europea.
               

                  Pero, bueno, vamos a hablar de derechos humanos. Pero vamos a hacerlo sobre Europa. ¿Qué ha dicho la Comisión Europea sobre el uso ilegal de armas sónicas contra civiles en Serbia —de lo que nos enteramos gracias a las redes sociales como otras tantas cosas—? ¿Qué han dicho sobre sabotear la candidatura legítima de Georgescu en Rumanía o sobre prohibir presentarse a las elecciones francesas a la candidata más votada del país, simplemente porque, en fin, no les gusta la gestión de fondos por parte de Le Pen?
               

                  Hoy mismo han arrebatado en este mismo Pleno la inmunidad parlamentaria al diputado alemán Petr Bystron por atreverse a publicar un simple meme satírico, ¡por un meme satírico! ¡Todos los derechos políticos de un eurodiputado! ¿Esta es la libertad que defendemos en la Unión Europea?
               

                  A mí mismo —les pongo un ejemplo— me quieren inhabilitar por movilizar pacíficamente a más de veinte mil españoles en las protestas de Madrid contra Pedro Sánchez del año pasado.
               

                  Señores, esta Europa que tanto habla de derechos humanos no es que esté agonizando, es que está muerta. Ustedes solo son los buitres que se comen los trozos de lo que queda de esta Europa.
               

Liudas Mažylis (PPE). – Pirmininke, vyriausioji įgaliotine, kolegos. Sovietmečio politinis kalinys Petras Plumpa, nepalaužiamas optimistas, yra sakęs: ‘Dvylika metų kalėjimo? - tai jeigu tik dėl gero reikalo!’. Ir geras reikalas tada laimėjo, Sovietų Sąjunga suiro. Dabar svarstom 21 amžiaus situaciją ir, deja, konstatuojam, kad padėtis kritinė, politinių kalinių skaičius siekia milijoną, įskaitant katastrofišką žmogaus teisių blogėjimą Baltarusijoje, dėl Rusijos vykdomo karo Ukrainoje, o ir pačioje Rusijoje. Diktatūros be ceremonijų kopijuoja užsienio agentų įstatymą, regime pilną pažeidimų spektrą. Pranešimo autorė visapusiškai įvertino problemą, pasiūlė sisteminius sprendimus, sinergiją, teikiant resursus, o tai, tikime, leis parodyti, ką gali susitelkusi Europa.
               

Marco Tarquinio (S&D). – Signora Presidente, signora Alta rappresentante, onorevoli colleghi, assistiamo, purtroppo, a un costante e sempre più allarmante peggioramento dei diritti umani a livello globale.
               

                  La relazione che è stata predisposta ne dà il senso e la profondità: dalla Palestina al Sudan, dal Congo ad Haiti, crisi, involuzioni autoritarie e guerre dilagano, mietono tragicamente vittime.
               

                  Quando parliamo e diciamo la nostra sui diritti umani nel mondo, dobbiamo anche ragionare seriamente su noi stessi, sul ruolo dell'Unione europea nel difenderli, i diritti umani e i valori comuni a livello internazionale, soprattutto oggi che le istituzioni multilaterali poste al loro presidio sono sotto attacco.
               

                  Grazie per le indicazioni che ci ha offerto, Alta rappresentante.
               

                  Abbiamo alternato, bisogna ammetterlo, capacità di incidere e difendere le persone e i loro diritti fondamentali all'inerzia: male. E ancor peggio sarebbe subordinare, o addirittura sostituire, la priorità dei diritti umani coniugata agli aiuti allo sviluppo con quella di contrasto alla migrazione umana, a qualsiasi costo umano.
               

                  Dobbiamo assolutamente ritrovare bussola e riprendere la rotta.
               

András László (PfE). – Tisztel Elnök Asszony! Az Európai Parlamentnek a kedvenc foglalatossága, hogy kioktassa a világot demokráciából és emberi jogokból. És eljött a pillanat megint: a 2024-es emberi jogi jelentésről vitatkozhatunk.
               

                  Az Európai Unió egy béke- és szabadságprojekt. Viszont jó lenne jó példával elöl járni. Számos alkalommal hangzik el az Európai Parlamentben, és ennek a jelentésnek a szerzői is azt követelik, hogy az EU külkapcsolataiban meghatározó szerepe legyen az emberi jogi megközelítésnek.
               

                  De ha a világ írna jelentést rólunk, az Európai Unióról, vajon mi lenne benne? Nem aggódhatnának amiatt, hogy néhány hónap alatt két országban is két vezető elnökjelöltet kizártak a versenyből? Semmilyen diplomáciai erőfeszítést nem tesz az EU, hogy újra béke legyen Ukrajnában? Miközben köztudott, hogy a háború a legsúlyosabb kockázat az emberi jogok érvényesülése szempontjából.
               

                  A korrupciós ügyek sorozatosan robbannak ki Brüsszelben. Talán a világ többi országa fogadjon el szankciókat a mi vezetőink ellen? És az ügyeket még lehetne sorolni. Itt lenne az ideje, hogy az EU-ból újból egy béke- és szabadságprojektet csináljunk.
               

(A felszólaló hajlandó válaszolni egy kékkártyás kérdésre)


Catarina Vieira (Verts/ALE),
blue-card question. – Dear colleague, you and your colleagues have repeatedly used this debate on human rights to raise the issue of Marine Le Pen.
My question to you is: yesterday, when our group proposed a debate on corruption, on this case, how did you vote? If you voted against, why are you instead using this platform to make the points that you could have voted on a debate to speak about?

András László (PfE),
blue-card answer. – We had our own proposal to talk about this. We wanted to talk about this here in the European Parliament, so we supported this proposal – our proposal, of course.
I believe it's a very serious issue that courts decide instead of European citizens and voters. They have all the information necessary to make their choice.
In my country, just recently, we had a by-election because of a criminal case against a Member of Parliament. He resigned. We had new elections and people voted. Unfortunately, the socialist criminal was re-elected.
It's a very sad situation, but I believe that people can make the right choice for themselves. It's not for courts to decide instead of elections.

President. – If someone is not sentenced, it is not allowed to call him a criminal. We have to clear that up.

Λουκάς Φουρλάς (PPE). – Κυρία Πρόεδρε, κυρία Επίτροπε, συγχαρητήρια στη συνάδελφο Isabel Lima για την εξαιρετική δουλειά της. Η Ευρωπαϊκή Ένωση οφείλει να είναι συνεπής στις αρχές και τις αξίες που υπερασπίζεται. Δεν μπορούμε να έχουμε διαφορετικές αντιδράσεις στα ίδια γεγονότα, ανάλογα με το ποιος είναι ο υπαίτιος ή ποια είναι τα συμφέροντά μας. Αυτή η επιλεκτική ευαισθησία απογοητεύει τις φιλοευρωπαϊκές δυνάμεις και υπονομεύει την αξιοπιστία μας.
               

                  Γιατί υπάρχει εκκωφαντική σιωπή απέναντι σε δικτάτορες, όπως για παράδειγμα ο Erdoğan, ο όποιος φυλακίζει δημοσιογράφους, καταστέλλει κάθε διαφορετική φωνή, ποδοπατεί τα ανθρώπινα δικαιώματα και παραβιάζει κάθε αρχή δικαιοσύνης και ισονομίας; Ο κόσμος στους δρόμους της Τουρκίας ζητά δημοκρατία, και αντί για ελευθερία παίρνει καταστολή, διώξεις και φυλακίσεις. Και εμείς σιωπούμε, έτοιμοι να δώσουμε στον Erdoğan όσα απαιτεί από εμάς. Γιατί; Επειδή είναι ισχυρός;
               

                  Αν η Ευρώπη θέλει να είναι φάρος δημοκρατίας και δικαιοσύνης, πρέπει να πάψει να φοβάται να πει τα πράγματα με το όνομά τους. Δεν μπορεί η σιωπή να είναι η πολιτική μας, γιατί μια Ευρώπη που σιωπά είναι μια Ευρώπη που συναινεί. Κι εμείς δεν μπορούμε να συναινέσουμε στην αδικία. Τα ανθρώπινα δικαιώματα είναι η βάση της ύπαρξής μας ως Ευρώπη. Ας τα διαφυλάξουμε λοιπόν για όλους, μακριά από συμφέροντα.
               

Chloé Ridel (S&D). – Madame la Présidente, chère Madame Kallas, alors que le monde n'a jamais eu autant besoin de paix et de coopération pour faire face aux défis du XXIe siècle – à commencer par le réchauffement climatique –, le spectre de la guerre refait surface. Les dépenses militaires mondiales atteignent 2 300 milliards d'euros. Elles n'ont jamais été aussi élevées et représentent dix fois le montant de l'aide publique au développement.
               

                  La montée de l'autoritarisme, cette internationale réactionnaire qui rassemble depuis Donald Trump jusqu'à Viktor Orban, est la plus grande menace contre les droits fondamentaux et contre nos libertés. Pour nous, le combat pour les droits de l'homme n'est pas juste un impératif moral ou de justice: c'est notre intérêt, c'est notre sécurité. Alors faisons plus! Si nous sommes, comme nous le disons, le continent de la dignité humaine, montrons-le! Nous devons défendre le droit international partout, sans géométrie variable, et nous en sommes bien loin – quand on voit ce qu'on a accepté tout au long de cette année 2024, notamment les exactions qui ont eu lieu à Gaza, dont nous n'aurions jamais accepté le dixième en Ukraine!
               

                  Utilisons notre arsenal de sanctions et protégeons les institutions internationales chargées de rendre justice! Finançons notre dissuasion militaire, mais aussi notre développement!
               

(L'oratrice accepte une question carton bleu)


João Oliveira (The Left),
Pergunta segundo o procedimento ‘cartão azul’
                     . – Senhora Presidente, Senhora Deputada Ridel, falou na violação de direitos humanos, fez referência a vários aspetos importantes, nomeadamente em relação àquilo que se passa na Palestina e na Faixa de Gaza, e isso é muito importante que seja sublinhado.
               

                  Mas queria colocar-lhe uma outra questão: não entende que, num debate sobre direitos humanos, devíamos também tratar de questões que têm que ver com a pobreza, com a falta de acesso à habitação, com a falta de acesso à saúde e à educação, que são verdadeiramente direitos humanos, que deviam ser reconhecidos como tal e que deveriam ser concretizados não apenas na perspetiva de direitos individuais que são, mas também como fundamentos dos regimes democráticos que nós queremos construir?
               

Chloé Ridel (S&D),
réponse carton bleu. – Mais si, vous avez parfaitement raison, il y a plus de 250 millions d'enfants, en l'occurrence, qui, dans le monde, sont privés du droit à l'éducation, par exemple. Nous devons prendre conscience que notre sécurité ne découlera pas uniquement de l'investissement, pourtant nécessaire, dans la dissuasion militaire, mais aussi d'une politique de développement robuste, parce que c'est comme cela qu'on aidera à la stabilité mondiale et à la paix sur le moyen et le long terme.
               

                  Il faut donc, quand on parle de droits fondamentaux, se donner aussi les moyens de financer le développement à travers le monde, et notamment les droits des femmes et des filles. Si l'on est conscient que cette internationale réactionnaire, dont je parlais juste avant, est aussi une internationale masculiniste, il faut que nous défendions – et je me tourne vers vous, Madame Kallas – une diplomatie féministe et que nous considérions l'égalité entre les femmes et les hommes comme une politique de sécurité.
               

Hermann Tertsch (PfE). – Señora presidenta, señora alta representante, otra vez el informe sobre derechos humanos que ya hoy en día es un sarcasmo.
               

                  Vamos a ver, ¿qué lecciones vamos a dar de derechos humanos nosotros, ahora, al mundo cuando los Gobiernos y la Comisión están estrangulando ya sistemáticamente la libertad de expresión, cuando censuran e imponen cordones de acoso a partidos democráticos que denuncian el fracaso de su política que nos hace cada vez más pobres y menos libres, cuando se felicitan de inhabilitar a los favoritos de las elecciones como se inhabilita en Venezuela pero ahora en Bucarest y en París —y quién sabe dónde será la siguiente—, cuando financian a la criminal dictadura de Cuba, cuando pagan a ONG que hacen tráfico de ilegales y destruyen la seguridad europea, cuando las embajadas de la Unión Europea han apoyado a candidatos narcocomunistas en Iberoamérica que hoy tienen cientos de presos políticos?
               

                  Señora Kallas, ¿cuántas veces ha hablado usted de los presos políticos de Iberoamérica? ¿Cuántas veces en los últimos seis meses ha hablado usted, por ejemplo, de Jeanine Áñez en Bolivia, que hizo un trabajo sobre unión en la Unión Europea? Y no tenemos ninguna reacción por parte de ustedes.
               

                  Hemos perdido toda la credibilidad de la Unión Europea y no la vamos a recuperar.
               

Εμμανουήλ Κεφαλογιάννης (PPE). – Κυρία Πρόεδρε, σε έναν κόσμο που αλλάζει, η Ευρωπαϊκή Ένωση είναι ο θεματοφύλακας των αρχών και των αξιών της δημοκρατίας και των ανθρωπίνων δικαιωμάτων. Για να εκπληρώσει αυτή τη σπουδαία αποστολή, η Ευρώπη χρειάζεται να δώσει απαντήσεις και λύσεις στα προβλήματα της κοινωνίας στο εσωτερικό της Ευρωπαϊκής Ένωσης. Να δείξει ότι η Ευρωπαϊκή Ένωση δεν είναι ικανή μόνο στο επίπεδο των διακηρύξεων, αλλά ότι είναι ισχυρή στον οικονομικό τομέα και στον τομέα της ασφάλειας και της άμυνας. Η ισχύς της δημοκρατίας στην Ευρωπαϊκή Ένωση θα πρέπει να γίνεται αντιληπτή και σεβαστή από φίλους και αντιπάλους.
               

                  Κυρίες και κύριοι συνάδελφοι, ο Winston Churchill έλεγε ότι η δημοκρατία είναι το χειρότερο πολίτευμα, αλλά το καλύτερο που εφηύρε ο ανθρώπινος νους. Ήρθε λοιπόν η ώρα των αποφάσεων για την Ευρώπη, την Ευρώπη της δημοκρατίας και των ανθρωπίνων δικαιωμάτων.
               

Evin Incir (S&D). – Madam President, democracy must be defended and developed always, all the time.
In the past 25 years, we have witnessed the trend towards autocratisation, to the point where seven out of ten persons globally now live in undemocratic countries. It is a global crisis we are talking about.
It often starts with a with hate speech and attack on freedom of speech. We see this trend all across the world, including in the US, in the EU, and even in my own country, Sweden, we can see how hate speech from representatives from some political parties has increased. These undemocratic forces wear different masks, but their ideological roots are the same – same-same, different names.
What is even more concerning are those who compromise with these forces, normalising them and becoming dependent on them. Undemocratic forces should not be tolerated. We must build a firewall against them.
To the EPP Group here in the European Parliament and across the EU: yes, I'm talking to you. Wake up. Join the right side of history and stop bending for these forces.

Alice Teodorescu Måwe (PPE). – Fru talman! Att människor används som ammunition i diktaturers hybridkrigsföring är definitionen av anti-humanism. Se bara hur Putin lurat, lockat och pressat migranter mot EU:s gränser.
               

                  Lösningen på dessa cyniska attacker är inte att öppna gränserna. Europa kan inte fortsätta ta emot ekonomiska migranter i den utsträckning vi har gjort.
               

                  Jag välkomnar därför i detta sammanhang att årets betänkande klargör att EU måste ta ansvar för att sprida information i syfte att förhindra att personer utan asylskäl reser mot Europa. Det är helt avgörande för att få ett slut på hybridkrigföringen med migranter.
               

                  I EU ska vi hjälpa de mest behövande – inte de mest lyckligt lottade eller de hitlurade. Men själva processen bör framöver skötas utanför EU för att minimera incitamenten för olagliga och livsfarliga resor i smugglarnas och hybridkrigarnas regi.
               

Catch-the-eye procedure


Sunčana Glavak (PPE). – Poštovana predsjedavajuća, kolegice i kolege, ja ću se osvrnuti na utjecaj digitalnih tehnologija koje utječu na ljudska prava. Samo ću vas podsjetiti da krhka demokracija može biti izuzetno opasna jer je podložna unutarnjim i vanjskim prijetnjama i upravo one mogu dovesti do njezinog urušavanja ili prelaska u takozvane autokratske sustave. Evo nekoliko ključnih razloga zašto je to ozbiljan problem. Prije svega, podložnost manipulaciji i populizmu jer često imaju slabe institucije, što omogućava populistima i autoritarnim liderima da preuzmu vlast manipulacijom javnog mijenja. Dezinformacije i propaganda izazivaju polarizaciju u društvu. Slabost vladavine prava. Sigurnosni kontekst. Imamo kompleksne sigurnosne prijetnje koje uključuju kibernetičke napade na kritičnu infrastrukturu, institucije i privatne kompanije. Dezinformacijske kampanje s ciljem destabilizacije demokratskih procesa. U tom kontekstu dolazimo i do ove točke, a to je ozbiljno narušavanje ljudskih prava u brojnim segmentima.
               

Juan Fernando López Aguilar (S&D). – Señora presidenta, señora Kallas, en un mundo turbulento de desorden global en el que los autoritarismos y las autocracias se dan la mano con los nacionalpopulismos en perjuicio de los derechos humanos, el informe sobre los derechos humanos 2024 del Parlamento Europeo analiza no solamente tendencias y desafíos, sino también las herramientas de que dispone. Yo les subrayo algunas importantes.
               

                  La primera, objetivar la política de visados para favorecer a activistas de derechos humanos —visados humanitarios—. La segunda, primar en la financiación de los programas europeos a las agencias de las Naciones Unidas que se ocupan de los derechos humanos y a las organizaciones no gubernamentales para fortalecer a la sociedad civil. La tercera, condenar aquellas medidas restrictivas contra los funcionarios y los trabajadores de la Corte Penal Internacional. Y la cuarta, poner el foco en la prohibición de la venta de armas a aquellos regímenes que violan masivamente los derechos humanos. Además de cuidar que los programas espía comprados por la Unión Europea en ningún caso se utilicen contra activistas de derechos humanos.
               

Lukas Sieper (NI). – Madam President, dear people of Europe, this report fills me with hope because it shows what I believe to be true, that the European Union stands for human rights in all areas of policy, not just in words, but also increasingly in action.
But we also have to be honest to ourselves: it is not enough. In Sudan, in Iran, Afghanistan, Belarus and many other places, people are raped, tortured and executed. I believe we must start where the crimes are the greatest, and we must use the court that was made for this purpose – the International Criminal Court in The Hague – because every EU Member State is a state party of the Rome Statute.
So let's act like it. Let's use our diplomatic, military and intelligence resources to identify these criminals – find them, take them into custody or, if it must be, abduct them – and bring them to justice. Because if the victims of atrocities cannot be safe in their own countries, then the perpetrators should not feel safe anywhere in the world either.

Michał Wawrykiewicz (PPE). – Madam President, Madam Commissioner, the EU was built on the foundations of human dignity, human rights, democracy and the rule of law. Today, as we examine this report, we see those very principles under attack globally and unfortunately, yes, also in our union. Human rights defenders are persecuted and convicted. Constitutional rules are brutally violated. Civil society is shrinking. Across the world, free elections, independent media and the rule of law are being eroded.
And we cannot be neutral in the face of this. Our foreign policy must reflect our values. This means effective measures against human rights abusers and strong vocal support for those risking their lives for freedom and justice.
And we must lead by example and speak out clearly, whether it's Istanbul, Managua, Tehran, Moscow or even a Member State that violates our fundamental rights, like Budapest. Silence is complicity. Democracy must be defended everywhere and every day. This is our duty.

(End of catch-the-eye procedure)


Kaja Kallas,
Vice-President of the Commission / High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy. – Madam President, honourable Members, thank you for this exchange of views.
When we discuss the challenges posed to human rights and democracy today, at the heart of these challenges, of course, is peace. And peace is not simply the absence of war. It is active cultivation of justice, it's protection of the most vulnerable, the realisation of all human rights, and commitment to dialogue and reconciliation.
Peace cannot come at the expense of human dignity and human rights. Peace endures because human dignity and human rights are protected. Therefore, protecting human rights and human dignity is also the fundamental strategic interest for the European Union because, like many of you said, the European Union is founded on peace, democracy and unity.
We must make very clear that we will not tolerate the erosion of these rights and freedoms that really define us. Now more than ever, we must unite in defence of our common values. Defending human rights and democracy is an opportunity for the European Union to also play on its strength because third countries are also looking towards us in this regard.
It's an opportunity to grow the European Union's partnership around a model that combines mutually beneficial investments with sustainable progress for all parts of society, and to address global challenges with integrity and reduce global inequalities altogether. So, the European Parliament here is a crucial ally.
Thank you for your work and I continue to count on your support.

SĒDI VADA: ROBERTS ZĪLE


Priekšsēdētāja vietnieks


Isabel Wiseler-Lima,
rapporteure. – Monsieur le Président, Madame la Vice-Présidente et Haute Représentante Kaja Kallas, merci beaucoup pour vos paroles et pour tout le travail que vous faites pour défendre notre démocratie et les droits de l'homme. Je voudrais aussi remercier les rapporteurs fictifs, qui ont travaillé de manière très constructive. Nous avons réussi à travailler dans le consensus, et j'espère que le rapport pourra trouver une large majorité demain, quand il sera voté.
                  

                     Aux collègues dans cet hémicycle qui ont parlé des pays de l'Union européenne, je voudrais rappeler que ce rapport est un rapport de la commission des affaires étrangères. Il concerne donc les pays qui sont en dehors de l'Union européenne. Vous êtes souvent prompts à parler de subsidiarité. Or, ici, nous avons une commission qui s'occupe de ce qu'il se passe dans les pays de l'Union européenne: la commission LIBE. Et je suis sûre que, quand il y a des écarts, cette commission, dont je fais d'ailleurs partie, fait bien son travail.
                  

                     Je voudrais par ailleurs dire que les interventions des collègues montrent bien que ce monde entre dans une ère nouvelle, une ère où le droit international, la démocratie, l'état de droit et les droits de l'homme sont fondamentalement remis en cause. L'Union européenne doit garder le cap et réaffirmer ses valeurs, qui construisent un monde de justice et de respect de la personne humaine. Si nous voulons que notre voix se fasse entendre sur l'échiquier mondial, nous devons être unis. Ce n'est qu'unis que nous serons assez forts pour nous faire entendre.
                  

President. – The debate is closed.
The vote will take place tomorrow.


Rakstiski paziņojumi (178. pants)



Viktória Ferenc (PfE),
írásban. – Sajnálattal vettem tudomásul, hogy az Európai Parlament emberi jogi jelentése évről évre egyre kevesebb figyelmet fordít a nemzeti, etnikai és nyelvi kisebbségek helyzetére.
                  

                     A kisebbségekhez tartozó személyek jogainak tiszteletben tartása az Európai Unió alapértékei közé tartozik. Aggasztónak tartom azonban, hogy a balliberális ideológiával átitatott európai uniós politika kettős mércét alkalmaz: egyes kisebbségek ügyét prioritásként kezeli, míg más kisebbségek, mint például a nemzeti, etnikai és nyelvi kisebbség problémáiról nem vesz tudomást.
                  

                     Az Európai Unió csatlakozási kritériumként határozta meg a kisebbségi jogok tiszteletben tartását, ezért úgy gondolom, köteles példát mutatni e téren. Mind az Európai Unión belül, mind azon kívül, a sokszínűség, a nyelvi és kulturális identitás megőrzése érdekében, olyan jogszabályok kidolgozását kell szorgalmaznunk, amelyek biztosítják a nemzeti, etnikai és nyelvi kisebbségek jogait.
                  

                     Az Unió kötelessége, hogy a nemzeti kisebbségek jogainak biztosítását az Ukrajnával folytatott csatlakozási tárgyalások során is megkövetelje. Hiszen az ott élő magyar kisebbség a háború súlya mellett, az utóbbi években jogszűkítéseket is tapasztal, ami elfogadhatatlan egy magát demokratikusnak valló, csatlakozásra váró ország esetében. A nemzeti kisebbségek jogainak tiszteletben tartása az európai integráció alapfeltétele és ezt Ukrajna esetében is érvényesíteni szükséges. A béke megteremtése és az Ukrajnában élő nemzeti kisebbségek jogainak teljeskörű helyreállítása elsődleges szempont kell, hogy legyen.
                  

Tomasz Froelich (ESN),
schriftlich. – ‘Wer Menschheit sagt, will betrügen’, sagte einst Carl Schmitt. Er hatte recht: Sein Zitat passt wunderbar in unsere Zeit: Unter dem Deckmantel der Menschenrechte wird eine Agenda verfolgt, die interventionistisch, globalistisch und woke ist. Eine Agenda, die unsere Souveränität, aber auch die anderer Staaten, aushöhlt. Eine Agenda, die sich gegen Kulturen und Traditionen organisch gewachsener Gesellschaften und Völker dieser Welt richtet. Man will andere belehren, verschließt aber vor eigenen Problemen die Augen – das ist symptomatisch für die Heuchelei des Westens. Über den Grooming-Skandal in Großbritannien findet man in diesem Bericht kein Wort: All meine Vorschläge, diesen Skandal in den Bericht einfließen zu lassen, wurden ignoriert. Tausende weißer britischer Mädchen wurden von überwiegend pakistanischen Gangs über Jahre hinweg sexuell missbraucht. Das interessiert hier aber niemanden. Es sind die falschen Opfer und die falschen Täter, deswegen hält man lieber die Klappe. Dieser selektive Zugang zu Menschenrechtsverstößen ist beschämend. Zumal wir das Recht, andere zu belehren, längst verwirkt haben: Annullierte Wahlen in Rumänien, Verbotsphantasien gegen die AfD in Deutschland, politische Schauprozesse gegen Le Pen in Frankreich, ein Medienputsch in Polen. Die linksliberale Dominanz verliert bei uns immer mehr die Nerven. Sie wird immer diktatorischer. Und sie nimmt – und das ist das Gute! - bald ihr Ende.
                  

Mariusz Kamiński (ECR),
na piśmie. – Prawa człowieka są uniwersalne i niepodzielne, powinny być chronione zarówno w Unii Europejskiej, jak i poza jej granicami. Naszym obowiązkiem jest stanowcze potępianie wszelkich ich naruszeń. Doceniam pracę włożoną w przygotowanie sprawozdania, szczególnie uwzględnienie zapisów dotyczących walki z bezkarnością i korupcją. Mimo wielu istotnych treści, sprawozdanie zawiera także luki, dlatego złożyłem szereg poprawek. Walka o prawa człowieka, wolność i sprawiedliwość jest dziś pilniejsza niż kiedykolwiek w ostatnich dekadach. Ale nie będziemy skuteczni, jeśli w tak ważnych dokumentach będziemy unikać wskazywania po imieniu tych, którzy są odpowiedzialni za największe zbrodnie: którzy jak Łukaszenka zamieniają swoje kraje w więzienia, czy jak Putin dokonują ludobójstwa i barbarzyńskich zbrodni wojennych. Błędem jest nieprzywoływanie tych, którzy są symbolem walki o prawa człowieka. Chciałbym przypomnieć o Andrzeju Poczobucie, niezłomnym bohaterze Polaków, Białorusinów i, jak wierzę, nas wszystkich. Od czterech lat jest więziony przez uzurpatora w Mińsku za to, że miał odwagę mówić prawdę. Dziś wiemy, że Oswaldo Payá, laureat Nagrody Sacharowa, który zginął 13 lat temu, był ofiarą zabójstwa przeprowadzonego przez komunistyczne służby bezpieczeństwa. Musimy brać to pod uwagę w naszych relacjach z brutalnymi reżimami – również w kontekście umów takich jak PDCA. Nie możemy prowadzić polityki dialogu i współpracy w cieniu brutalnych represji i prześladowań.
                  

Ewa Kopacz (PPE),
na piśmie. – Unia Europejska odgrywa fundamentalną rolę w obronie godności ludzkiej, demokracji i praw podstawowych na świecie. Szczególnie niepokojące są brutalne naruszenia praw kobiet i dzieci na terytoriach Ukrainy okupowanych przez Rosję. Doniesienia o systematycznych gwałtach, porwaniach oraz przymusowych deportacjach dzieci do Rosji stanowią poważne zbrodnie wojenne, które wymagają zdecydowanej reakcji społeczności międzynarodowej. Zgadzam się z oceną zawartą w sprawozdaniu, że ‘kobiety doświadczają wyjątkowych i niewspółmiernych skutków konfliktów’ oraz że ‘prawa człowieka przysługujące kobietom i dziewczętom […] wciąż są łamane na całym świecie’. UE musi konsekwentnie wspierać Międzynarodowy Trybunał Karny oraz korzystać z globalnego systemu sankcji Magnickiego wobec osób odpowiedzialnych za te zbrodnie. Wzywam Komisję i Europejską Służbę Działań Zewnętrznych do zintensyfikowania interwencji dyplomatycznych i prawnych w celu zapewnienia sprawiedliwości oraz ochrony ofiar. Prawa człowieka są nienaruszalne. Ich łamanie, zwłaszcza wobec najbardziej bezbronnych, podważa fundamenty międzynarodowego ładu opartego na prawie i wartościach, które jako Unia mamy obowiązek chronić.
                  
11.   Presentation of the New European Internal Security Strategy (debate)

Priekšsēdētājs. – Nākamais darba kārtības punkts ir debates par Komisijas paziņojumu par iepazīstināšanu ar jauno Eiropas iekšējās drošības stratēģiju (2025/2608(RSP)).
               

Magnus Brunner,
Member of the Commission. – Mr President, ladies and gentlemen, honourable Members, security, of course, is the task, I would say, of our times, and this internal security strategy that we are presenting today to you is, I would say, our blueprint for protecting Europeans in a more dangerous world. The goal of this security strategy, the goal of this 'ProtectEU', as we call it, is not only to develop a new, joined-up approach to internal security but also to create a new security mindset. And we live in, I would say, a new era of security threats, and our enemies are not met on an open battlefield, but they hide in the shadows of our financial systems and also in the dark corners of the web. So our policy, of course, must be always able to match this.
And we need to start thinking about security in everything we do. Concretely, this means a security check on all our initiatives, always asking the question, 'How can this proposal we're going to deliver enhance the safety of our citizens?' And we need to act together as a society at all different levels. Providing security is the job of the government, yes, but everyone has to play a role in it. The private sector, the communities, the citizens, of course, and all need to be made aware, actually, of their role. To be very clear on that, staying prepared and ready also for whatever the future holds, I think, is the best way for us to keep actually enjoying our lives, of course and the opportunities there ahead of us.
So, honourable Members, to come to the substance also of the strategy, Europol just published their assessment on serious and organised crime, called the SOCTA, a few weeks ago. And it actually makes for eye-opening reading, I would say. Criminal networks are becoming more sophisticated – we know that – than ever before, and many operate inside the European Union but are run remotely from outside, from third countries. They recruit children who are under the age of criminal responsibility and often unable to actually understand the seriousness of their involvement, to act as helpers, on the one hand, as dealers on the other hand, but even as assassins. And too many people in vulnerable positions are abused by networks of human traffickers.
But I'm very confident that Europe, of course, has the right answers. And under this strategy, under ProtectEU, we will take the fight to the criminals on every front. We will come forward with a massive upgrade to Europol. We will strengthen its mandate with the necessary oversight and provide also the Member States with the level of support they need, and exactly also where, of course, they need this support and – which is also very important – we will follow the money, for example, by pushing forward the implementation of the new rules for money laundering. We will also give law enforcement stronger tools for investigations like undercover operations, but also crown witness programmes and perhaps even more importantly, we will tackle the issue of better access to data. That is very important in that respect – to give the police the tools they actually need to prevent, on the one hand, but also to prosecute, on the other hand, and ProtectEU will take a determined approach, but also a careful approach on that.
Organised criminals are, as I said before, more international than ever before. So we must also, of course, be international by ramping up our engagement with third countries through new security partnerships with our partners. Even, I would say, going beyond partnerships, we want to pursue a sort of new kind security diplomacy, meaning that the EU's security concerns will be on the table in all our dealings with third countries, whether it has to do with with trade or whether it has to do with visa facilitation or development, in all the dealings we have.
The threat of terrorism is also on the rise and as instability continues, just to give an example, of course, in the Middle East, but also elsewhere, we need new tools to stop radicalised individuals from, I would say, slipping through our borders and to stop hateful content from content from radicalising our youth here at home. Under ProtectEU, Frontex, of course, will have an important role to play on the external border and we will be tripling its manpower over time.
I was mentioning the tensions in the Middle East. They are also creating, I would say, new divisions between our religious communities in Europe. We are seeing a shocking rise in antisemitism and at the same time, more widespread anti-Muslim hatred. And the European Union, in my opinion, cannot tolerate either. Protecting the EU also means protecting every European's right to practice his or her religion in peace, and to do so also in an open manner. That will remain an active part of the ProtectEU strategy and I think that's where we really feel very strongly about.
The use, also, of hybrid strategies puts, I would say, the internal cohesion and also the resilience of our societies, of course, to the test and some of the most serious hybrid threats to the security and safety of people in Europe take place online. So, new technologies provide new tools also for influencing our society and we need to hold tech companies to account when it comes to online content that is hateful, that is criminal, and that actually also radicalises our youth. So, protecting children is the most essential duty of any society, I would say, and we must win the fight against child sexual abuse once and for all. And that takes us also back to the to the topic of data access, to how easy it is right now for sexual predators to hide their crimes in the dark corners of cyberspace.
So, honourable Members, as you have seen, ProtectEU has a high level of ambition. Never in the history of the European Union have so many new initiatives in the area of security policy, of course, been put on the table. And I'm asking for your support on all these initiatives, which I know are, I would say, a shared concern for all of us. And because although we no longer have the, I would say, luxury of taking our security for granted, we do have one important advantage because the threats we are facing, also bring us closer together as Europeans. They remind us actually, of our unity, of everything that unites us in Europe, and they give us a sense also of common purpose. And I'm very much convinced that we will retain that sense of common purpose, that we will be able also to protect against these new threats, and that we will emerge stronger than we are before.

Tomas Tobé,
on behalf of the PPE Group. – Mr President, Commissioner, colleagues, Europe is facing major threats to our internal security.
Organised crime is on the rise, hostile state actors are attacking our critical infrastructure and sometimes migration is weaponized at our external borders. This is why the EPP has called for a European security pact to protect our citizens. We welcome that the Commission is now taking crucial steps because this will be needed now to make Europe safe, but also safe for future generations.
The new internal security strategy sends a clear signal that Europe will defend itself against threats – foreign and domestic – and it's also a clear signal to EU citizens that safety needs to be a top priority because without security there is no freedom.
Now, we must also move from words and make sure that we deliver on the content of this strategy. I can assure you, Commissioner, that the EPP is fully committed to achieve this. We will push in this House to make sure that Europe steps up the fight against organised crime, that we tackle illegal migration and that we protect ourselves against hybrid threats. To make it clear: we want a Union for citizens, not for criminals.

Birgit Sippel,
im Namen der S&D-Fraktion. – Herr Präsident! 2020 stellte die Kommission ihre letzte Strategie für innere Sicherheit vor. Damals standen wir noch ganz am Anfang der Corona-Pandemie, schien der russische Angriffskrieg auf die gesamte Ukraine undenkbar, war das Ausmaß hybrider Bedrohungen, gezielter Falschinformationen und Manipulationen kaum vorstellbar, war die Zerstörung von Demokratie als Folge der zweiten Amtszeit von Donald Trump bestenfalls böse Utopie. Vieles ist passiert, und die neue Strategie für innere Sicherheit kommt daher zu einem wichtigen Zeitpunkt.
               

                  Selten war das Bedürfnis der Menschen nach Sicherheit so stark, die Verunsicherung so umfassend, verstärkt durch soziale Ausgrenzung und finanzielle Unsicherheiten. Und dennoch: Wir dürfen uns nicht von Angst, Unsicherheit und scheinbar einfachen Ideen treiben lassen, denn sie helfen nicht, ganz im Gegenteil. Das mussten wir lernen, als der Europäische Gerichtshof etwa 2014 – zu Recht – die damalige Richtlinie zur Vorratsdatenspeicherung für ungültig erklärte.
               

                  Jetzt müssen wir nachhaltige, grundrechtekonforme Lösungen schaffen, und dazu müssen wir die tatsächlichen Sicherheitslücken aufspüren und Herausforderungen rational analysieren. Dazu gehören der Kampf gegen die immer professionellere organisierte Kriminalität sowie der Schutz vor Angriffen auf sensible Infrastruktur, der Schutz vor Natur- und Umweltkatastrophen, der Kampf gegen Extremismus und Terrorismus. Und auch wenn es einige nicht gerne hören: In Deutschland wurden die meisten politisch motivierten Straftaten 2023 im rechten Spektrum begangen. Wichtig auch: der Schutz vor Hassverbrechen und Hassgewalt, der Schutz von Frauen vor Femiziden, der Schutz von Demokratie und Rechtsstaat.
               

                  All dies muss eine Strategie für innere Sicherheit ins Visier nehmen, denn nur so können wir das Vertrauen und das Sicherheitsgefühl der Menschen nachhaltig stärken.
               

Fabrice Leggeri,
au nom du groupe PfE. – Monsieur le Président, la Commission européenne présente aujourd'hui sa stratégie de sécurité intérieure. Puisque la lutte contre le terrorisme en fait partie, Bruxelles doit montrer l'exemple en arrêtant enfin, comme l'exige Marine Le Pen depuis des années, de verser des fonds européens à des organisations proches des Frères musulmans.
               

                  L'islam radical, qui tue, blesse et meurtrit psychologiquement des milliers de nos compatriotes à travers l'Europe, n'a pas à être subventionné par l'Union européenne. Bruxelles doit également cesser de faire le jeu idéologique des islamistes. Le 29 mars, le Collectif contre l'islamophobie en Europe, le nouveau nom du CCIF – une organisation interdite en France –, a relayé une vidéo de la commissaire européenne Hadja Lahbib. Cela n'a été possible que parce que cette dernière reprenait exactement la rhétorique des Frères musulmans.
               

                  Enfin, Bruxelles doit faire pression sur les pays tiers pour qu'ils reprennent leurs ressortissants présents illégalement chez nous. Beaucoup menacent en effet notre sécurité. À défaut, l'Union européenne deviendra la principale complice de ceux qui veulent la détruire.
               

Assita Kanko,
on behalf of the ECR Group. – Mr President, shootings in Brussels, threats in our ports, drugs in our schools, illegal migration and modern slavery in our cities, rape crimes even in daytime. Organised crime knows no boundaries and criminals too often are still outfoxing us. They use borders, busy trade routes and technology to hide their activities.
I welcome the awareness that started emerging in recent years, particularly strong awareness among the so-called 'coalition of the willing', including Belgium, the Netherlands and Germany. These countries must continue to take the lead, but the problems must also be heard and tackled more widely within the European and global frameworks, through what you call security diplomacy.
Dear Commissioner Brunner, as an MEP, as Chair of the Intergroup on the Police and as a mother, I greatly appreciate that this Commission is working so hard to change the mindset and will international agreements.
This strategy is an important step and it gives hope also to our police forces. To them, I would like to say today, thank you and we shall help you.

Malik Azmani,
namens de Renew-Fractie. – Voorzitter, commissaris Brunner, collega's, de wereld om ons heen wordt steeds harder. En zoals de oorlog in Oekraïne laat zien: onze veiligheid wordt bedreigd van buitenaf. Daarom is het ook goed dat er nu een strategie ligt waarbij we snel en gezamenlijk kunnen reageren op hybride dreigingen.
               

                  Maar terwijl we naar deze dreigingen kijken, wil ik benadrukken dat we ook alert moeten blijven op wat er bínnen onze grenzen gebeurt. Want georganiseerde misdaad en ondermijning nemen zowel in Nederland als in de Europese Unie toe. Dit legt een enorme druk op onze manier van leven. Criminele netwerken worden steeds brutaler, gewelddadiger en internationaler. Een Europese aanpak is nodig, ook op drugs, want strengere controles in één haven zorgen voor meer smokkel in de andere.
               

                  Graag hoor ik van de Eurocommissaris hoe hij denkt dit te bewerkstelligen. Het uitrollen van een uitgebreidere Europese havenstrategie lijkt mij keihard nodig! Ik bedank de commissaris en ben gemotiveerd, samen met mijn collega's hier, om samen met hem te werken aan een veiliger Europa en daarmee ook een veilig Nederland.
               

Saskia Bricmont,
au nom du groupe Verts/ALE. – Monsieur le Président, la sécurité est un sujet préoccupant pour nous tous. C'est pourquoi il est heureux que la Commission européenne se penche dessus et qu'elle communique sa stratégie aujourd'hui. Assurer la sécurité intérieure de l'Union européenne exige cependant une approche systémique, qui va de la prévention aux sanctions et à la réhabilitation en passant par les moyens de police, d'enquête et de justice, sans oublier les réponses socioéconomiques.
               

                  Face au crime organisé, assurer la sécurité des citoyens passe aussi par une sécurité sociale forte. Il faut assurer à chacun les conditions d'une existence digne et empêcher la précarité, véritable faille dans laquelle s'engouffrent les criminels pour recruter des enfants de plus en plus jeunes et des personnes vulnérables.
               

                  Assurer la sécurité face au crime organisé, c'est aussi lutter efficacement contre la corruption et le blanchiment d'argent, qui alimentent les réseaux criminels. Assurer la sécurité des citoyens, c'est lutter contre le terrorisme islamiste et contre le terrorisme d'extrême droite. C'est rétablir la vérité quant aux responsables de ces violences, eux qui visent la même chose: déstabiliser nos démocraties et faire peur aux citoyens pour rendre plus acceptables des politiques liberticides, la surveillance généralisée et l'utilisation massive de nos données.
               

                  Assurer la sécurité – les premières victimes européennes du dérèglement climatique ne le savent que trop bien –, c'est aussi assurer la protection des citoyens face aux éléments au moyen de politiques d'adaptation, de prévention, de gestion de crise efficaces, pour faire face aux inondations, aux incendies, aux pénuries d'eau. Assurer la sécurité, c'est aussi mettre fin à la criminalité environnementale, qui est la troisième plus grande activité criminelle.
               

                  Bref, la liste est longue. La Commission européenne doit favoriser l'approche systémique. Il faut faire en sorte que la sécurité mondiale soit respectueuse des droits de l'homme et de nos démocraties, et renforcer les moyens d'agences telles que le Parquet européen.
               

Giuseppe Antoci,
a nome del gruppo The Left. – Signor Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, ringrazio il signor Commissario Brunner per l'importante lavoro svolto.
               

                  La nuova strategia europea di sicurezza interna rappresenta un passo cruciale per contrastare la criminalità organizzata che minaccia la sicurezza dei cittadini e l'integrità delle nostre economie.
               

                  Accolgo con grande favore la proposta di trasformare Europol in un'agenzia pienamente operativa, dotata di risorse e strumenti innovativi per indagini transfrontaliere complesse. Allo stesso tempo, rafforzare Eurojust consentirà una cooperazione giudiziaria più rapida ed efficace.
               

                  Fondamentale sarà anche potenziare il ruolo della Procura europea e della nuova Autorità antiriciclaggio, assicurando un'efficace cooperazione con Europol ed Eurojust.
               

                  È essenziale, inoltre, che la proposta legislativa del 2026 per modernizzare le regole sulla criminalità organizzata identifichi, finalmente, l'associazione mafiosa: senza questo riconoscimento gli strumenti previsti dalla strategia rischiano di essere più deboli.
               

                  Serve coraggio e determinazione, solo così potremo combattere e vincere contro le mafie.
               

Mary Khan,
im Namen der ESN-Fraktion. – Herr Präsident! Was die Kommission heute als Sicherheitsstrategie verkauft, ist eigentlich das alte Spiel – mehr Macht nach Brüssel, weniger Verantwortung in den Nationalstaaten. Herr Brunner, Sie haben bei dem Bericht im Ausschuss von einer neuen Realität gesprochen. Aber diese Realität, diese neue Realität, ist hausgemacht – offene Grenzen, Massenzuwanderung und importierter Terrorismus. Statt unsere Grenzen zu schützen, liefern Sie uns technokratische Planspiele zu Resilienz und zivil-militärischer Zusammenarbeit. Kritische Infrastruktur sichern? Ja, aber national und nicht mit Brüsseler Phrasen.
               

                  Europa braucht keine Bereitschaftsunion, sondern Grenzkontrollen und Souveränität. Und ja, vor allem die Linken sprechen hier bei Terrorismus in Attacken von Männerproblemen. Aber ich sage Ihnen mal etwas: In Ungarn und in Polen gibt es auch Autos und Männer. Und wissen Sie was? Gerade die Bilanz zu islamistischen Terroranschlägen liegt bei Null. Warum? Weil diese Regierungen ihre Bürger schützen und vor allem ihre Grenzen.
               

Jeroen Lenaers (PPE). – Mr President, the EPP stands for a Europe that protects its citizens. You cannot have freedom or prosperity without security. And Europeans overwhelmingly agree with this. Over two thirds of European citizens support a stronger EU role in security. They also see security as the main area where the EU should act. And with the launch of today's strategy, the European Commission puts security at the core of its agenda, and rightly so.
Criminal networks operate across borders. So must our response. Better cooperation and enforcement. Effective communication between Member States. Transforming Europol into an operational agency alongside stronger mandates for Eurojust and Frontex. All of this is vital to addressing security challenges.
Let me highlight some specific ones. A society that cannot protect its children is a society that has no future, and yet we see child sexual abuse increasing. We need to really step up our fight to protect our children. Some proposals are already on the table and we need to adopt them ASAP.
In border regions, like my own, criminals exploit borders to continue their crimes. Strengthening administrative cooperation next to law enforcement and judicial cooperation is necessary and will ensure that criminals will no longer hide behind borders.
And thirdly, strengthening the fight against migrant smuggling and human traffickers by criminal gangs, who often are also involved in other crimes, is an absolute priority.
To conclude, the Commission has taken a key step to safeguard our citizens, but words alone won't do. We need decisive, ambitious action and you can count on the EPP.

Thijs Reuten (S&D). – Voorzitter, collega's, commissaris Brunner, defensie en afschrikking, waar we terecht miljarden voor vrijmaken, zijn niet hetzelfde als interne veiligheid in brede zin. Maar ze zijn wel verbonden met zwakke plekken. In die interne veiligheid heb je dus geen waterdichte verdediging. Het is jammer dat we de vernieuwde strategie voor interne veiligheid nog niet kennen terwijl we hier met u spreken. Maar één ding is zeker: zwakke plekken zijn er.
               

                  Buitenlandse inmenging in verkiezingen is geen theoretisch voorbeeld. Europese burgers worden dagelijks geïntimideerd door autocratische regimes. Cyberaanvallen kunnen in één klap de vitale infrastructuur platleggen. En georganiseerde misdaad is soms zelfs verweven met diezelfde buitenlandse actoren.
               

                  We worden voortdurend getest. Het soepele functioneren van onze samenleving wordt actief ondermijnd om ons verdeeld, afhankelijk en kwetsbaar te maken. De interne samenhang, zoals u, commissaris, terecht zei, staat op het spel.
               

                  Maar als de focus op veiligheid allesoverheersend wordt en mensen raakt die niets kwaads in de zin hebben, dan schiet deze ook zijn doel voorbij en verzwakt die ons ook. Sterke defensie en weerbare burgers die we niet onnodig bang maken, maar het vertrouwen geven dat we dit kunnen met een robuuste veiligheidsstrategie — dat is een dijk die ons beschermt en veilig houdt.
               

Jorge Buxadé Villalba (PfE). – Señor presidente, señor comisario, Sabar, Franklin, Omar, Nassim, Abdelkader, Salah, Younes, Karim. Es la lista de nombres propios de los detenidos una noche en Barcelona, mi ciudad. Algún político en España ha dado la orden a la Policía de denunciar al portavoz nacional de VOX por mostrar esta realidad en una rueda de prensa. Las calles de Europa no son seguras. Las mafias que trafican con seres humanos inundan de droga nuestras calles. Delitos sexuales, robos, agresiones, asaltos a viviendas, machetazos y conductores yihadistas arrasando paseos o mercados.
               

                  La mayoría de los medios de comunicación sistemáticamente oculta la nacionalidad de los extranjeros cuando son detenidos o condenados. La Policía carece de los medios adecuados para combatir el crimen porque la gran coalición popular-socialista ha convertido a las víctimas en culpables y a los culpables en víctimas.
               

                  Es necesario un rearme, un rearme político y moral. Hemos de combatir el crimen con todos los medios a nuestro alcance. Que los medios no oculten la verdad, penas más altas, rebaja de la edad penal, mayor presencia policial, deportaciones masivas y pérdida de ayudas sociales.
               

                  Restablecer el orden es la única estrategia de seguridad posible.
               

Alessandro Ciriani (ECR). – Signor Presidente, signor Commissario Brunner, onorevoli colleghi, accogliamo con favore la nuova strategia di sicurezza interna, un passo importante per dotarsi di strumenti efficaci contro le minacce sempre più complesse e in evoluzione.
               

                  Rafforzare Frontex ed Europol è una necessità: per troppo tempo l'Europa ha affrontato le crisi con mezzi inadeguati, incapaci di rispondere con tempestività e determinazione alle sfide del nostro tempo.
               

                  Terrorismo, criminalità organizzata, traffico di esseri umani, minacce ibride richiedono una strategia solida e una cooperazione rafforzata tra gli Stati membri.
               

                  Tuttavia dobbiamo evitare un errore: passare da una politica emergenziale a una politica dettata dalla paura. La sicurezza non si costruisce con l'allarmismo, ma con una pianificazione strategica autorevole; le minacce esistono e vanno affrontate con fermezza.
               

                  Pertanto dobbiamo rafforzare il controllo alle frontiere, contrastare l'immigrazione clandestina e la radicalizzazione, proteggere i cittadini; dobbiamo mettere in atto azioni decise contro la criminalità organizzata, che sfrutta le debolezze del nostro sistema, e contro le minacce ibride.
               

                  Commissario, l'Europa dimostri di essere forte e di non temere le sfide che ha davanti.
               

Moritz Körner (Renew). – Herr Präsident, liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Sehr geehrter Herr Kommissar, vielen Dank für diese Sicherheitsstrategie! Mehr Zusammenarbeit in Europa im Kampf gegen Terrorismus, organisierte Kriminalität und Cyberangriffe ist sicherlich richtig. Ein Kollege – ich glaube, von der EVP – hat eben gesagt: Ohne Sicherheit gibt es keine Freiheit – und das ist auch richtig. Aber wer die Freiheit aufgibt, um die Sicherheit zu gewinnen, der wird am Ende alles verlieren. Deswegen muss es in unserem Kampf um mehr Sicherheit auch rote Linien geben: keinen Generalverdacht gegen unsere Bürgerinnen und Bürger, keine Massenüberwachung, keine Aufweichung von unseren Grundrechten.
               

                  Wir brauchen also eine smarte und rechtsstaatliche Sicherheitspolitik: mehr Investitionen in digitale Polizeiarbeit statt pauschale Überwachungsinstrumente wie die Chatkontrolle und die Vorratsdatenspeicherung, einen effektiven Austausch zwischen den Behörden, bessere Instrumente zur Bekämpfung von Extremismus, ohne die Meinungsfreiheit einzuschränken.
               

                  Ja, wir wollen Europol zu einem wirklichen europäischen Kriminalamt machen, zur Terrorbekämpfung. Wir wollen unsere Europäische Staatsanwaltschaft stärken. Wir müssen immer darauf achten, dass wir die Sicherheit stärken und die Freiheit dabei nicht aufgeben.
               

(Der Redner ist damit einverstanden, auf eine Frage nach dem Verfahren der ‘blauen Karte’ zu antworten.)


Lukas Sieper (NI),
Frage nach dem Verfahren der ‘blauen Karte’
                     . – Vielen Dank, Herr Kollege, dass Sie die blaue Karte akzeptiert haben. Ich bin grundsätzlich völlig bei Ihnen mit dem, was Sie gesagt haben. Ich frage mich nur eine Sache: Sie haben gesagt, keine Massenüberwachung, aber gleichzeitig mehr digitale Polizeiarbeit. Also, wo ist für Sie der Unterschied zwischen Massenüberwachung und digitaler Polizeiarbeit? Müssen wir nicht, wenn wir die Polizei digital arbeiten lassen wollen, ein bestimmtes Maß an Massenüberwachung in Kauf nehmen, um insbesondere soziale Netzwerke auch konsequent kontrollieren zu können?
               

Moritz Körner (Renew),
Antwort auf eine Frage nach dem Verfahren der ‘blauen Karte’
                     . – Herr Kollege, vielen Dank für die Frage, die ich sehr gerne beantworte. Ich finde, der Unterschied ist genau da, wo wir aus Offline- in Onlineüberwachung gehen, dass wir die gleichen Prinzipien, die wir haben, nicht über Bord werfen. Es muss immer einen Anfangsverdacht geben für eine Ermittlung, denn es darf keine generelle Massenüberwachung geben, wo wir am Ende die Unschuldsvermutung aufgeben, wo unschuldige Bürgerinnen und Bürger ständig überwacht werden; da ist der Unterschied.
               

                  Wenn wir also die digitalen Kompetenzen unserer Polizisten stärken, die in konkreten Fällen ermitteln, dann bin ich sehr, sehr dafür. Wenn wir grundsätzlich alle überwachen, zum Beispiel mit künstlicher Intelligenz, wie das bei der Chatkontrolle geplant ist, dann bin ich dagegen.
               

Lena Düpont (PPE). – Mr President, Commissioner, when we look at the area of freedom, security and justice from 1999, we've come a long way. We have overcome hurdles administratively, but most importantly, sometimes mentally. We increased cross-border cooperation. We built the agencies. We beefed them up on mandates, on staff and resources, on the tasks. We aligned important policies in order to have full leverage on the to the outside world.
But somehow during the process, we but more prominently the Member States, lost ambition, while criminals, like threats, like malicious actors, did not. Cynically enough, time has come to once again step up on security. So the strategy of today is more than a strategy. It's a promise to keep Europe safe. It's an illustration of a security governance that is fit for purpose and time, including information and intelligence gathering and sharing, feeding into a clear situational picture, innovative and thriving capabilities and businesses, agencies that are strong and well coordinated, from border protection to critical infrastructure, to cyber, to law enforcement and to the judiciary side, the fight against organised crime, radicalisation and terroristic threats. The tasks are numerous.
So to the Member States, let's be ambitious. That requires strength, that requires courage, and it needs to match the stakes. The most important promise that we can give to our citizens is their safety.
To the Parliament, we need to adapt and arrive into the new security landscape, on content and on procedures. And altogether, let's do what is needed to serve the European Union, our citizens, our way of life. This is no time to shy away. This is no time to close our eyes, on with courage and determination.

Juan Fernando López Aguilar (S&D). – Señor presidente, señor comisario Brunner, la seguridad europea tiene una dimensión exterior que llevamos un tiempo discutiendo mucho, pero ya era hora de que discutiéramos la seguridad interior con esa estrategia que debe suceder a la actualmente vigente a partir de 2025. Y comprenderá que ninguna de sus herramientas puede sorprender a quienes venimos mucho tiempo abogando por ellas.
               

                  En primer lugar, la coordinación operativa y la complementariedad de Europol y Eurojust para optimizar sus resultados. En segundo lugar, evidentemente, tenemos un plan contra las drogas y contra las armas de fuego. ¿Por qué no ejecutar implacablemente la legislación penal contra el tráfico de armas que ya pusimos en vigor en este Parlamento Europeo? Y, del mismo modo, completar las negociaciones para garantizar la protección de los menores ante los abusos sexuales en la red, porque este Parlamento también ha hecho su trabajo y es al Consejo al que ahora le toca hacerlo.
               

                  Pero, sobre todo, hay que actuar contra el terrorismo. Claro, no solamente contra sus fuentes de financiación, no solamente contra la propagación de sus contenidos online, sino también contra la radicalización que lo produce y lo fomenta.
               

                  Y, finalmente, las infraestructuras digitales, la información digital, compartir información digital en modo que seamos capaces de proteger nuestras comunicaciones críticas con herramientas parejas.
               

                  Pero nada de esto estaría completo si no consideramos también la importancia que tiene combatir toda forma de discurso de odio, el antisemitismo, el antigitanismo y el racismo. El odio que incita directamente a la criminalidad y a la violencia. Porque sin ello no estará completa nuestra estrategia de seguridad interior.
               

Petra Steger (PfE). – Herr Präsident! Sehr geehrter Herr Brunner, ich muss Sie fragen: Was machen Sie hier eigentlich überhaupt noch? Wie sich jetzt herausgestellt hat, sind Sie verantwortlich für das größte finanzpolitische Desaster der Zweiten Republik. Sie haben Österreich von einer gesunden Volkswirtschaft in einen Pleitestaat verwandelt: 4,7 % Budgetdefizit. Sie sollten sich nicht um unsere Sicherheit kümmern oder in einem gut bezahlten EU-Top-Job hier sitzen. Genauso wenig wie übrigens Ihr ehemaliger Bundeskanzler Nehammer, der jetzt als Dankeschön für den Scherbenhaufen auch noch in der Europäischen Investitionsbank versorgt wird.
               

                  Wenn Sie Anstand hätten, würden Sie zurücktreten, und zwar sofort. Nein, stattdessen präsentieren Sie heute eine Sicherheitsstrategie, ohne überhaupt irgendeine Strategie zu haben. Nichts! Es gibt nichts! Keine Dokumente, keine Daten, keine Zahlen – gar nichts. Nur schwer bedenkliche Ankündigungen. Anstatt endlich für Sicherheit zu sorgen, stellen Sie die Bürger mal wieder unter Generalverdacht und leben mal wieder Ihre Zensurphantasien gemeinsam mit von der Leyen aus.
               

                  Im Kampf gegen Terrorismus und organisierte Kriminalität sollen jetzt natürlich wieder TikTok und Social Media zensiert werden. Gleichzeitig schauen Sie weiter zu, wie jedes Jahr Millionen Illegale unkontrolliert über unsere Grenzen kommen und mit ihnen zahlreiche Gefährder, Extremisten und Terroristen, und damit, Herr Brunner, zeigen Sie mal wieder, dass Sie genauso ahnungslos als Migrationskommissar sind, wie Sie schon als Finanzminister in Österreich waren.
               

Mariusz Kamiński (ECR). – Panie Przewodniczący, panie Komisarzu! Przyniósł Pan dziś dokument z kilkoma interesującymi pomysłami, ale Komisja Europejska już wcześniej przyjmowała podobne strategie, by później zaprzeczać im własnymi działaniami. Katastrofalna polityka migracyjna znacząco osłabiła Europejczyków. Szeroko otworzyła drzwi dla grup przestępczych, przemytników, terrorystów. Dziś mówi Pan o wzmocnieniu granic przez urzędników Frontexu. Panie Komisarzu, czy jest Pan świadom, że zamiast wspierać strażników chroniących granice Litwy z Białorusią w trakcie szturmu organizowanego przez Łukaszenkę, urzędnicy Frontexu działający tam działali tak jak niemal jakieś lewicowe NGOsy? Wysyłali raporty podważające działania litewskiej Straży Granicznej. Mówi Pan o konieczności walki z zagrożeniami hybrydowymi. Czy wie Pan, że Komisja Europejska krytykowała Polskę za zatrzymanie udającego dziennikarza agenta GRU Pawła Rubcowa? Mówi Pan, że służbom należy zapewnić dostęp do nowoczesnych technologii, do nowoczesnych narzędzi, bo z takich korzystają przestępcy i nasi wrogowie.
               

                  Czy takie do tej pory płynęły komunikaty z Brukseli? Absolutnie nie, wręcz przeciwnie. Zgadzam się, że należy zintensyfikować współpracę w zwalczaniu transgranicznej przestępczości zorganizowanej. Apeluję jednak do Pana, aby ta strategia zawierająca wiele wartościowych elementów nie została kolejną kartką……
               

(Przewodniczący odebrał mówcy głos)


François-Xavier Bellamy (PPE). – Monsieur le Président, Monsieur le Commissaire, ça ne se passe pas très loin d'ici: à Saint-Ouen, une ville de la banlieue parisienne, les parents d'élèves vont devoir décider s'ils déménagent ou non des classes d'une école primaire parce que le trafic de drogue a rendu la vie tellement impossible et tellement dangereuse aux enfants que leur établissement scolaire ne peut pas rester là.
               

                  Monsieur le Commissaire, vous présentez votre nouvelle stratégie pour la sécurité intérieure, et je voudrais vous remercier parce que vous portez la voix d'une Europe qui décide de devenir lucide – enfin! – sur ces sujets de sécurité. Je voudrais simplement vous dire qu'il n'y a pas de sécurité intérieure sans une vraie stratégie extérieure. Sans la protection de nos frontières contre l'immigration illégale, il n'y aura pas de sécurité dans nos pays demain.
               

                  Tous nos pays, tous nos pays doivent coopérer en refusant de délivrer ensemble le moindre visa à des États tiers qui refusent de reprendre leurs ressortissants rentrés illégalement sur le sol européen. L'attentat de Mulhouse, qui a endeuillé la France il y a quelques jours seulement, a été commis par un clandestin que l'Algérie avait refusé dix fois de suite de reprendre sur son sol, alors même qu'il avait commis des crimes sur le sol de notre pays. L'Europe est de toute évidence impuissante, ce qui aggrave l'insécurité pour nos concitoyens.
               

                  Je parle également d'une stratégie de protection des frontières face au narcotrafic, qui menace aujourd'hui jusqu'à l'ordre public et la souveraineté de nos États, et d'une stratégie de protection de nos frontières face au risque terroriste. Dans tous ces domaines, la sécurité intérieure passe de toute évidence par le fait de garantir que nous aurons ensemble une vraie stratégie de sécurité extérieure.
               

Marieke Ehlers (PfE). – Voorzitter, commissaris, collega's, we leven in een tijd waarin de dreigingen niet alleen van buitenaf komen, maar ook van binnenuit. Veiligheid is meer dan een strategie. Het garandeert het recht om je thuis te voelen in je eigen land, in je eigen stad en in je eigen straat. De Amerikaanse vicepresident heeft gelijk: elke veiligheidsstrategie, of deze nu intern of extern is, zal pas slagen als we niet alleen weten waartegen we ons beschermen, maar ook wat we beschermen.
               

                  Het is op dit punt dat we de weg kwijt zijn geraakt. We hebben onze sociale cohesie verloren, de warmte van goed nabuurschap, het vertrouwen om je deur open te laten en je toch veilig te voelen. Het gevoel van zorg voor elkaar is langzaam vervaagd en het wordt tijd dat we dat weer terugvinden. Want ik wil weer leven in een land waar mijn kinderen veilig buiten kunnen spelen, waar ze opgroeien in een samenleving die hen beschermt, begeleidt en trots maakt op wie ze zijn. Zonder dat fundament kunnen we nog zoveel politieke of veiligheidsstrategieën bedenken, ze blijven gedoemd om te falen.
               

Charlie Weimers (ECR). – Mr President, Commissioner Brunner, your predecessor Ylva Johansson's internal security strategy failed.
Migrant crime, bombings, shootings and radical Islam is Europe's new normal. Across open borders, thieving gangs move freely, plundering Swedish farms and families. I therefore welcome your more pragmatic, security-first approach that builds on strict border controls and increased returns of migrants.
Now say it slow so the left can scribble it down in their feelings journal: we need mass deportations. That's how we restore safety to our streets. It's time for those who talk about safe streets to deliver. More community centres, social programmes and mass surveillance are the distractions of the left. They're banning ninja swords, but keeping the ninjas. Ignore them and let's make Europe safe again.

Javier Zarzalejos (PPE). – Señor presidente, señora vicepresidenta, señor comisario, en primer lugar, creo que es justo felicitarles por la presentación de esta estrategia de seguridad interior de la Unión que significa el cumplimiento de un compromiso, y de un compromiso en tiempo y forma, y que nos permite poder definir una estrategia que tiene que ser consistente y que tiene que ser adecuada a la naturaleza y la gravedad de las amenazas. Un documento que no es solamente un análisis, que no es tampoco solamente una hoja de ruta, sino que tiene que ser un compromiso operativo que nos permita medir el avance que se produce en este terreno a través de las iniciativas que impulse la Comisión.
               

                  No estamos amenazados solo como individuos, estamos amenazados como sistemas de convivencia. Están amenazadas nuestras instituciones y nuestros propios sistemas democráticos. Y, de nuevo, no descubro nada cuando digo que la clave a la que nos tenemos que enfrentar es nuestra capacidad para cumplir, es el delivery. Y en este punto creo que es fundamental que reforcemos aquellos instrumentos ejecutivos que van a definir la capacidad para hacer buenos los compromisos que se asumen en la estrategia. Me estoy refiriendo a las agencias europeas Europol, Eurojust, Frontex, la Agencia de Asilo de la Unión Europea, la Agencia de los Derechos Fundamentales de la Unión Europea, la eu-Lisa, la CEPOL y, ahora, la ALBC y la Fiscalía Europea. Tenemos que dotarlas de medios —y en ese sentido el MFP va a ser definitivo— y contemplar las mejoras necesarias en la regulación de su mandato.
               

                  Tenemos ante nosotros un trabajo que no admite soluciones fáciles y en el que las instituciones, empezando por el Parlamento, estén seguros de que cooperarán.
               

Joachim Stanisław Brudziński (ECR). – Panie Przewodniczący, szanowni Państwo! Bezpieczeństwo wewnętrzne państw członkowskich winno oznaczać w pierwszej kolejności bezpieczeństwo obywateli naszych państw. A jak to wygląda w praktyce? Posłużę się przykładem mojego kraju – Polski. Otóż oddelegowany przez Ursulę von der Leyen na premiera rządu polskiego Donald Tusk po to, aby rzekomo przywracać zagrożoną przez rządy Prawa i Sprawiedliwości praworządność, wprowadzał je w sposób zaiste spektakularny, na przykład dzisiaj w areszcie wydobywczym przetrzymywana jest współpracownica poprzedniego premiera Mateusza Morawieckiego, którą na przesłuchania prowadzi się w zespolonych kajdankach jak bardzo groźnego przestępcę. Matka cięzko chorego dziecka jest szantażowana – zeznasz coś na poprzedniego premiera, to zostaniesz zwolniona.
               

                  Inny przykład to panie, których zbrodnią było to, że współpracowały z poprzednimi ministrami czy premierem, przetrzymywane są w aresztach bez podstawowych środków higienicznych. Swoje potrzeby fizjologiczne muszą załatwiać w obecności mężczyzn. Również próbuje się wymuszać na nich kompromitujące zeznania na poprzedników. A co najciekawsze, w ostatnich dniach z więzienia zostaje zwolniony wyjątkowo bestialski morderca, który próbując zabić Jarosława Kaczyńskiego, gdy mu się to nie udało, zamordował Bogu ducha winnego pracownika biura poselskiego, drugiemu poderżnął gardło i zostaje zwolniony trzy dni po tym, jak zostaje zaszczuta wieloletnia dyrektorka biura Jarosława Kaczyńskiego, której odmawiano prawnika przy przesłuchaniach. Tak wygląda praworządność Donalda Tuska.
               

(Mówca nie zgodził się na pytanie zasygnalizowane przez podniesienie niebieskiej kartki przez Dariusz Joński)


Paulo Cunha (PPE). – Senhor Presidente, Senhor Comissário, a segurança interna da União Europeia enfrenta desafios sem precedentes.
               

                  As ameaças não respeitam fronteiras. É por isso que necessitamos, com urgência, de uma estratégia europeia de segurança interna, única, renovada, robusta e coerente.
               

                  Existem quatro prioridades claras para a área da segurança: a proteção das fronteiras externas, o reforço da cooperação policial e judiciária, o combate ao terrorismo e a segurança digital.
               

                  Estes quatro eixos permitem-nos uma resposta abrangente e multifacetada a uma ameaça em rápida mutação.
               

                  É crucial reforçar a cooperação entre os Estados-Membros. As fronteiras externas da União Europeia devem ser protegidas de forma eficiente, investindo em tecnologia e recursos humanos qualificados.
               

                  Hoje, a Europa deve reafirmar-se como um projeto de paz, garantindo a segurança dos seus cidadãos e protegendo os seus valores, mas sem ceder à tentação de restringir liberdades fundamentais.
               

                  Unidos somos mais fortes e, agora, mais do que nunca, precisamos de um verdadeiro pacto europeu para a segurança.
               

(O orador aceita responder a uma pergunta ‘cartão azul’)


João Oliveira (The Left),
Pergunta segundo o procedimento ‘cartão azul’
                     . – Senhor Deputado Paulo Cunha, o senhor veio fazer elogios à proposta de estratégia europeia de segurança interna e quero fazer-lhe duas perguntas.
               

                  A primeira é a de saber se o senhor deputado acha mesmo que é de elogiar uma estratégia que estigmatiza migrantes, estigmatiza a religião, mas fecha os olhos à criminalidade económica e financeira, fecha os olhos às ameaças da extrema-direita em termos de criminalidade?
               

                  E a segunda pergunta é se acha que é correta uma estratégia que centra as atenções nas agências europeias de segurança, desvalorizando e desconsiderando a necessidade de investimento nacional nas forças e serviços de segurança?
               

Paulo Cunha (PPE),
Resposta segundo o procedimento ‘cartão azul’
                     . – Elogio uma estratégia que enfrenta um problema que existe. O erro seria nós ignorarmos uma dificuldade que é real e visível por todos.
               

                  Considero que a solução preconizada pelo senhor comissário é uma solução pragmática e o pragmatismo da solução é o melhor caminho para fomentarmos a migração. As políticas migratórias serão favorecidas, serão protegidas se nós defendermos os canais legais.
               

                  O que está em cima da mesa é regularizar um processo e a regularização trará resultados favoráveis do ponto de vista da proteção dos direitos dos migrantes.
               

Elena Donazzan (ECR). – Signor Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, c'è una preghiera di un'associazione di ex militari che dice: ‘salva noi, armati come siamo di fede e di amore’. L'Europa ha perso la fede e ha confuso l'amore, e oggi ha un problema di sicurezza piuttosto evidente.
               

                  Dobbiamo uscire da questa ipocrisia e affrontare il tema con chiarezza; la strategia di sicurezza interna è un'esigenza fondamentale.
               

                  Non solo armi, certo! Ma anche armi, anche eserciti, anche forze militari, e certamente la sicurezza però riguarda molto di più: riguarda i cittadini; riguarda i dati di questi cittadini, le imprese; riguarda i confini; riguarda i domini; riguarda la terra, il mare e oggi anche lo spazio; riguarda le fonti energetiche, l'acqua, le materie prime, le infrastrutture strategiche.
               

                  È una guerra ibrida e dobbiamo averne consapevolezza e preparazione.
               

                  Deve perciò cambiare il paradigma e dobbiamo agire per la difesa della nostra sovranità. In primis, oggi riguarda la produzione industriale/personale e la libertà.
               

Maciej Wąsik (ECR). – Panie Przewodniczący! Dzisiaj musimy zmierzyć się z pytaniem, dlaczego Europejczycy czują się mniej bezpieczni. Badania wskazują na trzy główne czynniki, które rzucają cień na bezpieczeństwo w Europie. Po pierwsze migracja i potężne trudności z integracją. Po 2015 roku miliony migrantów przekroczyło granice Unii Europejskiej. Ludzie na ulicach boją się o swoje bezpieczeństwo, zwłaszcza po takich incydentach jak w Sylwestra w Kolonii, gdzie zgłoszono ponad 1200 napaści. Po drugie terroryzm. Powtarzające się zamachy, takie jak w Paryżu, Berlinie, Strasburgu, Nicei czy w Brukseli, sprawiają, że mieszkańcy często obawiają się przebywać w przestrzeni publicznej. Po trzecie zwykła uliczna przestępczość. W 2023 roku w Paryżu odnotowano ponad 10.000 kradzieży z użyciem przemocy, a w Sztokholmie 62 strzelaniny gangów i 300 gwałtów. Budzi to strach na ulicach i paraliżuje mieszkańców.
               

                  Te obawy wymagają działań, skutecznego zablokowania nielegalnej imigracji i wzmocnienia granic Europy. Pakt migracyjny nie jest odpowiedzią na problemy związane z migracją. To tylko przeniesienie problemów Europy Zachodniej do jeszcze bezpiecznych krajów, takich jak Polska, Czechy czy Węgry. Należy wycofać się z paktu i wdrożyć szybkie i skuteczne metody obrony granic i odsyłania nielegalnych imigrantów z Europy.
               

Gheorghe Piperea (ECR). – Domnule președinte, vorbim aici despre securitate, dar în Cartea albă pentru apărarea europeană nu este vorba doar despre securitate, ci despre transformarea economiei și a sistemului nostru politic într-un capitalism de stat care pune industria militară în centrul său. Nu reprezintă o ajustare economică. Este de fapt construirea unei economii de război, iar o economie de război nu este o economie de piață, nu e o democrație.
               

                  O economie de război înseamnă rechiziționarea resurselor, consolidarea producției de armament în carteluri monopoliste și subordonarea întregii industrii nevoilor militare, înseamnă funcționarea sub un sistem de achiziții publice opace și confidențiale, unde responsabilitatea, atât legală, cât și morală, este eliminată ostentativ. Înseamnă că vom trăi într-o urgență permanentă, unde deciziile sunt luate cu ușile închise, justificate prin nevoia de securitate, iar nu prin dezbateri democratice.
               

                  Chiar ne dorim să redefinim Europa în jurul armelor și al războiului? Suntem dispuși să acceptăm un viitor în care planificarea economică servește strategiilor militare și nu bunăstării sociale? Securitatea este esențială, dar nu o securitate creată cu prețul democrației, transparenței și libertății economice.
               

Brīvais mikrofons


Dariusz Joński (PPE). – Panie Przewodniczący! Bezpieczeństwo Europy to jest hasło polskiej prezydencji i nie dotyczy tylko i wyłącznie bezpieczeństwa naszych granic, ale również bezpieczeństwa wewnętrznego. Więc tym bardziej cieszy, że Komisja Europejska przygotowała jasny konkretny plan walki z gangami przestępczymi, zorganizowanymi grupami przestępczymi, a jest ich blisko 5 tysięcy w Unii Europejskiej. Każdy, ale to absolutnie każdy, kto korzysta z naszej gościnności europejskiej, a mamy Europę otwartą, ale brutalnie łamie prawo, musi być deportowany. Taką zasadę przyjęliśmy w Polsce i od wielu tygodni premier Donald Tusk stosuje zasadę zero tolerancji dla tych, którzy właśnie brutalnie łamią prawo, a przyjeżdżają i korzystają z naszej gościnności.
               

                  Cieszy, że wzmacniamy Frontex. Cieszy, że Europol będzie miał rolę operacyjną i stanie się taką specjalną siłą policyjną, która będzie reagowała. Musimy reagować. Bezpieczeństwo dla Europy, dla nas wszystkich jest najważniejsze.
               

José Cepeda (S&D). – Señor presidente, señor comisario, primero, me gustaría extender mis felicitaciones por la estrategia de seguridad interior de la Unión Europea. Pero hay dos cosas que me preocupan especialmente y que quería compartir con usted y con la vicepresidenta Virkkunen.
               

                  La primera tiene que ver con el ecosistema digital. Usted ha dicho que vamos incluso a eliminar contenidos de las plataformas. Eso puede estar muy bien, pero por lo menos deberíamos plantear claramente cómo verificar la identidad cada una de las plataformas y cómo se aplica realmente en Europa el Reglamento de Servicios Digitales. Yo creo que en esto ustedes tienen que ser mucho más duros y mucho más contundentes.
               

                  En segundo lugar, estamos hablando del Plan ReArmar Europa. Estamos hablando realmente de cómo definir nuestra estrategia de seguridad de fronteras hacia fuera. Y uno de los grandes déficits que, por ejemplo, plantea el Informe Niinistö es el de los servicios de inteligencia. Para hacer realmente una seguridad interior es mucho más importante que la inteligencia interior también esté perfectamente coordinada. Ese, sin lugar a dudas, es uno de los retos que tienen que desarrollar en este programa de trabajo.
               

João Oliveira (The Left). – Senhor Presidente, Senhor Comissário Brunner, a estratégia europeia de segurança interna define prioridades erradas, ameaça as liberdades dos cidadãos e dedica-se a caçar bruxas enquanto fecha os olhos aos crimes de colarinho branco e às ameaças da extrema-direita.
               

                  A proposta apresentada pela Comissão comete quatro pecados capitais.
               

                  Primeiro, centra as suas atenções nas agências europeias, quando a prioridade devia ser o apoio ao investimento nas forças e nos serviços de segurança de segurança nacionais.
               

                  Segundo, reforça mecanismos de vigilância das pessoas e aponta perspetivas de mais restrições de direitos, liberdades e garantias dos cidadãos, incluindo a sua privacidade e a proteção dos seus dados pessoais.
               

                  Terceiro, desconsidera completamente o combate à criminalidade económica e financeira, incluindo aquela que se desenvolve utilizando a liberdade de circulação de capitais e modernos meios e capacidades tecnológicos.
               

                  Quarto, instrumentaliza a religião e os migrantes, fazendo deles bodes expiatórios da criminalidade, fechando os olhos a práticas criminais e ameaças que têm origem em forças de extrema-direita.
               

                  Esta estratégia não garante a segurança nem defende a democracia.
               

Sunčana Glavak (PPE). – Poštovani predsjedavajući, poštovani povjereniče, kolegice i kolege, prema dostupnim podacima Europola na području Europske unije djeluje 821 kriminalna mreža. Glavna djelatnost: trgovina drogom, trgovina ljudima, kibernetički kriminal i, naravno, pranje novca. Stoga pozdravljam ovu inicijativu koja nam prije svega donosi integrirani rad sigurnosnih agencija, što znači dublju suradnju između nacionalnih sigurnosnih službi, Europola i Frontexa. Osim toga, ono što je bitno, želimo unaprijediti Kibernetičku sigurnost, nove tehnologije za detekciju i neutralizaciju kibernetičkih prijetnji, naravno, želeći zaštititi digitalnu infrastrukturu i podatke naših građana. Ono što je jako važno, to je jasnija i važnija kontrola na vanjskim granicama Europske unije. Borba protiv dezinformacija nešto je o čemu stalno govorim, godinama u ovom parlamentu, a to se prije svega odnosi i na medijsku pismenost prema našim građanima koji tek ulaze u život. Zaključno, implementacijom ovih mjera želimo povećati otpornost Europske unije. I naravno, ono što je najbitnije… (predsjedavajući je govorniku oduzeo riječ)


Diana Iovanovici Șoșoacă (NI). – Domnule președinte, în calitate de avocat, nu pot să nu avertizez întreaga lume europeană de faptul că sub acoperișul acestei strategii de securitate, dumneavoastră implementați cea mai cumplită dictatură și reinventați inchiziția. Mă aștept acum să îl aud pe Galileo Galilei spunând: E pur si muove!, pentru că aici suntem. Inchiziția a durat 600 de ani și a distrus întreaga omenire.
               

                  Dumneavoastră nu ne mai acuzați că suntem extrema dreaptă, pentru că dumneavoastră sunteți extremiștii lumii și ați ucis proiectul european. Ne-ați anulat dreptul de a avea o opinie, de a ne exprima, de a gândi. Dacă nu gândim ca dumneavoastră, oficial, suntem paria societății.
               

                  Nu veți ajunge nicăieri în felul acesta. Avem drepturi și libertăți fundamentale pe care trebuie să ni le respectați, pentru care au murit milioane de oameni să și le câștige. Sunteți doar o dictatură care trebuie dată jos.
               

Ana Miguel Pedro (PPE). – Senhor Presidente, Caro Comissário, quero felicitá-lo, antes de mais, pela estratégia que aqui nos traz hoje.
               

                  É um passo decisivo para enfrentar a realidade que todos reconhecemos. As ameaças já não têm fronteiras e são cada vez mais rápidas, inteligentes, interligadas.
               

                  Estamos a lidar com uma combinação explosiva de crime organizado, terrorismo, ameaças híbridas e até atos de sabotagem promovidos por Estados hostis.
               

                  Mas sejamos francos, enquanto discutimos estratégias, os criminosos não perdem tempo com burocracias para atravessar fronteiras.
               

                  Neste contexto, a partilha de informações entre Estados-Membros é absolutamente crucial. Se os criminosos continuarem a partilhar informações de forma mais rápida e eficaz do que nós, a Europa terá perdido a batalha antes dela começar.
               

                  Caro Comissário, esta estratégia é uma oportunidade única para corrigir os erros do passado e demonstrarmos que a Europa consegue responder à altura das ameaças que enfrenta.
               

Lukas Sieper (NI). – Herr Präsident, liebe Menschen Europas! Die Bedrohungen für unsere innere Sicherheit sind real – von russischer Sabotage bis hin zu islamistischen, links- oder rechtsextremistischen Terrorzellen, von Cyberangriffen bis hin zu Wahlmanipulation. Diese Strategie erkennt das an, aber wenn wir europäische Sicherheit wollen, dann brauchen wir europäische Lösungen. Das bedeutet eine Ermittlungshoheit von Europol in transnationalen Fällen, europäische Einsatzkräfte zum Schutz kritischer Infrastruktur, vernetzte Datenbanken anstatt 27-mal Bürokratie und 27-mal nationales Kompetenzchaos. Es heißt aber auch, Freiheit verteidigen, während wir Sicherheit verteidigen: keine anlasslose Massenüberwachung, keine Chatkontrolle, keine Kriminalisierung von Verschlüsselung.
               

                  Sicherheit ist kein Vorwand, um Grundrechte abzubauen; sie ist ein Versprechen, sie zu schützen. Setzen wir auf eine moderne, digitale, grundrechtsbasierte Sicherheit, bauen wir eine Union, die sich selbst schützen kann, ohne sich abzuschotten, ohne ihre Seele zu verlieren.
               

(Brīvā mikrofona uzstāšanos beigas.)


Henna Virkkunen,
Executive Vice-President of the Commission. – Mr President, honourable Members, thank you very much for this debate. Commissioner Brunner and I have been listening very carefully to what you all have said here, and I think it's very encouraging to hear that in this House, there seems to be broad agreement that we need a change in our approach to security.
And this is also, as we know, something that EU citizens also expect from us. According to the latest Eurobarometer, 64 % of EU citizens expressed concerns about the EU's security.
Europe has long been a beacon of freedom, security and prosperity, grounded in the rule of law, democracy and shared values. But in today's rapidly evolving world, our security landscape has changed. The threats we are facing today, they are larger, they are more global and also increasingly they are online – ranging from organised crime and terrorism to hybrid threats fuelled with disinformation, fear and sabotage to our critical infrastructures.
So, it is clear that No Member State can tackle these threats alone. We need a bold, proactive and also coordinated European response. The European internal security strategy is this response, together with the white paper on the future of defence and the preparedness Union strategy. We are now setting together the vision for a safe, secure and more resilient European Union.
Security is also a precondition for our democracy. Our security will be further strengthened by the upcoming Democracy Shield, which will also lay out a comprehensive framework to protect and promote democracy in the European Union.
We do not start from scratch. Our work will build on the existing vast European internal security architecture with many achievements already in place. We will reinforce partnership with the third countries contributing to global security. We will also make the EU more secure by reinforcing our capabilities, leveraging technology, enhancing cyber security and combating security threats decisively.
I cannot stress enough the online dimension of security: combating hateful, criminal and radical online content is a top priority for us. So is ensuring lawful access to data, while preserving privacy and cybersecurity.
Here, I want to underline especially the need to protect our children online. We need a new legal framework on protecting children from sexual abuse online. I count on the co-legislators to advance the negotiations here very swiftly, and we will put forward also new initiatives to protect children from radicalisation, online recruitment of gangs and cyber bullying and other serious threats.
Resilience is at the heart of all our security measures. We need a change of mindset towards a whole-of-society approach where each citizen, civil society, businesses and academia feel engaged and empowered. As President Niinistö said in his report, security is a public good. We all need to protect it together.

President. – The debate is closed.


Rakstiski paziņojumi (178. pants)



Caterina Chinnici (PPE),
per iscritto. – La relazione EU-SOCTA 2025 conferma quanto la criminalità organizzata minacci la coesione politica, economica e sociale dell'Europa, oltre che la sicurezza e la libertà dei cittadini.
               

                  Gruppi criminali organizzati, sempre più diffusi e radicati, ricorrono a strumentazioni e tecnologie sempre più complesse e sofisticate per i loro traffici e per reinvestirne gli ingenti profitti nell'economia legale.
               

                  Le tensioni geopolitiche, poi, riacutizzano la minaccia terroristica.
               

                  L'UE deve quindi dotarsi di una nuova, forte ed ambiziosa strategia di sicurezza interna.
               

                  Bene dunque il rafforzamento di Europol e delle capacità di prevenzione, analisi ed indagine delle autorità di contrasto nazionali, anche migliorandone l'accesso a dati e informazioni.
               

                  Bene l'approccio ‘follow the money’, con la rapida implementazione delle nuove norme antiriciclaggio.
               

                  Bene la cooperazione con i paesi terzi.
               

                  Europol, EPPO, AMLA e gli altri organi dell'UE impegnati nel settore devono pertanto ricevere tutte le risorse necessarie ai loro compiti.
               

                  Sicurezza per tutti deve poi significare, anzitutto, sicurezza per i più vulnerabili, cioè prevenzione e contrasto al reclutamento di minori a scopi criminali e lotta alle violenze e agli abusi sessuali sui bambini, online e offline.
               

                  Solo un'UE davvero sicura al proprio interno può garantire i diritti dei cittadini e affrontare adeguatamente anche le sfide internazionali.
               
12.   EU Preparedness Union Strategy (debate)

Priekšsēdētājs. – Nākamais darba kārtības punkts ir debates par Komisijas paziņojumu par Savienības krīžgatavības stratēģiju (2025/2641(RSP)).
               

Hadja Lahbib,
Member of the Commission. – Mr President, honourable Members, it's a pleasure to speak to you about a topic that concerns all of us: preparedness for keeping our societies working and our citizens safe under any circumstance.
Today's existing and emerging threats facing Europe are many, complex, and they are frequently connected. That is why our Preparedness Strategy is based on an 'all-hazards' approach, from natural disasters to man-made disasters and hybrid threats, which can often take unpredictable forms.
It is a fact that no one can deny. Every year, more and more extreme weather disasters are striking our communities with tragic consequences. And they are happening with greater intensity than ever before. Flash floods, wildfires, heatwaves. At the same time, the phones we carry in our pockets, our computers, social media, electrical grids, financial institutions, supply chains and raw materials are also vulnerable.
No country can face these massive challenges alone. This is today's reality. So we must face it in an orderly manner with collective responsibility and solidarity, and we must pay particular attention to our most vulnerable citizens: children, the elderly, people with disabilities and all those who are often the first victims in times of crisis.
Honourable Members, the bottom line is we must be ready for anything, even the unexpected. We must be able to maintain the vital services of all democratic societies: children going to school; hospitals delivering care; governments and parliaments continuing to fulfil their responsibilities no matter what happens.
For that, we must take a holistic approach. Our reinforced preparedness cannot rely on isolated silos. It has to be systematic, coordinated and integrated in different areas. It must also be proactive to anticipate risks and challenges.
Now, you may ask yourself, is this the role of the European Union? And the answer is yes, our people want it. Last year's Eurobarometer survey shows that more than six out of ten Europeans say they need more information to prepare for disasters, and more than eight out of ten Europeans believe the EU should be more involved in preparedness efforts for future crises.
Honourable Members, as Commissioner for Preparedness and Crisis Management, I have been endorsed by our President to work with the Executive Vice-President Mînzatu to present a preparedness strategy to help keep people safe, prepared and informed. I take this responsibility very seriously. This is not about preparing for war or alarming our citizens, quite the opposite. It is about raising awareness and preparing our people in an active manner. It is about working together with our Member States, our political representatives, our partners, the private sector and our citizens to build trust and responsibility. That's what our citizens expect, and that's the promise of our Union, a project of peace and prosperity.
And to keep our promises, we are preparing. We must reach all our citizens. We will leave no one behind. That's why, since the start of my mandate, I have visited countries around Europe, I have multiplied exchanges with ministers of interior on security, I have visited different emergency centres and civil protection services from across Europe and around the world to exchange on lessons learned and best practices. The EU Preparedness Strategy is the result of all of this, and is built on the Niinistö reports by the previous President of Finland, with whom I had an extensive exchange as well.
The EU is now taking concrete action to keep Europeans safe. Last week we launched our Preparedness Union Strategy. This is one of the first 100-day initiatives of the Commission's mandate. It is concrete, targeted and operational. This strategy of preparedness and readiness is based on three principles. First, an 'all-hazards' approach. This means taking an integrated and comprehensive approach to the full range of natural- and human-induced threats and their cascading effects across sectors. Second, we are taking a 'whole of government' approach. This ensures that authorities at every level contribute and know their role in an emergency at local, regional, national and EU level. Preparedness lies primarily within the Member States' competences. This strategy will make us more coordinated and efficient in supporting our Member States with an additional layer of protection. And third, we are taking a 'whole of society' approach. Everyone on board – citizens, businesses, media and civil society. Everyone doing their part to keep their family, friends, workers and communities safe.
Our Preparedness Strategy sets out 30 clear and concrete key actions. I will briefly focus on six of them, for the sake of time. First, we are strengthening our Emergency Response Coordination Centre (ERCC) and setting up an EU crisis coordination hub. We are breaking down silos to be more coordinated and more comprehensive. It will support coordination across sectors during a crisis, not just for civil protection, but across Commission services to address the spill-over effects of today's complex crises in areas like health and energy, for instance.
Second, we are beefing up our Union Civil Protection Mechanism (UCPM), which quickly coordinates aid, mobilises emergency teams and delivers life-saving assistance when floods, wildfires and other disasters strike. And our Member States are using it more and more. Requests for assistance have gone up by over ten times since it started in the early 2000s. This shows the value of this shield of protection.
And third, we are making full use of Europe's Copernicus and Galileo satellite systems. Copernicus provides Earth observation to help anticipate and reduce the impact of disasters like floods, wildfires, and earthquakes. In fact, just last week, Copernicus was activated after the devastating earthquake in Myanmar. And the upcoming Galileo emergency warning satellite service will enable national civil protection authorities to send alert messages directly to our European citizens.
Fourth, we are strengthening our ability to protect our critical infrastructure and services, to keep our societies running during emergencies, to make sure that food and water continue to be available, and hospitals, ports, airports, energy supplies and digital services continue to function even under very extreme conditions.
Fifth, we are boosting our rescue strategic reserves for when national competence capacities are stretched. Rescue includes stockpiles of vital medical, energy and shelter equipment and specialised capacities for chemical, biological, radiological and nuclear threats. Just last week, in France, I visited strategic rescue stocks with CBRN countermeasures and other equipment like emergency resuscitation equipment.
And finally, sixth, we are strengthening our civil military cooperation so investment can benefit civilians and military. Civilian services and infrastructure play a key role in supporting the military during emergencies. We are also getting more young people involved in building a new culture of preparedness programmes like Erasmus+, and the European Solidarity Corps will help create a new generation who are aware, trained and ready to act in in emergency.
To conclude, honourable Members, this is a once-in-a-generation moment for the safety of Europe. Strengthening our preparedness will be a key part of this. Your support in Parliament will be essential for our success. You are part of the 'whole of government' approach as an institution and 'all citizens' approach because you are their voice. So when we are prepared together, we are safer together. Now it's time to get to work and to put all of this into action.

Lena Düpont,
im Namen der PPE-Fraktion. – Herr Präsident! Frau Kommissarin, Sie haben es gerade den once-in-a-generation moment genannt. Wenn wir uns die Entwicklungsgeschichte der Europäischen Union einmal angucken, dann sind wir hervorgegangen aus den Lehren des Zweiten Weltkrieges. Wir haben Sicherheit primär damals voreinander geschaffen. Wir sind wirtschaftlich erfolgreich geworden, wir haben den Binnenmarkt geformt, wir sind darüber wirtschaftlich ein sehr starker Akteur geworden. Wir sind heute in der Situation, wo wir Wettbewerbsfähigkeit wiederherstellen müssen, und wir sind in einer Situation, wo wir Sicherheit füreinander herstellen müssen.
               

                  Frieden, Freiheit, Stabilität – das ist in den letzten Wochen, Monaten, Jahren klar geworden – sind keine Selbstverständlichkeit. Das Defence White Paper, die Internal Security Strategy, die Preparedness Strategy sind Ausdruck davon, und ich danke Ihnen ausdrücklich, Frau Kommissarin, für Ihren Beitrag zu der Strategie oder Ihre Strategie in dem Fall.
               

                  Ich möchte drei building blocks sozusagen einmal herausgreifen, die neben allen anderen natürlich genauso wichtig sind, aber zur Grundbedingung sozusagen einer erfolgreichen Resilienz-Strategie mit dazugehören.
               

                  Das eine ist das Lagebild und der Informationsaustausch. Wir müssen schnell alle relevanten Akteure, auch die aus dem Innenbereich unserer Agenturen im Bereich justice and home affairs einbinden, damit wir eine gemeinsame Risikowahrnehmung auf europäischer Ebene etablieren können, um daraus politisches Handeln abzuleiten.
               

                  Wir brauchen diese gemeinsame Risikowahrnehmung auch in der Bevölkerung. Wir müssen über Schulen – der Vorschlag sieht es ja vor –, über öffentliche Debatten alarmieren, ohne alarmierend zu sein – ein ganz wesentlicher Unterschied. Denn das Ziel ist dabei, die Bevölkerung zu befähigen, mit Krisen umzugehen, eben resilienter zu sein, als wir es jetzt sind. Sie haben gerade auch Erasmus und das Solidaritätskorps angesprochen. Warum nicht Erasmus für Katastrophenschutz, zum Beispiel, das zusammenzubringen und zu unterstützen?
               

                  Und zu guter Letzt: Die zivil-militärische Zusammenarbeit funktioniert dann, wenn wir ihnen erlauben, zu üben, zu üben, zu üben, Abläufe durchzuspielen, Aufgaben festzulegen und zu erproben.
               

                  Und ich möchte schließen mit drei Bitten. Einmal an die Mitgliedstaaten: Ihre eigene Sicherheit, die europäische Sicherheit ernst zu nehmen, ambitioniert zu sein. Es ist eine Zeit, die Mut braucht, aber auch belohnt. An die Kommission die Bitte, das Parlament mitzunehmen, nicht nur bei der Entwicklung der Strategie in der gemeinsamen Risikowahrnehmung, sondern auch als Kommunikatoren im Wahlkreis, als diejenigen, die die Strategie auch weitertragen können, und die Bitte, alle Akteure und Agenturen aus dem Innenbereich auch mitzunehmen.
               

                  Und an uns alle: whole-of-government, whole-of-society, all-hazards approach bindet uns alle. Und deswegen ist es nicht weniger Zeit für Europa, sondern mehr. On with courage and determination.
               

PRESIDENZA: PINA PICIERNO


Vicepresidente


Γιάννης Μανιάτης,
εξ ονόματος της ομάδας S&D. – Κυρία Πρόεδρε, αγαπητοί συνάδελφοι, ο κόσμος μας γίνεται όλο και λιγότερο ασφαλής. Οι συνέπειες της κλιματικής κρίσης κάνουν τις φυσικές καταστροφές πιο ισχυρές και πιο συχνές. Αυτό φάνηκε και στις πρόσφατες καταστροφές στην Ελλάδα, στα νησιά του Αιγαίου και τις Κυκλάδες. Στο πλαίσιο αυτό, καλωσορίζουμε την έκθεση της Ευρωπαϊκής Επιτροπής για την ετοιμότητα.
                  

                     Για να γίνουμε όμως πιο ανθεκτικοί απέναντι στις σύγχρονες απειλές, πρέπει να προετοιμάσουμε τις κοινωνίες μας, ώστε να ξέρουν πώς θα αντιδράσουν. Να θωρακίσουμε τις υποδομές μας, δημόσιες και ιδιωτικές. Να προχωρήσουν τα κράτη μέλη, χτίζοντας στους στόχους ανθεκτικότητας του ευρωπαϊκού μηχανισμού πολιτικής προστασίας. Να αποκτήσουμε μια ευρωπαϊκή έκθεση αξιολόγησης κινδύνων και κοινή αντίληψη απειλών με σαφείς και τεκμηριωμένες εθνικές εκθέσεις αξιολόγησης κινδύνων. Και τέλος, να δώσουμε ουσιαστικό νόημα στη ρήτρα αλληλεγγύης του άρθρου 222 και στη ρήτρα αμοιβαίας βοήθειας του άρθρου 42 παράγραφος 7 της Συνθήκης, ώστε να μην μένουν κενό γράμμα αν και όποτε χρειαστεί.
                  

Roberto Vannacci,
a nome del gruppo PfE. – Signora Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, c'è un tedesco, un francese, un belga e un italiano. Sembra l'inizio di una barzelletta, purtroppo non lo è.
                  

                     Von der Leyen, Macron, Lahbib e Draghi – ovvero le stesse persone che ci hanno fatto sprofondare in una crisi acutissima – oggi ci dicono cosa dovremmo fare per uscirne fuori.
                  

                     E, d'altra parte, loro ci hanno dato le macchine elettriche, ci hanno dato la guerra ad oltranza, ci hanno dato le sanzioni che avrebbero spezzato le reni al Cremlino e oggi tirano fuori dal cilindro le armi e lo zainetto per la sopravvivenza, che ci dovrebbe salvare dai cosacchi.
                  

                     Lo zaino pesa, Commissaria Lahbib, si vede che non ne ha mai portato uno sulle spalle. E proprio per questo l'unica cosa che possiamo fare per salvarci è allenarci.
                  

                     Allenarci a correre per scappare da ladri, stupratori, molestatori, in gran parte immigrati clandestini, che a causa vostra hanno ricominciato a fare le scorrerie in Europa. Allenarci a sopportare il freddo, perché a causa vostra l'energia costa sempre più cara. E allenarci anche a vivere in clandestinità, perché a causa vostra l'Europa greca, romana e cristiana è perseguitata ovunque e sta morendo.
                  

                     E allora, tenetevele le vostre armi e il vostro zainetto per la sopravvivenza, perché noi non sappiamo cosa farcene. Se volete fare qualcosa di buono per questa Europa, sparite! Perché potreste anche cominciare ad allenarvi a correre, potrebbe tornarvi utile.
                  

Beata Szydło,
w imieniu grupy ECR. – Pani Przewodnicząca! Pani Komisarz! Z uwagą wysłuchałam Pani wystąpienia. Skoncentrowała się Pani przede wszystkim na zarządzaniu kryzysowym w związku z zagrożeniami wynikającymi z klęsk żywiołowych. Ale dokument, który państwo opublikowaliście dotyczący gotowości, traktuje sprawę szerzej. Pozwoli Pani, że skoncentruję się na tym drugim wymiarze. Po pierwsze, mam wątpliwość, wynika to również z mojego doświadczenia, kiedy byłam premierem polskiego rządu, czy zarządzanie centralne na poziomie Unii Europejskiej w takich sytuacjach kryzysowych jest najlepszym pomysłem. Na pewno potrzebne jest wsparcie, solidarność i współpraca. Nie ulega wątpliwości. Natomiast w sytuacjach kryzysowych trzeba działać szybko i trzeba podejmować decyzje tu i teraz. Obawiam się, że machina urzędnicza będzie działała zbyt wolno. I druga refleksja, która nasuwa się już bardzo krótko w związku z tym. Granica pomiędzy wsparciem, pomocą, chęcią obrony demokratycznego procesu a próbą ingerowania w procesy demokratyczne, w poszczególne państwa członkowskie jest bardzo wąska, bardzo cienka. W ostatnich miesiącach również obserwujemy ze strony……
                  

(Przewodnicząca odebrała mówczyni głos)


Grégory Allione,
au nom du groupe Renew. – Madame la Présidente, chers collègues, la semaine dernière, vous avez, Madame la Commissaire Lahbib, présenté une stratégie pour préparer notre Europe, laquelle s'appuie sur les recommandations du rapport Niinistö. Je tenais à vous en féliciter. En tant que sapeur-pompier, c'est la première fois que je vois celles et ceux que je croise dans la rue enfin me parler de l'Europe qui leur permet de se préparer. Même si certains pensent tout savoir, sachez que quelques opérationnels, qui sont ici dans la salle, partagent ce qui est préparé par notre Union européenne.
                  

                     Le 5 novembre dernier, comme vous, la présidente de la Commission, Ursula von der Leyen, a évoqué la nécessité d'encourager les volontaires et les bénévoles à s'engager dans la protection collective, dans la protection civile.
                  

                     Madame Lahbib, je vous fais confiance pour proposer dans les prochains mois un texte qui donnera les grandes lignes de l'engagement citoyen volontaire, afin de le protéger, de le reconnaître et de le défendre. Oui, il faut un cadre juridique clair, pour nos concitoyens, pour appuyer votre préparation de notre union.
                  

                     Because we are safer together, solidarity and commitment must guide our actions toward a more secure, cohesive and resilient Europe.
                  

Diana Riba i Giner,
en nombre del Grupo Verts/ALE. – Señora presidenta, señora comisaria, preparar a Europa para las crisis que se nos plantean no es una opción, es una necesidad. Pero nos sorprende que, de todos los retos en materia de seguridad, la Comisión haya decidido centrar su comunicación en un kit de supervivencia, un kit que se propuso en un informe en este Parlamento hace ya un año y que aparece ahora.
                  

                     Nos preguntamos por qué, y creo que no hace falta ser muy brillante para ver que lo que intentan es crear un clima de urgencia que haga indiscutible la inversión en armamento que nos han planteado. Nosotros —como ha hecho muy bien hoy, comisaria— queremos hablar de seguridad: de seguridad energética. Necesitamos una inversión masiva en renovables porque, si no, seguiremos estando en manos de Rusia, los Estados Unidos o Qatar. Queremos hablar de seguridad digital, porque el 90 % de nuestras empresas dependen de los servicios que están en la nube de Amazon, Microsoft o Google, o de las principales redes sociales que todos nosotros y también todos los ciudadanos europeos utilizan y son propiedades de tecnoligarcas estadounidenses, por lo que necesitamos impulsar tecnología y redes europeas. También queremos hablar de la seguridad alimentaria, que estamos reduciendo con acuerdos de libre comercio que condenan a nuestro sector primario.
                  

                     Por lo tanto, hablemos de seguridad con madurez en toda su amplitud y no traslademos la responsabilidad a nuestros ciudadanos pidiéndoles que compren un kit de supervivencia.
                  

Ana Miranda Paz (Verts/ALE). – Señora presidenta, quería plantear una cuestión de observancia del Reglamento interno en relación con la intervención del diputado que habló hace dos turnos, sobre la base del artículo 10, apartado 4, del Reglamento interno del Parlamento, que dice que en los debates parlamentarios los diputados y diputadas no recurriremos a un lenguaje ofensivo.
                  

                     Yo considero, por lo menos bajo el punto de vista ético y también siguiendo el Reglamento interno, que unir a un inmigrante con violación es lenguaje ofensivo.
                  

Presidente. – La ringrazio, onorevole Miranda. Io sono d'accordo con lei ed è giusto che il dibattito dentro quest'Aula venga contenuto sempre entro un perimetro civile e rispettoso di tutte e di tutti. La ringrazio per il suo intervento.
                  

Merja Kyllönen,
The Left-ryhmän puolesta. – Arvoisa puhemies, turvallisuus ei ole koskaan itsestäänselvyys. Se vaatii jatkuvaa työtä ja vahvaa ennakointia. Komission esittelemä varautumisunionistrategia sisältää konkreettisia toimia, joilla voidaan vahvistaa laajasti Euroopan turvallisuutta.
                  

                     Mutta pelkkä strategia ei riitä. Varautumisunionin rakentaminen ei ole sprintti. Turvallisuuskuvan on oltava laaja. Se ei ole pelkkää sotilaallista puolustamista. Se on maratonlaji, jossa aidosti katsotaan kaikkia huoltovarmuuden haasteita. Se edellyttää pitkäjänteistä toimeenpanoa ja ennen kaikkea riittävää rahoitusta, muuten suunnitelmat jäävät vain paperille. Kaikkien asiakirjojen strategioiden, puhutaanpa sitten puolustuksesta, sisäisestä turvallisuudesta tai varautumisesta, pitää olla kokonaisuus.
                  

                     Euroopan turvallisuus on johdonmukainen paketti. Meidän on varmistettava, että nämä linjaukset muuttuvat konkreettisiksi toimiksi ja vahvistavat pysyvästi EU:n turvallisuusrakenteita. Vain siten rakennamme varautumisunionia ja kokonaisvaltaisesti vahvempaa Eurooppaa.
                  

Christine Anderson,
im Namen der ESN-Fraktion. – Frau Präsidentin! Essen, Wasser, Nahrungsmittel und Batterien im Haus zu haben – das nennt man Prepping oder gesunder Menschenverstand. Bürger, die sich so auf den Ernstfall vorbereiteten, wurden bisher von Ihnen als Aluhüte oder Weltuntergangsfanatiker verspottet. Und jetzt? Jetzt verlangen Sie plötzlich genau das, was Sie noch letztes Jahr ins Reich der Verschwörungstheorie verbannt haben. Doch bei Ihrem Vorschlag geht es nicht um kluge Vorsorge für den möglichen Ernstfall: Sie machen mal wieder Politik mit der Angst.
                  

                     Während COVID haben Sie ja gelernt, dass die von Ihnen in Angst und Schrecken versetzten Bürger der Durchsetzung Ihrer politisch illiberalen Agenda zustimmen werden. Mit Awareness-Kampagnen, europaweitem Preparedness Day, mit Lehrplänen für Kinder, nicht zuletzt mit Sprache machen Sie den Ausnahmezustand zum Dauerzustand. Durch ständige Alarmbereitschaft normalisieren Sie den Angstzustand. Verängstigte Bürger lassen sich doch so viel leichter beherrschen, nicht wahr? Vor allem aber lassen sich die Bürger besser davon ablenken, wer die Energiekrise, die Geldentwertung und die wachsende Kriegsgefahr zu verantworten hat, nämlich Sie, die EU-Kommission. Vielen herzlichen Dank dafür! Die Bürger werden es Ihnen hoffentlich irgendwann einmal wirklich heimzuzahlen wissen.
                  

Presidente. – Anche in questo caso devo richiamare a un linguaggio rispettoso, come abbiamo già detto – rispettoso della Commissaria e rispettoso anche delle colleghe e dei colleghi che in quest'Aula siedono.
                  

                     È possibile naturalmente esprimere critiche, ma cerchiamo di essere rispettosi.
                  

Lukas Mandl (PPE). – Frau Präsidentin! Mein Italienisch reicht gerade noch aus, um dem zuzustimmen, was Sie gerade gesagt haben, Frau Präsidentin, und ich danke herzlich dafür. Frau Kommissarin, liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Es ist wichtig, dass wir in Zivilschutz investieren in Europa in diesen Zeiten. Es ist wichtig, dass die neue Europäische Kommission klare Schwerpunkte setzt für Sicherheit und für Wirtschaft, für Wirtschaft und für Sicherheit und für die Zusammenhänge dazwischen. Zur Sicherheit gehört selbstverständlich auch der Zivilschutz. Die Verantwortung ist immer die Verantwortung für die anderen. Wir machen nicht nur Zivilschutz für uns selbst – gewissermaßen egoistisch –, sondern auch für alle Menschen in unserer Gesellschaft und auch für kommende Generationen. Deshalb ist es so wichtig, jetzt zu investieren.
                  

                     Wir haben vorbereitet – in meiner vorletzten Periode hier im Europäischen Parlament durfte ich das verhandeln, den Katastrophenschutzmechanismus. Er hat sich auch schon positiv ausgewirkt, bei Waldbränden, als europäische Mitgliedstaaten zusammengewirkt haben, um diese Naturkatastrophen zu bekämpfen. Was damals wichtig war und was auch jetzt wichtig ist und was ich Ihnen ans Herz legen möchte, Frau Kommissarin, ist, dass wir subsidiär denken. In Österreich sind es der Zivilschutzverband und die Feuerwehren, selbstverständlich immer zusammen mit dem Bundesheer und Profis in allen Bereichen und Ehrenamtlichen in allen Bereichen, die subsidiär zusammenwirken, damit Katastrophenschutz wirklich gelingen kann und Zivilschutz gelingen kann, und nicht zentralistisch, sondern mit den Betroffenen vor Ort auch diesen europäischen Zivilschutz zu entwickeln, das scheint mir so wichtig zu sein. Dann sind wir auf dem richtigen Weg.
                  

Christophe Clergeau (S&D). – Madame la Présidente, Madame la Commissaire, je partage totalement vos priorités politiques, à savoir nous préparer à tous les risques, mobiliser tous les niveaux de gouvernement, mobiliser la société tout entière et faire émerger une nouvelle culture commune des risques fondée sur la solidarité et la cohésion. Nous sommes nombreux ici à avoir une demande forte à votre égard: favoriser l'engagement citoyen et sécuriser le statut des volontaires, et notamment des pompiers, en réglant la question de l'application de la directive sur le temps de travail.
                  

                     Je remarque que nos collègues d'extrême droite n'ont pas un mot pour les pompiers, pas un mot pour les volontaires, pour les citoyens qui s'engagent pour la protection civile. Alors, dans les semaines qui viennent, vous pourrez compter sur nous pour faire des propositions, pour que la protection civile soit prise en compte dans toutes les politiques de l'Union européenne – ce que vous appelez preparedness-by-design (‘préparation dès la conception’). Il s'agira de propositions pour préparer la société, dans son ensemble, aux crises, mais aussi pour vous aider à avoir un budget: un budget pour le centre de coordination de la réaction d'urgence, un budget pour rescEU, un budget pour l'ensemble de ces stratégies, afin qu'elles soient efficaces et pleinement au service des citoyens.
                  

Christophe Bay (PfE). – Madame la présidente, Madame la Commissaire, chers collègues, l'Union européenne se présente une nouvelle fois comme le rempart contre les crises. La stratégie de l'Union vise une meilleure préparation, ambitionne de renforcer l'anticipation et d'améliorer la résilience de nos services. Si je puis me permettre, Madame la Commissaire, ce n'est pas avec des vidéos quelque peu ridicules que nous protégerons efficacement les peuples d'Europe.
                  

                     La stratégie prévoit la mise en place d'un dispositif d'alerte et de réponse rapide. Tant mieux. Mais, une fois de plus, constatons que cette stratégie vise à aliéner la souveraineté des États. Il est impératif que toute action de préparation – et je me permets de vous donner un conseil – prenne en compte nos diversités. Chaque pays doit rester maître de ses priorités en matière de sécurité et de gestion de crise.
                  

                     Nous sommes plusieurs dans cet hémicycle à avoir, dans nos vies professionnelles, géré des crises. Je peux vous assurer, d'une part, que les coopérations d'État à État fonctionnent très bien, et, d'autre part, contrairement à ce que vient de dire le précédent intervenant, que nous avons, en France, un modèle de sécurité civile à préserver, notamment nos services publics et nos sapeurs-pompiers volontaires.
                  

Elena Donazzan (ECR). – Signora Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, c'è un film che amo molto, Fight Club. A un certo punto entrano nell'abitacolo dell'aereo e sostituiscono le carte. Le carte erano tutte rassicuranti: c'era un disastro aereo ma volti sorridenti e pacati uscivano con garbo.
                  

                     Ecco, a me pare che qui stia accadendo questo: ovvero lei, signora Commissaria – con tutto il rispetto – ha usato toni rassicuranti, ha parlato di pace e prosperità, ha fatto un video molto rassicurante dove faceva uscire dalla sua borsa un kit di sopravvivenza.
                  

                     Ma io direi che non si è letta la relazione Niinistö, che dice tutt'altro: analizza pienamente qual è lo stato di impreparazione di questa Europa. Si cita, giustamente, il modello finlandese, che è una preparazione a tutto campo, dalle forze armate alla cittadinanza, all'evidenza che deve esserci una formazione molto seria, una sorta di reclutamento dei cittadini.
                  

                     Ecco, il problema della preparazione è che siamo molto impreparati.
                  

Anna-Maja Henriksson (Renew). – Fru talman! Kommissionär. Naturkatastrofer, olyckor, pandemier, hybridhot, cyberattacker och väpnade konflikter – det är allt exempel på vad vi behöver vara beredda på att kan hända.
                  

                     Beredskap. Det handlar ju om att på förhand också tänka till och skaffa sig de redskap man behöver för att hantera olika typer av kriser.
                  

                     Medborgarna är också här i nyckelroll, inte bara regeringarna och Europaparlamentet, EU, utan också medborgarna och företagen. Och därför är det viktigt att medborgarna tänker till. Hur agerar du om det blir ett strömavbrott på grund av en storm eller ett hybridangrepp? Vad gör du om det plötsligt inte kommer vatten i kranen?
                  

                     Vi i Renew Europe föreslår att alla hushåll i Europa ska få en beredskapsguide. När människor känner att de har tänkt igenom saker känner de sig också tryggare.
                  

                     President Niinistös rapport är en mycket bra rapport, och jag vill gratulera kommissionen till att ha tagit den i beaktande. Den här beredskapsstrategin ett steg i absolut rätt riktning.
                  

Ville Niinistö (Verts/ALE). – Arvoisa puhemies, sellainen maa, jossa ihmiset ovat hyvin koulutettuja, jossa luonnosta pidetään huolta ja jossa pidetään huolta myös siitä, että ihmisillä on vaihtoehtoja elämässä, jossa ihmiset näkevät toivoa ja jossa he ovat tasa-arvoisia ja jossa ketään ei syrjitä. Sellainen maa on maa, jota myös halutaan puolustaa, tarvittaessa myös aseellisesti.
                  

                     Eli valmiusstrategiassa on kysymys siitä, että me näemme hyvinvointiyhteiskunnan ja tasa-arvon ja osallisuuden merkityksen sille, että meidän yhteiskuntamme ovat resilienttejä. Juuri tätä vastaan hyökkää muun muassa Venäjän diktaattori Vladimir Putin. Hän näkee demokratian uhkana sen takia, että meillä ihmisillä on ääni.
                  

                     Siksi haluan kiittää komissiota valmiusstrategian valmistelussa siitä, että tässä on kokonaisvaltainen ote, aivan niin kuin sen pohjalla olevassa Niinistön raportissa. Mutta meillä on silti niitä ääniä, kuten Naton pääsihteerillä Mark Ruttella ja monilla poliittisessa oikeistossa, jotka näkevät, että nyt pitää panostaa puolustukseen ja samalla pitäisi leikata sosiaaliturvasta tai eläkkeistä. Tälle on selkeästi sanottava ei.
                  

                     Hyvinvointivaltio ja tasa-arvoiset mahdollisuudet kouluttautua ja pärjätä työelämässä luovat myös sitä pohjaa, jossa ihmisillä on medialukutaitoa ja uskoa tulevaisuuteen. Ja silloin yhteiskuntamme on myös resilientti ja valmis erilaisiin kriiseihin. Siksi valmiudessa on kysymys ihmisten tasa-arvosta.
                  

Catarina Martins (The Left). – Senhora Presidente, Senhora Comissária, não vejo o seu vídeo sobre o kit de sobrevivência para 72 horas apenas como uma brincadeira infeliz. Ele é parte de uma estratégia para impor à opinião pública a inevitabilidade da guerra.
                  

                     Há 20 anos, a indústria da guerra inventou a mentira das armas de destruição maciça do Iraque, agora é a suposta falta de armas na Europa.
                  

                     A União Europeia tem a segunda maior despesa em defesa e é o segundo maior exportador de armas no mundo. Só é suplantada pelos Estados Unidos.
                  

                     Tem falta de autonomia, sim, mas não de armas. O problema é que até as armas dependem do gás de Putin e dos satélites de Musk.
                  

                     Prontidão exige transição energética. Milhares de europeus morreram em catástrofes climáticas e a Comissão propõe recuar nas metas climáticas.
                  

                     Exige estratégia pública, digital e de comunicações. Vivemos entalados entre as apps americanas, chinesas e russas, e medicamentos.
                  

                     A União Europeia depende até 80 % de substâncias ativas produzidas na China. Não podemos desperdiçar nas armas de que não precisamos o investimento em saúde que nos falta.
                  

                     Prontidão não é ter medicamentos para três dias, é ter medicamentos todos os dias.
                  

Cecilia Strada (S&D). – Signora Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, volevo tornare un momento sull'intervento del deputato Vannacci.
                  

                     Oltre a condividere quello che sottolineava la collega, vorrei anche far notare che i toni aggressivi che ha utilizzato nei confronti della Commissaria Lahbib, nonché la parte finale del suo intervento in cui invita a imparare a correre perché potrebbe servire, sono, credo, da tutti quelli che hanno orecchie per ascoltare, percepibili come minacce.
                  

                     Non sono accettabili in quest'Aula, dei toni aggressivi e delle minacce nei confronti della Commissaria, quindi forse sono toni che vanno bene nel suo movimento, ma sicuramente non in quest'Aula.
                  

Presidente. – Abbiamo già invitato l'onorevole Vannacci e tutti i colleghi e le colleghe a mantenere ovviamente un linguaggio consono e rispettoso della Commissaria e di tutti i presenti in quest'Aula.
                  

                     Il suo richiamo è opportuno, perché i toni sono stati eccessivi.
                  

Κώστας Παπαδάκης (NI). – Κυρία Πρόεδρε, επιδίδεστε σε ανέξοδα λογύδρια για την ειρήνη και δίνετε 800 δισ. από την τσέπη των λαών για τον πόλεμο. Δάνεια, ρήτρες διαφυγής, ευρωομόλογα, συγκρότηση ευρωστρατού και αποστολής στρατιωτικών δυνάμεων στην Ουκρανία υπηρετούν την επικίνδυνη πολεμική προετοιμασία. Όλα ενταγμένα στον οξυμένο ανταγωνισμό με Ρωσία, Κίνα, αλλά και με τις ΗΠΑ εντός ευρωατλαντικού στρατοπέδου, για μοίρασμα αγορών, σπάνιων γαιών, ενεργειακών δρόμων, την ανοικοδόμηση, για τα κέρδη των ομίλων.
                  

                     Ο λογαριασμός στέλνεται στους λαούς για καθηλωμένους μισθούς, αυξήσεις του ενός ευρώ —όπως στην Ελλάδα— άγριες περικοπές, οδηγούς επιβίωσης 72 ωρών. Οι δε αυξήσεις στους στρατιωτικούς, που δόθηκαν στην Ελλάδα, χρησιμοποιούνται για απόσπαση της συναίνεσής τους για τη βαθύτερη πολεμική εμπλοκή. Η κυβέρνηση της Νέας Δημοκρατίας συνεχίζει την αποστολή οπλισμού και αφήνει ανοικτή την αποστολή στρατού στο ουκρανικό μέτωπο, ενώ τα κόμματα της βολικής αντιπολίτευσης ζητούν λαϊκές θυσίες, στηρίζουν την πολεμική οικονομία της Ευρωπαϊκής Ένωσης και ψηφίζουν νατοϊκούς προϋπολογισμούς. Οι λαοί με τον αγώνα τους να επιβάλουν: καμιά θυσία για τα πολεμικά σας σφαγεία, τα κέρδη και τη μοιρασιά της ιμπεριαλιστικής λείας.
                  

(Ο αγορητής δέχεται να απαντήσει σε ερώτηση με γαλάζια κάρτα)


João Oliveira (The Left),
Pergunta segundo o procedimento ‘cartão azul’
                        . – Senhora Presidente, Senhor Deputado, a questão que quero colocar-lhe é uma questão muito concreta: o senhor deputado está de acordo com a opção que faz a Comissão Europeia de secundarizar o papel dos Estados, das estruturas e dos serviços públicos na resposta que precisam de garantir em situações que sejam verdadeiramente situações de crise, de proteção civil ou de dificuldades em infraestruturas críticas?
                  

                     O senhor deputado está de acordo com a perspetiva da Comissão Europeia, que concebe a preparação para as crises como se fosse uma responsabilidade individual dos cidadãos, que recairá nas costas de cada um, para que cada um assuma a sua proteção? Ou considera que o Estado e as estruturas públicas têm um papel mais importante a desempenhar?
                  

Κώστας Παπαδάκης (NI),
απάντηση σε ερώτηση με γαλάζια κάρτα. – Νομίζουμε ότι το σημαντικό είναι ότι η Ευρωπαϊκή Ένωση επιδιώκει —πέραν από την πράσινη και την ψηφιακή στρατηγική που δεν έδωσε τα κέρδη που ανέμενε και γι' αυτό βάζει μπροστά την πολεμική οικονομία, γι' αυτό βάζει μπροστά τις θυσίες των λαών να πληρώσουν για τους πολέμους τους— να ενισχύσει την κερδοφορία των επιχειρηματικών ομίλων, των ευρωενωσιακών, σε ανταγωνισμό με τους υπόλοιπους. Σε κάθε περίπτωση, οι λαοί δεν πρέπει να πληρώσουν το μάρμαρο. Πρέπει να οργανώσουν την πάλη τους για να μην οδηγηθούν στα σύγχρονα πολεμικά σφαγεία που ετοιμάζουν.
                  

Tomislav Sokol (PPE). – Poštovana predsjedavajuća, povjerenice, kolegice i kolege, pandemija Covid-19 razotkrila je ozbiljne slabosti Europske unije u pogledu pripravnosti na krizne situacije. Početkom 2020. svjedočili smo kaotičnom razvoju događaja, uključujući uvođenje ograničenja protoka ključnih medicinskih potrepština među državama članicama, što je ozbiljno narušilo načelo solidarnosti koje je temelj europskog projekta. Između ostalog, iz tog iskustva proizašla je nužnost donošenja sveobuhvatne strategije za pripravnost Unije. Suočavamo se s novim geopolitičkim okolnostima koje dodatno naglašavaju važnost koordiniranog odgovora na krize. Energetska sigurnost, lanci opskrbe kritičnim sirovinama, lijekovima, ali i odgovori na prekogranične zdravstvene probleme. Sve su to ključni elementi strategije koja će osigurati otpornost Unije. Posebno je važno da je zdravstvo prepoznato kao jedan od prioriteta djelovanja Europske unije. To potvrđuje Zakon o kritičnim lijekovima koji postavlja okvir za sigurnu i stabilnu opskrbu, ali i jačanje europske konkurentnosti u području ključnih lijekova. Element koji tim zakonom, međutim, nije do kraja riješen, tiče se stvaranja zaliha lijekova i drugih medicinskih potrepština za slučaj nestašice. Zato mi je izuzetno drago da se u ovom dokumentu izričito spominje donošenje zajedničke europske strategije za stvaranje zaliha ključnih resursa te posebno medicinskih protumjera. Nužno je stvaranje zajedničkih europskih zaliha kako bi lijekovi i druge medicinske potrepštine u slučaju krize stigli upravo onima koji ih najviše trebaju, a ne trunuli u skladištima. Kolegice i kolege, strategija pripravnosti nije samo još jedan u nizu dokumenata, već je odraz lekcija koje smo naučili i jamstvo da ćemo budućim krizama pristupiti organizirano, solidarno i učinkovito.
                  

Heléne Fritzon (S&D). – Fru talman! Kommissionär Lahbib. Ja, när kriser drabbar oss så är det alltid de mest sårbara som drabbas först. Det är kvinnor och barn som utsätts för brutalt våld. Vi ser det bland annat i Ukraina där tusentals, tiotusentals barn har kidnappats. Och bakom varje siffra finns ett barn med ett namn och en historia. Ett barn vars hopp och drömmar krossats.
                  

                     En motståndskraftig union måste därför vara beredd på mer än cyberhot och sabotage. Vår förberedelse handlar också om att skydda liv. Att se till att de som riskerar mest inte lämnas ensamma.
                  

                     Därför måste vi stärka beredskapen på alla nivåer, från EU till lokalsamhället och civilsamhället. För en verklig trygghet, den byggs bara tillsammans av alla och för alla.
                  

Barbara Bonte (PfE). – Voorzitter, mevrouw de commissaris, collega's, we hebben allemaal ongetwijfeld de video gezien waarin commissaris Lahbib enkele dagen geleden haar paraatheidstrategie presenteerde. Van de bedreigingen waar de burgers al jarenlang wakker van liggen, heeft de Commissie blijkbaar geen flauw benul.
                  

                     De burgers worden namelijk elke dag geconfronteerd met de negatieve gevolgen van de massamigratie, onder andere toenemende onveiligheid en sociale spanningen. Aanslagen, geweerschoten en zelfs granaatontploffingen zijn al vele jaren een realiteit in vele Europese steden.
                  

                     Maar volgens mevrouw de commissaris betekent paraatheid in Brussel een handtas met daarin een kaartspel en een radio. Het enige wat nog ontbreekt is toiletpapier. Wat een wereldvreemdheid! Als ik als vrouw over straat loop in Brussel of daar de metro neem en ik voor de zoveelste keer belaagd en geïntimideerd word, gaat dit mij alvast niet helpen. Mevrouw Lahbib, het wordt tijd dat u stopt met weg te kijken van de realiteit en oog heeft voor de echte problemen.
                  

Adrian-George Axinia (ECR). – Doamnă președintă, strategia Uniunii Europene pentru pregătirea populației în situații de criză este un demers util, mai ales că trăim într-o lume tot mai nesigură, în care așa-zisele lebede negre apar cu regularitate. Totuși, anumite direcții de acțiune propuse trebuie, fie reformulate, fie regândite.
                  

                     Punctez patru neajunsuri ale strategiei:
                  

                     În primul rând, felul în care s-a comunicat obligativitatea acelui kit de provizii de 72 de ore a creat panică. S-a creat impresia că se intră sigur în război și că acesta este motivul pentru care există această strategie.
                  

                     În al doilea rând, având în vedere că există tot mai multe probleme cu funcționarea democrațiilor unor state membre, pare că Uniunea Europeană încurajează o militarizare instituțională. Ori, ne aducem aminte că în pandemie a existat o derivă autoritaristă, cu multe excese și abuzuri.
                  

                     În al treilea rând, așa cum am văzut și în scandalul Pfizergate, câtă vreme nu există transparență din partea Comisiei Europene, propunerea ca Bruxelles-ul să gestioneze integrat stocarea resurselor pentru situații de urgență nu este cea mai bună idee.
                  

                     Și nu în ultimul rând, este tragicomic faptul că Uniunea Europeană, pe orice subiect, este să înființeze noi instituții și structuri birocratice alese implicit și lipsite de legitimitate.
                  

(Vorbitorul a refuzat ca Alvise Pérez să îi adreseze o întrebare în conformitate cu procedura ‘cartonașului albastru’)


Nathalie Loiseau (Renew). – Madame la Présidente, ‘vous devez toujours être prêts. Assurez-vous de regarder les choses sous tous les angles. Si vous n'êtes pas préparé, vous échouerez.’ Ce n'est pas vous, Madame la Commissaire, qui vous exprimez de cette manière, c'est Benjamin Franklin. Si Benjamin Franklin vivait aujourd'hui, son appel serait sans doute encore plus pressant. Nous venons de connaître une pandémie, la guerre est revenue en Europe, nos démocraties sont attaquées, et le dérèglement climatique n'en est qu'à ses débuts.
                  

                     Nous autres, Européens, avons montré que nous n'étions pas mauvais quand il s'agissait de réagir aux crises, quoique nous n'ayons pas assez appris à les prévenir ni à nous y préparer. Cela demande de changer nos habitudes et exige, surtout, de nous rassembler. Tant que la puissance publique et le secteur privé resteront à distance, tant que l'État assurera la protection des citoyens sans les associer à un nécessaire effort de prévoyance, tant que nous nous acharnerons sur ce qui nous divise plutôt que de chérir ce qui nous réunit, nos sociétés ne seront pas prêtes à affronter des situations extrêmes.
                  

                     Les peuples européens sont pleinement conscients des menaces qui pèsent sur eux. Ils attendent de nous que nous agissions, mais ils veulent aussi prendre leur part. Si nous nous rassemblons, si les efforts et la responsabilité de chacun s'additionnent, à l'échelon le plus local comme à l'échelle européenne, nous saurons conjurer le sort et préserver ce à quoi nous sommes le plus attachés: nos libertés et l'avenir de nos enfants.
                  

Lena Schilling (Verts/ALE). – Frau Präsidentin, liebe Frau Kommissarin, liebe Kolleginnen, liebe Kollegen! Wenn ich heute hier stehe, dann denke ich an die Bilder von weggeschwemmten Dörfern, von überschwemmten Häusern und von zerstörten Existenzen. Und ja, deswegen ist es genau der richtige Moment, um über diese Strategie zu reden, über eine Strategie, wie wir gemeinsam in Europa diese Krisen angehen, weil ja, Naturkatastrophen machen keinen Halt an nationalstaatlichen Grenzen.
                  

                     Und gleichzeitig bedeutet doch vorbereitet sein, auch Risiken abzuschätzen. Es gibt Dinge, die wir verhindern können. Das ist zum Beispiel, die schlimmsten Auswüchse der Klimakrise zu bekämpfen. Das bedeutet zum Beispiel, dass wir heute schon sagen können: Wenn wir die 1,5 Grad nicht erreichen und weit darüber hinausgehen, dann werden wir mehr Naturkatastrophen sehen, dann werden wir mehr zerstörte Häuser sehen, und es werden mehr Menschen betroffen sein.
                  

                     Sie haben gesagt: die Kinder. Die Kinder sind eine vulnerable Gruppe, gerade in Zeiten von Krisen, auch von Naturkatastrophen. Also lassen Sie uns das als Ansporn nehmen, einerseits an einer Strategie für heute zu arbeiten, aber auch für eine Strategie für morgen.
                  

Luke Ming Flanagan (The Left). – Madam President, Commissioner Lahbib spoke about anticipating risk. We should have anticipated the risk when we made ourselves dependent on Vladimir Putin for energy and fertiliser. We should now anticipate the risk in leaving ourselves 85 % dependent on the US for soya imports. What looked like a stable relationship with the US is now in tatters.
But we're not learning – quite the opposite. Through Mercosur we are now slowly but surely going to make ourselves dependent on them for beef. Is it anticipating risk depending our future on President Milei?
In a crisis, in a war, during a massive climate event, there will not be the case that the current policy will keep us safe. You said in your own video we may end up hungry: ‘You could end up very hungry’. With the way the EU policy is going, you will end up hungry. So we have got to change the direction we're going.

Massimiliano Salini (PPE). – Signora Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, la logica della preparazione integrata alle crisi è una delle ragioni per cui esiste l'Unione europea, in ambito civile e in ambito militare, per cui questo piano d'azione va nella direzione corretta.
                  

                     Ed è una delle direzioni su cui anche sulla più grave delle crisi che si affacciano alle porte dell'Unione europea – cioè quella militare – anche in quella direzione è ancor più corretto ragionare nella logica del coordinamento.
                  

                     L'azione militare oggi è assegnata dai trattati all'autonomia dei singoli paesi membri, ma spesso chi critica le azioni dell'Unione europea in questa direzione le critica proprio perché non sono sufficientemente unitarie.
                  

                     Bene, quindi, o la propria critica è un pretesto e un alibi per continuare a dividere ulteriormente l'Unione europea, oppure ragioniamo nella logica della critica costruttiva e favoriamo azioni come questa, affinché si ritorni all'origine dell'Unione europea, sia dal punto di vista civile che dal punto di vista militare.
                  

Annalisa Corrado (S&D). – Signora Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, sono un'attivista climatica e mi è chiarissima l'importanza di essere preparati a gestire le crisi.
                  

                     Non lo siamo abbastanza, anche a causa della irresponsabile propaganda delle destre negazioniste.
                  

                     In questi giorni, però, si è parlato pochissimo di terremoti, incendi e alluvioni e troppo di borse per sopravvivere 72 ore ad attacchi militari. Mi si consenta: è un gioco molto pericoloso quello di chi evoca la guerra, soffiando sulla paura delle persone.
                  

                     È sacrosanto: dobbiamo investire in prevenzione e diffondere la cultura della gestione delle crisi, ma se proprio vogliamo parlare di borse, io nella mia vorrei un sistema sanitario affidabile, universalistico e pronto ad affrontare le crisi, che collabori con una protezione civile coordinata, attrezzata e finanziata; risorse per l'adattamento alla crisi climatica; istituzioni europee forti, autonomia strategica e coesione sociale; energia pulita e a basso costo, che ci liberi dai ricatti dei paesi produttori di idrocarburi; lavoro dignitoso e formazione di qualità.
                  

                     E la cosa più importante, e concludo: vorrei che, malgrado le urgenze, nella mia borsa rimanesse la democrazia, ma non per 72 ore, per le prossime 72 generazioni almeno.
                  

Juan Carlos Girauta Vidal (PfE). – Señora presidenta, señora comisaria, ustedes, que son la aristocracia de la burocracia, nos instan a estar preparados para catástrofes de toda índole. Acabamos de oírlo. El apocalipsis se acerca en forma de desastres climáticos, guerra, noticias falsas, injerencias extranjeras. Me parece que pretenden generar un estado de miedo permanente. Así les agradeceremos que hagan con nosotros lo que deseen.
                  

                     Y lo que ustedes desean es convertir en normalidad lo excepcional, la excepción, para poder tenernos sometidos y vulnerables ante el poder. Lo más escandaloso es que estos peligros de los que ahora alertan son consecuencia de sus propias políticas, ya sea por acción consciente o por omisión calculada: no son los desastres climáticos, es el Pacto Verde; no es la guerra, es la falta de acción e inversión durante años en políticas de defensa; no son la injerencia extranjera o las noticias falsas, son ustedes mismos tratando de controlar el relato, son ustedes llevando al extremo la injerencia, anulando elecciones democráticas, sacando de la pista a candidatos incómodos. Si fuera cierto que hay que prepararse para cualquier crisis, sería por su culpa.
                  

(El orador se niega a que Grégory Allione le formule una pregunta con arreglo al procedimiento de la ‘tarjeta azul’)


Michał Dworczyk (ECR). – Pani Przewodnicząca! Pani Komisarz! Szanowni państwo! Polacy wielokrotnie zdali egzamin z gotowości i odporności. Ostatnie kryzysy związane z atakiem hybrydowym na nasze granice, z napływem uchodźców wojennych z Ukrainy pokazały, że to państwa członkowskie i ich obywatele odgrywają kluczową rolę w reagowaniu na zagrożenia. Podobnie w czasie ostatniej powodzi na Dolnym Śląsku Polacy wykazali się solidarnością i determinacją. Codziennym wyrazem gotowości jest także zaangażowanie tysięcy Polaków w obronę terytorialną stworzoną przez rząd Prawa i Sprawiedliwości.
                  

                     Dlatego chociaż idee współpracy i solidarność w obliczu zagrożeń zawarte w strategii Unii Europejskiej na rzecz Unii gotowości są godne pochwały, to warto zadać pytanie, czy rzeczywiście Komisja Europejska wie lepiej, jak budować gotowość w Polsce czy w Finlandii? Czy centralne planowanie odporności społecznej z poziomu Brukseli ma większy sens niż rozwiązywania dostosowane do realiów lokalnych? Strategia to kolejna propozycja Komisji, w której trafnie zdiagnozowano problem, ale zaproponowano wątpliwej jakości lekarstwo. Przekracza ona granice koordynacji i przesuwa punkt ciężkości z państw narodowych na poziom unijny. Nie idźmy tą drogą.
                  

Nicolás Pascual de la Parte (PPE). – Señora presidenta, señora comisaria, yo creo que la estrategia que plantea la Unión Europea se tiene que integrar en un concepto más amplio de seguridad integral humana, que tiene una dimensión de defensa clásica —las fuerzas armadas— pero también tiene una dimensión civil, que es la preparación para los conflictos, los desastres naturales y los imprevistos. Esto significa básicamente que tenemos que prepararnos para estas eventualidades, porque es mucho más barato prepararnos que después hacer frente a las consecuencias de estos desastres.
                  

                     ¿Es cara la preparación? Sí, pero, como digo, es mucho más caro el tratar de revertir las situaciones. Eso significa una mayor cooperación civil y militar, una mayor cooperación entre el sector público y el privado, para asegurar que las infraestructuras críticas y los servicios esenciales están garantizados y que estamos preparados para responder a los ataques, a los ciberataques, a las amenazas híbridas, a las manipulaciones de la información.
                  

                     En una palabra, tenemos que concienciar a la sociedad de que la cultura de la defensa es de todos y de que todos tenemos que prepararnos.
                  

Leire Pajín (S&D). – Señora presidenta, señoras comisarias, ‘el proceso de globalización ha ampliado el concepto de seguridad que, superando las concepciones meramente militares, ha adquirido un carácter multidimensional’. Esta frase la pronunció nuestro primer alto representante, Javier Solana, hace más de veinte años.
                  

                     Entonces ya tenía razón y, desde entonces hasta hoy, la Unión Europea ha vivido inundaciones, desastres naturales devastadores, una pandemia, ciberataques, amenazas digitales a nuestra democracia, amenazas militares. Necesitamos un cambio de mentalidad para pasar de la reacción a la anticipación, a estar meramente preparados.
                  

                     Pero, en un mundo de amenazas globales, ¿qué significa estar preparados? En primer lugar, es conocer las amenazas reales con rigor —todas ellas— y combatir a los que las niegan. Necesitamos saber dónde están nuestras capacidades e integrar nuestros instrumentos civiles y militares. Necesitamos integrar todos los ámbitos de gobernanza global y local y, sobre todo, generar una cultura ciudadana de la respuesta. La gente debe saber cómo hacerlo y cuándo hacerlo. Y necesitamos, sobre todo, instrumentos de comunicación y de lucha eficaz contra la desinformación.
                  

Matej Tonin (PPE). – Gospa predsednica! Drage kolegice, komisarka! Mir je seveda želja vseh nas.
                  

                     Včasih se zdi, da je absolutno samoumeven, včasih tako željen, pa težko dosegljiv. In mir je temelj, ki zagotavlja delovanje vseh družbenih podsistemov, od gospodarstva, zdravstva do sociale.
                  

                     Ker se zavedamo, da mir ni samoumeven, je bil pred kratkim predstavljen program ReArm EU za izgradnjo kredibilnega odvračanja. Danes je bila predstavljena še strategija za zagotavljanje notranje varnosti za učinkovito preprečevanje organiziranega kriminala.
                  

                     Tokrat pa je pred nami še strategija za Unijo pripravljenosti, ki ustvarja podlago, da se kot družba celostno pripravimo na krize, ki nas čakajo v prihodnosti. Naj k temu dodam še, da smo tudi evropski poslanci ustanovili posebno medparlamentarno skupino za odpornost, obvladovanje nesreč in civilno zaščito.
                  

                     Omenjeni trojček torej zagotavlja, da bo Evropa jutri bolje pripravljena na vse krize.
                  

Tobias Cremer (S&D). – Madam President, store several dozen litres of drinking water. Keep a 72-hour supply of canned food. Have torches ready and know your nearest shelter. Colleagues, to many, these instructions might sound like a bad joke, especially on April Fool's Day, but unfortunately they're not. They reflect a growing need to prepare for the many threats we are facing today, from Russian aggression to natural disasters, from hybrid warfare to future pandemics, Europe must be prepared and so must every European.
But let us be clear being prepared does not mean being fearful. On the contrary, preparedness should give us peace of mind and courage. And most importantly. Preparedness is not just the job of a household or a family. It's a whole of society effort. Because real resilience comes from strong communities knowing whom to call, where to turn, and how to help one another in the case of crisis.
That is why social cohesion and civil society, sports clubs, unions, churches and associations must be at the heart of our preparedness strategy. True preparedness isn't what we store in our basement. True preparedness is the strength of the connections we build aboveground.

Victor Negrescu (S&D). – Doamnă președintă, doamnă comisară, stimați colegi, când au loc incendii, inundații sau crize medicale, exemplele de solidaritate europeană sunt apreciate de toată lumea. Aceste situații arată că o Uniune pregătită pentru situațiile de criză este o necesitate. Avem nevoie de acțiuni concrete, măsurabile și echitabile pentru toate statele membre.
                  

                     În urmă cu câțiva ani am venit cu o inițiativă care a fost adoptată de Parlamentul European privind crearea unor echipe medicale comune europene și a unei infrastructuri partajate pentru intervenții rapide în situații de criză. Totodată, am obținut creșterea bugetului UE pentru protecție civilă în calitate de negociator al legislativului european. Din păcate, Comisia Europeană nu a pus în aplicare aceste măsuri solicitate de Parlamentul European.
                  

                     Acum revenim la aceleași concluzii, dar timpul pierdut trebuie recuperat. Viitoarele crize ne pot lovi în orice moment, oriunde în Uniune. A ne pregăti nu înseamnă a induce panică, ci a fi responsabili și bine informați. Cetățenii vor soluții, iar noi suntem aici să le oferim, clar și fără ambiguități.
                  

Vytenis Povilas Andriukaitis (S&D). – Madam President, dear Commissioner, a resilient Europe is not built through force. It is built through trust and is based on a long-lasting holistic approach. We must embed civil, military and public health cooperation with the public health workforce as a strategic bridge between institutions, citizens and armed forces. By empowering people, by investing in citizen-led resilience hubs, we will achieve whole-of-society resilience and co-create local responses. Preparedness must start long before the military is called.
The goal is civilian deterrence, building such a strong public health system that threats are absorbed, not amplified. We must train law enforcement and the military in public health, so they support, not replace it.
And we must stop ignoring noncommunicable diseases and mental health, which silently erode resilience every day. They are not secondary. They are core security threats. Europe must act now by investing in prevention and in the public health system as our first line of defence. I will welcome that strategy.

Procedura ‘catch-the-eye’
                        


Hélder Sousa Silva (PPE). – Senhora Presidente, Senhora Comissária, congratulo-me com a apresentação da Estratégia da União da Preparação da UE, que consagra uma abordagem essencial para reforçar a capacidade da União em prever, antecipar e enfrentar as crises.
                  

                     Cidadãos preparados são o primeiro recurso de uma sociedade resiliente. Promover a literacia para o risco e assegurar os sistemas de aviso e alerta precoces são responsabilidades dos vários níveis de governação. Destaco, em particular, a cooperação público-privada e a cooperação civil-militar, dois pilares indissociáveis numa era marcada por ameaças híbridas, por instabilidade prolongada, caminhando no sentido de se criar um verdadeiro mecanismo europeu de defesa civil.
                  

                     A União Europeia deve assumir um papel de coordenação em domínios pan-europeus, mas é imperativo os Estados-Membros e as autoridades locais assumirem as suas responsabilidades.
                  

                     A proteção civil é verdadeiramente uma tarefa de todos para todos.
                  

Laura Ballarín Cereza (S&D). – Señora presidenta, señora comisaria Lahbib, estar preparadas ante una pandemia, un ataque o un desastre natural es mucho más que llevar una linterna o una barra energética en el bolso. Entre la alarma y la frivolidad, necesitamos sentido común. Sentido común para informar a nuestra ciudadanía de la necesidad, sí, de proteger la paz y la estabilidad de la Unión Europea en el momento más convulso y más hostil de nuestra historia reciente.
                  

                     Por eso saludo la Estrategia de Preparación de la Unión para concienciar y formar a nuestra ciudadanía de los riesgos y los ataques que podemos sufrir. También reconocer y aprender de las lecciones de la pandemia de COVID-19 y, por supuesto, invertir más y mejor en seguridad europea en sentido amplio: emergencia climática, seguridad alimentaria, seguridad militar, pero también seguridad digital ante la pandemia de salud mental que viven nuestros jóvenes.
                  

                     Por eso —como se suele decir—, debemos prepararnos para lo peor, pero esperando lo mejor. Responsabilidad, solidaridad y más Europa.
                  

Ana Miranda Paz (Verts/ALE). – Senhora Presidente, o clima político mudou. Há tambores de guerra e, em vez de trabalhar pela paz, Bruxelas soma-se ao discurso da escalada belicista.
                  

                     Claro que precisamos de um kit de sobrevivência: um kit com trabalho, serviços públicos, com casas, com alimentos a preços económicos, com justiça social e com dignidade.
                  

                     Este kit de sobrevivência de 72 horas, que noutros países é obrigatório, mas não neste contexto, é um exemplo clássico de comunicação estratégica, no termo moderno, que substitui as antigas operações psicológicas de manipulação da perceção pública.
                  

                     A Comissão von der Leyen apresentou este plano para rearmar a Europa, no qual pretende investir até 800 mil milhões de euros em armamento e outros equipamentos.
                  

                     Condicionam os povos, preparando-os para cenários potencialmente assustadores e criando uma sensação de urgência, para aceitar futuras decisões de defesa e segurança, criando medo, como nos comunicaram muitos cidadãos.
                  

                     Isso não é trabalhar pela paz.
                  

Cecilia Strada (S&D). – Signora Presidente, signora Commissaria, onorevoli colleghi, io non sono d'accordo su quasi nulla di quello che la Commissione sta facendo per prepararci alle grandi sfide che ci attendono.
                  

                     Io, nella mia borsa della resilienza, ho messo il diritto internazionale umanitario, che ogni giorno è sotto attacco e viene stracciato, non solo da Putin. Le cito un altro caso: dal governo Netanyahu.
                  

                     Nella mia borsa ci sono le convenzioni internazionali importantissime, come il trattato di Ottawa e la convenzione di Oslo, che vietano la produzione di mine antipersona e di munizioni a grappolo; diversi paesi europei ne vogliono uscire in nome della sicurezza.
                  

                     Nella mia borsa c'è un'Europa che lavora per il disarmo, non per la proliferazione.
                  

                     E c'è anche un'enorme tassazione sugli extraprofitti dell'industria bellica, perché non penso che nessuno debba diventare ricco sulle sofferenze della popolazione civile; c'è la lotta alle disuguaglianze, perché la pace non è assenza di guerra ma la pienezza dei propri diritti; c'è la Carta dei diritti fondamentali dell'Unione, che è un'altra cosa che siamo un po' stracciando. Ci sono paesi che, in nome della sicurezza, stanno effettuando dei respingimenti collettivi, che sono vietati.
                  

                     Ecco, cara Commissaria, io sono preoccupata perché se, in nome della sicurezza, accettiamo di ridurre la protezione dei diritti delle persone e accettiamo di ridurre le nostre leggi e i nostri valori, temo che non ci rimanga molto da difendere.
                  

Juan Fernando López Aguilar (S&D). – Señora presidenta, señora comisaria Lahbib, una estrategia de preparación europea que permita mejorar su capacidad de respuesta ante amenazas y riesgos sin duda requiere señalar cuáles son esas amenazas, ya sean catástrofes naturales y fenómenos climáticos extremos cada vez más frecuentes, catástrofes de origen humano, ataques de ciberseguridad, amenazas híbridas o incluso crisis geopolíticas con agresiones inminentes.
                  

                     Pero, sobre todo, requiere la anticipación en un mecanismo de protección civil que sea capaz de integrar las capacidades civiles y militares y las públicas y privadas. Y, lo más importante, que no haya ninguna concesión al miedo, no ya a la caricatura del kit de supervivencia, sino sobre todo al miedo, que es la semilla del populismo y de las distopías regresivas en las que se pierde el alma de la Unión Europea.
                  

                     Por tanto, la comunicación eficaz proeuropea es absolutamente imprescindible para la preparación para lo peor.
                  

João Oliveira (The Left). – Senhora Presidente, Senhora Comissária Lahbib, este debate sobre a designada preparação para as crises é o debate da fuga às responsabilidades, da promoção do medo e da ideologia da guerra.
                  

                     A Comissão Europeia secundariza o papel dos Estados e das estruturas e dos serviços públicos essenciais, concebendo a preparação para as crises como uma responsabilidade individual dos cidadãos.
                  

                     Ao mesmo tempo que trata de situações que justificam verdadeira preocupação com a proteção civil ou infraestruturas críticas, a Comissão promove o medo, porque o medo é o cavalo de Troia dos povos, para que assimilem e aceitem o que naturalmente recusariam por se opor aos seus interesses.
                  

                     A razão dessa promoção do medo encontramo-la nas palavras do escritor Mia Couto quando disse: ‘Para fabricar armas é preciso fabricar inimigos. Para produzir inimigos é imperioso sustentar fantasmas.’
                  

                     A promoção das crises esconde os fantasmas e o medo com que querem acomodar os povos à ideologia da guerra.
                  

                     Por nós não passarão.
                  

Μαρία Ζαχαρία (NI). – Κυρία Πρόεδρε, μας λέτε να είμαστε έτοιμοι για 72 ώρες, να έχουμε σπίρτα, φακούς και κονσέρβες. Γιατί; Για να είμαστε λέει έτοιμοι για κρίσεις, πανδημίες, φυσικές καταστροφές και εξωτερικές επεμβάσεις. Δηλαδή σκορπάτε τον τρόμο στον κόσμο για να αποδεχτεί τη στρατικοποίηση που κάνετε στην Ευρώπη. Εσείς που μας φέρατε χιλιάδες φορές με τις πολιτικές σας σε κρίσεις. όπως η ενεργειακή κρίση και η κλιματική αλλαγή. Εσείς που πρώτα καταστρέψατε τη δημόσια υγεία και μετά αφήσατε τους γιατρούς και τους νοσηλευτές να παλεύουν με την πανδημία. Εσείς που κόβετε συντάξεις, μειώνετε μισθούς και είστε έτοιμοι να χρηματοδοτήσετε τις στρατιωτικές δαπάνες από χρήματα των καταθετών σε τράπεζες και από ασφαλιστικά ταμεία των εργαζομένων. Εσείς τώρα μας λέτε να είμαστε έτοιμοι. Για εμάς όμως υπάρχει μια λύση ριζική. Να οικοδομήσουμε μια Ευρώπη των λαών με δημοκρατία, διαφάνεια και κοινωνική δικαιοσύνη. Μια Ευρώπη που θα είναι ειρηνευτική δύναμη και όχι χρηματοδότης πολέμων.
                  

(Fine della procedura ‘catch the eye’)


Hadja Lahbib,
Member of the Commission. – Madam President, thank you very much for these frank and engaging insights on this very important topic.
Being prepared is no longer a luxury, it is a necessity to keep our families, our communities safe – and no country, no one, can do it alone. We need to do it together. Our Preparedness Union Strategy is a strong step towards a safer and stronger Europe.
We have the tools and the strategy to confront today's most complex threats. But we also need the courage and the political will, and we will need trust. Trust is the super glue holding all this together – trust between people and government, trust between Member States and trust between Europe and its partners.
This preparedness strategy is a systematic, coordinated and proactive approach to make sure every European citizen is ready for any crisis. We are building a Europe that is safer, stronger and ready for today and for whatever comes next. The European Parliament definitely has a role to play and can engage our citizens and create awareness without provoking anxiety, but, on the contrary, promoting inclusivity.
What people fear is being caught off guard. Our citizens, furthermore, want to be involved. We are then considering the integration of preparedness training in EU youth programmes such as the Solidarity Corps and Erasmus+ to promote resilience and participation in democratic life and civic engagement.
Because, indeed, and I will switch to French…
Vous avez tout à fait raison quand vous dites que les pompiers et les volontaires sont une des forces majeures de notre résilience. Nous les tenons à bord: ils seront partie prenante – ils sont déjà partie prenante – de cette résilience.
We have already talked about this initiative, about Erasmus+, on preparedness in our Solidarity Corps with Commissioner Glenn Micallef. And I also tested this idea during my dialogue with young European citizens at the Youth Dialogue, and it was a very well received in a very enthusiastic way.
And I would like to also underline that the preparedness strategy is part of an umbrella. We now have a triplet with the white paper on defence – Readiness 2030 – the preparedness strategy and the internal security strategy that was presented just today. We will have also the Democracy Shield coming soon. And shortly we will also present an EU stockpiling strategy and a medical countermeasure stockpiling strategy to complete the protection of our citizens and of our societies, but also of our democracy.
So, real resilience comes from strong societies and from a strong European Union. When we are all together prepared, we are stronger and safer together.

Presidente. – Ringrazio tutte le colleghe e i colleghi che hanno partecipato al dibattito.
                  

                     Un ringraziamento particolare va alla Commissaria Lahbib per la pazienza con cui ha ascoltato qualche tono eccessivo, che abbiamo stigmatizzato.
                  

                     La discussione è chiusa.
                  


Dichiarazioni scritte (articolo 178)



Vilija Blinkevičiūtė (S&D),
raštu. – Pastaraisiais metais Europos Sąjunga susiduria su vis sudėtingesniais iššūkiais. Po daugelio metų taikos Europos žemyne trečius metus vyksta karas. Rytinės ES valstybės narės susiduria su precedento neturinčiomis grėsmėmis – nuo migrantų instrumentalizacijos iki hibridinių atakų Baltijos jūroje, kuriomis siekiama sugadinti strateginę energetikos ir ryšių infrastruktūrą. Todėl Europa privalo būti pasiruošusi apsaugoti savo piliečius ir pagrindines visuomenės funkcijas. Valstybės narės privalo užtikrinti visuomenės pasirengimą galimų grėsmių atvejais, užtikrinant saugias slėptuves, maisto ir vaistų atsargas. Privalome stiprinti mūsų žmonių pasirengimą galimoms nelaimės ir aktyviai įtraukti šį procesą vietos valdžios institucijas. Labai svarbu, kad mūsų žmonės jaustųsi socialiai saugūs Europoje, nes tik socialiai stipri Europa bus atspari išorės grėsmėms.
                  

José Cepeda (S&D),
por escrito. – Desde la Delegación Socialista española apoyamos la iniciativa de la Comisión Europea de presentar esta Estrategia de Preparación de la Unión, entendiendo que debe ser planteada con una visión amplia de los conceptos de preparación y seguridad.
                  

                     En este sentido, la Estrategia debe ampliar la definición de seguridad para incluir todas las amenazas –y no solo las de naturaleza militar– que afectan a la seguridad de la población europea, como los desastres naturales, las pandemias, los ciberataques o la desinformación.
                  

                     La Delegación Socialista española aboga por un cambio de mentalidad que permita pasar de la reacción a la anticipación, e insta a que la Estrategia y las iniciativas legislativas que la acompañen incluyan un conocimiento profundo de las amenazas reales a las que se enfrenta la Unión, así como de las capacidades de prevención, preparación y respuesta frente a estas crisis.
                  

                     La Delegación Socialista española también considera que es esencial generar una cultura ciudadana de la preparación y establecer instrumentos de comunicación eficientes para combatir la desinformación.
                  

Lina Gálvez (S&D),
por escrito. – Desde la Delegación Socialista española apoyamos la iniciativa de la Comisión Europea de presentar esta Estrategia de Preparación de la Unión, entendiendo que debe ser planteada con una visión amplia de los conceptos de preparación y seguridad.
                  

                     En este sentido, la Estrategia debe ampliar la definición de seguridad para incluir todas las amenazas –y no solo las de naturaleza militar– que afectan a la seguridad de la población europea, como los desastres naturales, las pandemias, los ciberataques o la desinformación.
                  

                     La Delegación Socialista española aboga por un cambio de mentalidad que permita pasar de la reacción a la anticipación, e insta a que la Estrategia y las iniciativas legislativas que la acompañen incluyan un conocimiento profundo de las amenazas reales a las que se enfrenta la Unión, así como de las capacidades de prevención, preparación y respuesta frente a estas crisis.
                  

                     La Delegación Socialista española también considera que es esencial generar una cultura ciudadana de la preparación y establecer instrumentos de comunicación eficientes para combatir la desinformación.
                  

Maria Grapini (S&D),
în scris. – Doamnă comisară, ne-ați prezentat strategia UE pentru situații de criză dar, din păcate, comunicarea a fost proastă, cetățenilor li s-a indus frica în loc de încredere.
                  

                     Pregătirea populației pentru crize nu se poate face cu frică și coerciție, ci cu educație și încredere.
                  

                     În acest moment, cetățenii din țara mea au intrat în panică, unii își scot banii de la bancă, alții își fac stocuri de alimente excesive, alții, care nu au posibilități financiare, au intrat în panică, temându-se că nu vor avea soluții.
                  

                     Doamnă comisară, modul în care se comunică motivarea măsurilor propuse și luate este cel care duce la înțelegere și conformarea voluntară a cetățenilor.
                  

Jagna Marczułajtis-Walczak (PPE),
na piśmie. – Obywatele i obywatelki krajów członkowskich muszą wiedzieć, że mogą liczyć na pomoc w momencie, w którym najbardziej jej potrzebują.
                  

                     Muszą widzieć sprawczość i czuć, ze rządy biorą odpowiedzialność za przygotowania, zaopatrzanie czy wręcz ewakuację w momentach narażenia życia i zdrowia. Służby mundurowe i wolontariusze muszą być gotowi współdziałać.
                  

                     Poczucie wspólnoty pozwala na zintensyfikowanie działań, współpraca między krajami członkowskimi jest konieczna, i jak pokazały nam ubiegłoroczne klęski żywiołowe w Hiszpanii, Austrii czy w moim kraju – w Polsce, jesteśmy w stanie jako Unia Europejska poradzić sobie razem w sytuacjach trudnych. Dlatego cieszę się ze strategii na rzecz gotowosci Komisji Europejskiej i życzę Pani Komisarz Minzatu powodzenia w jej wdrażaniu.
                  

Nacho Sánchez Amor (S&D),
por escrito. – Desde la Delegación Socialista española apoyamos la iniciativa de la Comisión Europea de presentar esta Estrategia de Preparación de la Unión, entendiendo que debe ser planteada con una visión amplia de los conceptos de preparación y seguridad.
                  

                     En este sentido, la Estrategia debe ampliar la definición de seguridad para incluir todas las amenazas –y no solo las de naturaleza militar– que afectan a la seguridad de la población europea, como los desastres naturales, las pandemias, los ciberataques o la desinformación.
                  

                     La Delegación Socialista española aboga por un cambio de mentalidad que permita pasar de la reacción a la anticipación, e insta a que la Estrategia y las iniciativas legislativas que la acompañen incluyan un conocimiento profundo de las amenazas reales a las que se enfrenta la Unión, así como de las capacidades de prevención, preparación y respuesta frente a estas crisis.
                  

                     La Delegación Socialista española también considera que es esencial generar una cultura ciudadana de la preparación y establecer instrumentos de comunicación eficientes para combatir la desinformación.
                  
13.   Improving the implementation of cohesion policy through the mid-term review to achieve a robust cohesion policy post 2027 (debate)

Presidente. – L'ordine del giorno reca le dichiarazioni del Consiglio e della Commissione – Miglioramento dell'attuazione della politica di coesione attraverso la revisione intermedia per conseguire una solida politica di coesione dopo il 2027 (2025/2648(RSP)).
               

Adam Szłapka,
President-in-Office of the Council. – Madam President, Mr Commissioner, honourable Members, the current Multiannual Financial Framework has limited flexibility. It is therefore unavoidable that when we discuss the number of new and growing challenges the EU has to face, the contribution of cohesion policy is at the centre of the debate.
While the need to increase our competitiveness, our resilience, but also the urgency to intensify our security and defence are today essential for the EU to face the current and future challenges, the regions should remain at the core of cohesion policy.
The Commission has today presented its intention to adjust the agenda for cohesion policy with a view to better deliver on EU priorities and contribute more directly to competitiveness as well as defence already under the current MFF, together with a legislative proposal. The proposal uses the opportunity of the ongoing mid-term review of cohesion programmes to provide Member States with sufficient flexibility to adjust their programmes to the current needs. As the legislative amendments have been proposed just a few hours ago, the Council still needs to assess them.
However, the Member States have already repeatedly acknowledged the necessity for cohesion policy to adapt to the new situation already in the current MFF to respond effectively and wisely to emerging EU priorities and needs.
Last Friday, the Council approved conclusions on cohesion and cohesion policy post 2027, which include a detailed reflection in this direction, besides reaffirming the essential and fundamental principles of the policy.
Affordable housing, boosting competitiveness and strengthening our defence capabilities are key priorities of the cohesion policy. Support for regions in vulnerable situations, such as regions on the EU's external border, especially those bordering Russia and Belarus, is also needed. While I understand the plea of the Commission to act fast on this legislative proposal, we also need to be careful to preserve the Treaty objectives of the policy.
For this, we need to work together in order to take wise decisions and ensure meaningful but also balanced change. I am sure we will be closely in touch in the coming weeks to discuss the proposed amendments further.

Raffaele Fitto,
Executive Vice-President of the Commission. – Madam President, Minister, honourable Members, thank you for the opportunity to address you today. This debate is very timely. As you know, the college approved today the Commission's new initiative to modernise the cohesion policy. This modernisation is crucial. The current programmes were discussed in 2019 to 2021, and the partnership agreement was signed in 2022 – and they are only starting now. However, the world has changed since then in a significant way.
We are proposing that Member States and regions use this opportunity to better align cohesion policy with the EU's evolving strategic priorities: supporting competitiveness, boosting resilience and building Europe's capacity to respond to future challenges.
To support Member States in using the funds to advance these priorities, we proposed making tailored amendments to the European Regional Development Fund, Cohesion Fund and Just Transition Fund regulations. We are introducing incentives and flexibilities that support five priorities – competitiveness, defence, affordable housing, water resilience and energy interconnection and recharging infrastructure – while also accelerating implementation through simplification. Through these amendments, the mid-term review proposal will deliver a more responsive cohesion policy, which is aligned with today's realities and can better address current and future challenges.
The goal is to facilitate essential investments in areas that are crucial for the future prosperity of the EU. These five priorities will benefit from increased pre-financing and co-financing. National, regional and local authorities will be able to allocate funds within their current programmes towards these new priorities. This is completely voluntary.
The proposal also includes incentives for the eastern border regions, which encounter specific challenges not only linked to security, but also to relaunching their economies. As you know, this is a topic on which I have already had a good exchange with you after my visit to a border region.
Honourable Members, our proposal today is an important initiative to create better use of the current programmes, but also to create the right conditions for when discussions on the next MFF will properly start. In my meetings with the national and regional stakeholders, I have underlined the importance of relaunching cohesion policy and also the urgency of aligning our resources with our strategic priorities. I have also discussed this with many of you in bilateral meetings or in different committee meetings here in the European Parliament.
With the mid-term review we have a golden opportunity to modernise this important policy, to align investment with the changed realities on the ground. I count on your support as co-legislator to give this proposal your urgent consideration for the benefit of our regions and citizens. Your input, your advice and your experience are crucial. I am looking forward to hearing your views.

Andrey Novakov,
on behalf of the PPE Group. – Madam President, Onorevole Fitto, ladies and gentlemen, dear colleagues, European cohesion policy has been responsible for billions of investments in kindergartens, in schools, in water supply systems and in energy efficiency projects. However, today it looks like a sleeping beauty. We have EUR 370 billion allocated for this policy, and we have only 10% spent to the final beneficiaries five years after the beginning of the programming period. So we have to act.
And I welcome the efforts of Vice-President Fitto in that direction, because we have to act rapidly. Otherwise, if we don't modernise this policy, it will look old-fashioned. If we don't adapt this policy to the current realities, it will die, like every other living creature which is not capable of adapting to the changing environment. I think that it's the right time to adapt with the challenges that are coming with the war in Ukraine. We have to, once again, create flexible rules that we can provide to the Member states, invest in dual-use companies. We can simultaneously do two separate things. One is supporting European defence industry, supporting start-ups in Europe, supporting industry in Europe and creating jobs and helping our defence efforts that we have to create as joint efforts in Europe.
And I think now we don't have to be stubborn. We have to find a common language with the Commission and create a way to use all the capacity of the cohesion policy without losing any of the funds, without any the commitments and, finally, support the Member States in what they need, namely defence capacity.

Mohammed Chahim,
on behalf of the S&D Group. – Madam President, for me, cohesion policy is not only about economic growth, it's about building a strong social Europe that works for all, where prosperity is shared and no one is excluded.
The social or the Cohesion Fund is also one of the few connectivities we have with regions and cities. While we grant them direct access to European funds, we give Europe a social face. So now is not the time to cut funds that give Europe the social face.
The S&D is eager to discuss the Commission's idea to improve the absorption levels of the funds, especially to reach the underrepresented regions, but that does not mean that we can reallocate unspent cohesion funds unconditionally.
Cohesion policies are an answer to inequality both between Member States and within Member States, including my own, where bus stops disappear, libraries close, and as said, many other social projects are financed through the social fund. We cannot let this go without a good debate, without conditionality.
It's very important, at the end of the day, that this fund that gives access to European funds for millions of citizens should stand, and we should improve the accessibility and not only shift funds to other targets. For me, that's very important from an S&D perspective.

Rody Tolassy,
au nom du groupe PfE. – Madame la Présidente, tout d'abord, avant de m'exprimer, j'aimerais apporter mon soutien sincère à Marine Le Pen face à l'attaque antidémocratique que subit notre pays tout entier.
               

                  Madame la Présidente, Monsieur le Commissaire, chers collègues, l'Europe aime se vanter de sa cohésion, mais, dans les faits, elle abandonne une partie de ses propres territoires. Nos régions ne sont pas de simples avant-postes exotiques: elles sont stratégiques, elles sont européennes, et pourtant elles sont traitées à la marge.
               

                  Comment osez-vous parler de cohésion alors que ces territoires sont privés d'un accès plein et entier au Fonds de cohésion? Nos régions ultrapériphériques – nos RUP – souffrent de problématiques fondamentales, telles que celles liées à l'adduction d'eau, ressource cruciale dans la vie quotidienne.
               

                  Le réexamen à mi-parcours doit marquer une rupture. Nous exigeons un programme européen de compétitivité sur mesure, avec des financements et des règles adaptées à un véritable accompagnement des entreprises et des collectivités. L'Europe, sait agir quand elle le veut. Elle l'a démontré en Grèce. Pourquoi donc refuser ce même engagement à nos RUP, dont l'économie insulaire est fragile, mais pleine de potentiel?
               

                  Arrêtons l'hypocrisie européenne! Nos RUP ne peuvent plus être ignorées ni traitées comme des territoires de seconde zone. L'Europe doit s'engager fermement à accorder à ces territoires un accès complet et direct au Fonds de cohésion.
               

Denis Nesci,
a nome del gruppo ECR. – Signora Presidente, signor Vicepresidente esecutivo Fitto, onorevoli colleghi, la politica di coesione dell'Unione europea è essenziale per ridurre le disuguaglianze territoriali e promuovere uno sviluppo equilibrato. Tuttavia è necessario migliorarne l'attuazione, anche in vista del prossimo QFP.
               

                  La politica di coesione deve essere rinnovata per rispondere alle nuove esigenze dei diversi Stati membri, dando loro maggiore flessibilità. È essenziale che affrontiamo con decisione le sfide cruciali con le quali l'Unione europea si confronta ogni giorno, incluse le sfide demografiche e la valorizzazione dei talenti, affinché ogni giovane abbia la possibilità di rimanere nella propria terra.
               

                  Sono lieto che il Vicepresidente abbia posto l'accento sulla competitività e sul tema della casa, due priorità fondamentali che richiedono un'azione immediata. La questione abitativa è vitale non solo per le città ma anche per le aree rurali, e va trattata con la stessa urgenza e determinazione.
               

                  La comunicazione presentata oggi è un passo importante e va nella giusta direzione; è fondamentale semplificare l'accesso ai finanziamenti per le imprese e creare infopoint territoriali che offrano supporto amministrativo, semplificando i processi burocratici.
               

                  In conclusione, la revisione intermedia è un'opportunità cruciale per adattare la politica di coesione alle sfide emergenti, garantendo un futuro più forte e resiliente per i nostri territori.
               

Ľubica Karvašová,
on behalf of the Renew Group. – Madam President, with an absorption rate less than 10 %, we are failing our regions at the moment. But there are objective reasons why this is the case. Unprecedented crises, COVID, war in Ukraine, priority given to recovery plans, all consumed a lot of our capacities.
In several countries, it is also the centralisation of investments that delays investments in regions. The solution is not to give up on the policy, it's to fix it. So I support Commissioner Fitto's efforts for mid-term review and to ease access to EU funds, including for eastern border regions.
Cohesion policy is the one closest to our citizens in regions and in cities. So what we need is to simplify it and to bring it even closer to them. Focus on specific local needs in reducing regional disparities, but also in driving competitiveness.
So let us reunite around this goal together, the Commission, European Parliament and the Council, because if we gamble with the support of citizens in regions for European projects, we risk losing projects in general.

Cristina Guarda,
a nome del gruppo Verts/ALE. – Signora Presidente, signor Commissario, onorevoli colleghi, non possiamo far pagare le armi ai cittadini più poveri e a rischio d'Europa.
               

                  La politica di coesione è il cuore dell'Unione: serve a innovare, a dare futuro alle comunità montane e rurali, a dare alle terre colpite dalla crisi climatica una speranza, e soluzioni a chi vive in zone inquinate, isolate o senza opportunità.
               

                  E invece si vuole svuotarla per finanziare la spesa militare. Che difesa comune è mai questa, se intanto lasciamo indietro chi ha bisogno di sostegno, di reti, di servizi?
               

                  La revisione intermedia dovrebbe rafforzare e semplificare la coesione, non ridurla in vista del prossimo bilancio, sacrificando milioni di persone per favorire pochi attori dell'industria bellica.
               

                  La Presidente von der Leyen mostra scarso interesse per le politiche sociali. Mi appello quindi a lei, Vicepresidente Fitto: difenda la coesione, difenda il suo mandato. Non confonda le carte, nascondendo le armi dietro a parole come alloggi dignitosi e resilienza idrica.
               

                  La nostra forza sta nella capacità di costruire non 27, ma UN futuro europeo giusto, equo ed unito.
               

Έλενα Κουντουρά,
εξ ονόματος της ομάδας The Left. – Κυρία Πρόεδρε, κύριε Επίτροπε, η πολιτική συνοχής αποτελεί κρίσιμο όχημα για τη μείωση των ανισοτήτων που εντείνονται από τις πολλαπλές κρίσεις των τελευταίων ετών. Η κοινωνική, οικονομική, εδαφική σύγκλιση της Ευρωπαϊκής Ένωσης είναι βασική προτεραιότητα και αυτό πρέπει να αποτυπωθεί και στην πράξη.
               

                  Οφείλουμε να διασφαλίσουμε ότι στο επόμενο πολυετές δημοσιονομικό πλαίσιο η χρηματοδότηση της πολιτικής συνοχής θα ενισχυθεί σημαντικά, και ότι θα προβλεφθούν επαρκείς πρόσθετοι πόροι για τις ανάγκες που βιώνουμε, ώστε τα επόμενα χρόνια να πετύχουμε βιώσιμη και δίκαιη ανάπτυξη χωρίς να μείνει κανένας πίσω. Οφείλουμε να απορρίψουμε την περικοπή των κονδυλίων συνοχής και τη μεταφορά τους στον τομέα της άμυνας. Τέτοιες προτάσεις αντιβαίνουν στον θεμελιώδη σκοπό της συνοχής και στον στόχο της σύγκλισης.
               

                  Τέλος, πρέπει να διατηρηθεί ακέραιος ο αποκεντρωμένος χαρακτήρας της πολιτικής συνοχής. Η τοποκεντρική προσέγγιση είναι ουσιώδης. Οι περιφερειακές και τοπικές αρχές κατανοούν καλύτερα τις επείγουσες ανάγκες των κοινοτήτων, και πρέπει να παραμείνουν στον πυρήνα του σχεδιασμού και της υλοποίησης της πολιτικής συνοχής.
               

Gabriella Gerzsenyi (PPE). – Tisztelt Elnök Asszony! Quo vadis? Merre tart a kohéziós politika? Az unió kihívásai indokolják az egyenlőtlenségek leküzdését, jobban, mint valaha. Ez Európa biztonságának záloga. Együtt erősebbek vagyunk.
               

                  Szükséges a helyi és regionális szereplők megerősítése, az érintettek bevonása, a partnerség. Egyszerűsítés, könnyebb végrehajthatóság, a pénzek hatékony és szabályszerű felhasználása. Fontos, hogy a beruházások helyben hasznosuljanak, a kedvezményezettek minden előnyét élvezhessék. Egyetlen területet és egyetlen személyt se hagyjunk hátra, az időseket, a nőket, a romákat, a fogyatékossággal élőket sem.
               

                  A Tisza azon dolgozik, hogy helyrehozza az Orbán-kormány talán legnagyobb bűnét, az ország megfosztását a kohéziós források jelentős részétől. Kormányra kerülésük után hazahozzuk az uniós pénzeket, visszavezetjük Magyarországot a korrupciótól mentes, fejlődő gazdaság és a jogállamiság útjára, és ehhez köszönöm ezúton is a Bizottság együttműködését.
               

Marcos Ros Sempere (S&D). – Madam President, Commissioner, a citizen walks through the streets of his rural town. He picks up his child from school, drives along a small road and takes him to the health centre. In all three places, he can read the same sentence: 'Financed by European funds.'
Which is the European Union's greatest social policy? Cohesion policy which helps all European regions grow at the same pace, which creates quality jobs, which makes us more competitive. But we have challenges to solve: bureaucratic burdens, new needs of the citizens. We need to accelerate its implementation.
What is the solution? Modernisation. Greater involvement of regions and citizens. More flexibility and a large budget. Investment not only for defence or large corporations, investment for small and medium-sized businesses, investment for the most disadvantaged territories and investment for a safer, more competitive Europe with less inequality.
Commissioner, we socialists will work on the Commission's proposal. We will work to achieve these objectives.

Șerban Dimitrie Sturdza (ECR). – Doamnă președintă, domnule Fitto, stimați colegi, în primul rând trebuie subliniat faptul că obiectivul principal al politicii de coeziune este reducerea treptată a disparităților dintre regiuni, adică expresia solidarității europene. Totuși, realitatea se schimbă rapid. Avem noi priorități, crize neprevăzute și presiuni de investiții în domenii strategice. De aceea, flexibilitatea politicii de coeziune ar trebui să le ofere statelor membre șansa de a investi acolo unde este cu adevărat necesar.
               

                  Fondurile de coeziune trebuie să rămână un sprijin real pentru regiunile și comunitățile care au nevoie de ele, iar acolo unde resursele nu au fost cheltuite la timp, acestea nu trebuie pierdute, ci regândite și redistribuite inteligent chiar de către statul membru. Cu toate acestea, politica de coeziune nu poate deveni un fel de pușculiță bună la toate. Flexibilitatea este necesară, cu siguranță, dar trebuie să fie țintită, echilibrată și responsabilă.
               

Ciaran Mullooly (Renew). – Madam President, Commissioner, if Liberation Day is what they're calling the events in Washington this week, then surely today, here in Strasbourg, we should say it's D-Day for our European Commission to get its act together in readiness for the challenges that are undoubtedly ahead.
While Donald Trump talks of tariffs, we must talk about cohesion policy that will drive investment, reduce regional disparities and ensure that no region is left behind, especially in face of what will be tougher trading conditions. As we review our current programmes, there are fears ahead, Commissioner, that some projects risk being jettisoned for those more politically expedient in the short term, and even more concerns about reallocating funds to other priorities, such as defence spending. Commissioner, we cannot and will not stand idly by if this is proposed. We must not dilute our cohesion policy at any time, and especially when we are facing potentially crippling tariffs from the US. We need a robust, future-proofed cohesion policy, not just an investment. It's a commitment to European solidarity. Solidarity that is short in supply at the moment. We must safeguard a strong and well-funded cohesion policy well beyond 2027.

Gordan Bosanac (Verts/ALE). – Madam President, Mr Commissioner, I think one of my first speeches in this House was calling for the reform of cohesion policy, but not in my dream – or call it nightmare – I couldn't imagine that we will get such a comprehensive and, I will say, radical proposal how to change the cohesion policy, which I can partially agree with.
However, we will need more time to study more in depth what was written in the documents that were released only a few hours ago. But I have to challenge the idea that with these six new priorities, defence will also be included. Because can you imagine how this priority will overburden the other ones which we are talking about from the beginning, like solving the housing crisis or working more on the green energy transition. It's really good that you also emphasise the green transition, access to water, housing, but I'm afraid that defence will just swallow up everything.
Also, in my first reading, I haven't seen that you are proposing the change of Article 7(5) to enable investments from the cohesion policy directly into housing. So let's see what can happen there. And one thing which I find good: finally, you are putting more strong European urban initiatives. If we are going in the direction of more direct funding to regions and cities, this is the right way forward.

(The speaker agreed to take a blue-card question)


Lukas Sieper (NI),
blue-card question. – Thank you for taking the blue-card. In your speech, you talked about your fear that the defence spending would swallow all the other – as you said – very important matters. While I share that fear and theory, I would like to ask: why exactly do you think that? Why exactly should that happen? Because I think if we just state that without any reasoning in these really dark times, that would also not be good.

Gordan Bosanac (Verts/ALE),
blue-card answer. – Very good question. Because it's much easier to spend it on defence than to spend it on housing.
The second thing is that I'm worried about who will control the spending in defence when on the national level, the Member States will say, but we have our security laws which are protecting us from disclosing the information on spending in defence.
So, I see that for Member States it's much easier to grab into the defence than in the housing and energy transition.

IN THE CHAIR: ESTEBAN GONZÁLEZ PONS


Vice-President


Dan-Ștefan Motreanu (PPE). – Domnule președinte, domnule comisar, rata de absorbție a fondurilor de coeziune pentru perioada 2021-2027 este într-adevăr scăzută, însă acest lucru nu reflectă lipsa de interes din partea statelor membre, ci este cauzat de întârzieri în adoptarea bugetului Uniunii Europene, de suprapunerea și cu finalizarea programelor din 2014-2020 și cu implementarea planurilor naționale de redresare și reziliență.
                  

                     Trebuie avută în vedere și rata de contractare. În România, de exemplu, peste 60 % din valoarea finanțării este deja contractată. În plus, trebuie să ținem cont că unele proiecte, cum ar fi cele de infrastructură rutieră sau de apă și canalizare, sunt foarte complexe și pot dura uneori peste cinci ani. Rata de absorbție de aproape 100 % în perioada anterioară arată clar că politica de coeziune rămâne esențială pentru reducerea decalajelor dintre regiuni.
                  

                     Celor care propun redirecționarea bugetului dedicat coeziunii, le reamintesc că această politică a consolidat încrederea cetățenilor în proiectul european, prin investiții concrete în autostrăzi, spitale, școli și IMM-uri, investiții care contracarează eficient discursurile eurosceptice și influențele venite din afara Uniunii Europene.
                  

Victor Negrescu (S&D). – Domnule președinte, domnule comisar, dragi colegi, politica de coeziune este unul dintre cele mai puternice instrumente europene. Este expresia concretă a solidarității dintre statele membre și regiunile Uniunii. Fără aceasta, Europa s-ar rupe în două, între regiunile dezvoltate și regiunile lăsate în urmă. Prin revizuirea aceasta de la mijlocul perioadei, avem șansa să corectăm deficiențele actuale, să accelerăm implementarea și să demonstrăm impactul real al fondurilor europene.
                  

                     Dar mai mult decât atât, trebuie să apărăm această politică. Sunt voci care pun sub semnul întrebării viitorul coeziunii după 2027 și aici, domnule comisar, trebuie să spuneți foarte clar NU la aceste modificări. Nu putem permite ca o politică vitală pentru echitatea europeană să fie subfinanțată sau marginalizată. Coeziunea nu este un moft, este garanția unei Europe unite, echilibrate și prospere. Este responsabilitatea noastră să o facem eficientă acum și să o păstrăm puternică și pe viitor.
                  

Antonella Sberna (ECR). – Signor Presidente, signor Commissario, onorevoli colleghi, oggi è una giornata importante per i nostri territori, per le nostre imprese e per i nostri cittadini.
                  

                     Un approccio innovativo ai fondi di coesione, dalla flessibilità alla semplificazione, fino a un'azione a misura di territorio.
                  

                     Oggi restituiamo alle regioni europee e ai cittadini il principale strumento per la crescita: una politica di coesione che non resta immobile davanti alle crisi, ma risponde in modo rapido e concreto alle richieste che arrivano dalle regioni, dalle città e anche dalle comunità locali.
                  

                     Competitività, casa, acqua, energia, decarbonizzazione, semplificazione: una programmazione che non si aggrappa al passato, ma sceglie di affrontare le sfide con coraggio; che ha la lucidità di rendersi flessibile quando il contesto lo richiede; che agisce nel presente per gettare solide basi per il futuro.
                  

                     Così si inizia veramente a costruire l'Europa che vogliamo e che tanti hanno chiesto.
                  

                     Il Parlamento c'è, e lavorerà seriamente affinché si faccia presto e bene.
                  

Raquel García Hermida-Van Der Walle (Renew). – Voorzitter, commissaris, Europa moet fundamenteel veranderen. Maar laten we het fundament van Europa niet met het badwater weggooien. Dat fundament is onze solidariteit. De wetenschap dat we zo sterk zijn als onze zwakste schakel en zo rijk als onze armste regio. Dat is een ijzersterke logica, zoals ook onderschreven door Draghi en Letta. In onze armste regio's is de steun voor Europa het laagst en juist daar proberen Rusland en China hun invloed te kopen. Het cohesiebeleid is dus van cruciaal belang voor onze democratie en onze veiligheid.
                  

                     Het kan ook nog meer bijdragen aan andere strategische doelen. Dit gaat echter niet lukken wanneer we de tussentijdse evaluatie aangrijpen om geld te verslepen van de arme naar de rijke regio's. Dat is wat, naar ik vrees, gaat gebeuren met dit voorstel, of dat het risico lopen we toch. Daar maak ik me zorgen om. Bouwen aan een sterk Europa willen we allemaal, maar dat kan alleen als heel Europa meedoet.
                  

Christian Doleschal (PPE). – Herr Präsident, Herr Exekutiv-Vizepräsident, liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Als bayerischer Europaabgeordneter und regionalpolitischer Sprecher setze ich mich dafür ein, dass die Kohäsionspolitik mit ihren 392 Milliarden Euro gezielt dort wirkt, wo sie gebraucht wird. Ich begrüße die heute vorgestellte Standortbestimmung der Kommission. Es braucht Anpassungen in den Programmen, es braucht eine zukunftsfähige Kohäsionspolitik. Ich möchte aber dennoch noch einmal auf drei wichtige Schwerpunkte zu sprechen kommen.
                  

                     Unser Mittelstand ist das Rückgrat unserer Wirtschaft. Bayern und Deutschland sind deshalb stark, weil wir auf eine dezentrale Wirtschaftsstruktur setzen. Fördermittel dürfen nicht nur großen Unternehmen zugutekommen, sondern müssen auch den Mittelstand berücksichtigen. Stadt und Land müssen Hand in Hand gehen. Artikel 174 der EU-Verträge sieht vor, dass Regionen mit unterschiedlichen Entwicklungsständen, insbesondere ländliche Räume und Gebiete im industriellen Wandel, unterstützt werden müssen. Wenn wir über Stadtentwicklung sprechen, dann immer auch mit dem Blick auf die ländlichen Räume.
                  

                     Wir brauchen eine Politik, die Stabilität schafft. Die aktuellen Herausforderungen – von geopolitischen Spannungen bis zu wirtschaftlichen Umbrüchen – zeigen, wie wichtig eine gute und durchdachte Kohäsionspolitik ist. Ich bedanke mich für die bisherige Zusammenarbeit und hoffe auf gute weitere Beratungen.
                  

Carla Tavares (S&D). – Senhor Presidente, Senhor Ministro, Senhor Comissário, a política de coesão é historicamente um eixo essencial para a implementação das prioridades da União Europeia. É a política de coesão que traz ao terreno a União Europeia e mantém a Europa próxima e visível aos cidadãos. É a maior política de proximidade que temos. Mas, para o seu sucesso, necessita de estabilidade e previsibilidade.
                  

                     Sabemos que as prioridades europeias podem mudar rapidamente. Vimos isso no passado com a COVID ou com a crise energética. Temos agora pela frente novas e urgentes prioridades, como a defesa ou a competitividade europeia, para as quais são precisas verbas e investimentos avultados.
                  

                     Em momentos de urgência, todas as políticas da União devem ser chamadas a contribuir para as novas prioridades.
                  

                     A política de coesão fará, como sempre tem feito, o seu papel no alinhamento com as novas exigências e as despesas com a defesa não podem ser efetuadas à custa das despesas sociais e ambientais, nem podem conduzir a uma redução do financiamento da política de coesão, que provou o seu valor ao longo do tempo.
                  

                     São os Estados-Membros que conhecem o terreno e as suas necessidades e devem decidir como gerir os seus envelopes financeiros e fazer a articulação com as prioridades nacionais. Não podemos esvaziar a política de coesão por decreto ou com cortes cegos.
                  

(A oradora aceita responder a uma pergunta ‘cartão azul’)


Ana Miranda Paz (Verts/ALE),
Pergunta segundo o procedimento ‘cartão azul’
                        . – Senhora Deputada Tavares, é portuguesa, eu sou galega e temos dois territórios em comum que queremos que tenham muitos fundos europeus e muita política de coesão.
                  

                     Agora, temos a iniciativa do BRIDGE for Europe, que vai ser aprovada em breve, e trabalhámos muito para essa conexão entre Portugal e a Galiza: de comboio, nas lutas contra os incêndios, na mobilidade.
                  

                     Como vê esse tipo de políticas transfronteiriças?
                  

Carla Tavares (S&D),
Resposta segundo o procedimento ‘cartão azul’
                        . – As políticas transfronteiriças são absolutamente essenciais para reforçarmos a coesão entre os 27 Estados-Membros.
                  

                     Aliás, na proposta de quadro financeiro plurianual, que está neste momento em discussão e a receber os contributos das diversas comissões, tivemos oportunidade, numa das suas alíneas, de referir isso mesmo: a ligação entre os territórios. O aprofundar o transfronteiriço e reforçar as suas ligações é absolutamente essencial para o fortalecimento da União, nomeadamente em matérias como é o caso da mobilidade e o caso dos nossos territórios, que bastante nos diz respeito.
                  

Elsi Katainen (Renew). – Arvoisa puhemies, hyvä komissaari, muuttuneen geopoliittisen tilanteen takia myös koheesiopolitiikkaan kohdistuu ihan ymmärrettävästi kovia uudistamispaineita. On kuitenkin tärkeää, että EU tavoittelee edelleen alueiden hyvinvointia, kehityserojen tasaamista ja läheisyysperiaatteen toteutumista. Ne jo itsessään edistävät turvaa, rauhaa ja vakautta.
                  

                     Koheesiopolitiikan pitää olla vaikuttavaa ja alueiden erilaiset tarpeet huomioivaa. Alueiden kilpailukykyyn, infraan ja yrittäjyyden tukemiseen on panostettava vahvasti. Valitettavasti maiden sisäistä eriytymistä tapahtuu yhä ja siihen on koheesiopolitiikan toimin entistä vahvemmin myös puututtava.
                  

                     Venäjän hyökkäyssodan vuoksi myös itäiset raja-alueemme ansaitsevat erityishuomiota. Kiitoksia komissaarille tästä, sillä oikein kohdennetulla koheesiopolitiikalla ja varautumisella on iso merkitys koko Euroopan turvallisuudelle. Eurooppa on älykkäämpi ja turvallisempi, jos politiikan toimet huomioivat yhtä lailla energiasiirtymän ja koulutuksen tarpeet. Siksikin koheesiopolitiikan roolia sen perinteisessä mielessä ei tule heikentää. Siis yksinkertaistamiselle ja tehostamiselle kyllä, mutta heikentämisille ei.
                  

Elena Nevado del Campo (PPE). – Señor presidente, señor comisario, el examen intermedio de la política de cohesión es el momento para aprovechar las lecciones aprendidas, hacer más accesibles los fondos y abordar las amenazas. Los retos exigen tomar decisiones que estén a la altura.
                  

                     Sin embargo, no podemos dejar de lado la cuestión de cómo quiere Europa seguir estando en el terreno. Para que la Unión preserve su presencia en el terreno sin mermar su capacidad de actuación, es clave que siga invirtiendo los fondos en aquellas regiones para las que fueron destinados, respetando la labor de las administraciones locales y regionales en su diseño y en su ejecución.
                  

                     Buscar la convergencia puede lograrse por muchas vías, con proyectos capaces de atender a varias prioridades al mismo tiempo, proyectos que refuercen la competitividad, la seguridad, la conectividad, el bienestar social o la gestión del agua, como se ha dicho.
                  

                     Los medios deben servir al fin. El fin último debe seguir siendo promover la convergencia, porque esa es la Europa que valoran los ciudadanos. Confiamos en usted.
                  

(La oradora acepta responder a una pregunta formulada con arreglo al procedimiento de la ‘tarjeta azul’)


Raquel García Hermida-Van Der Walle (Renew),
pregunta de ‘tarjeta azul’
                        . – Me alegra saber que seguimos en la misma línea sobre el destino final de los fondos de cohesión, que deben contribuir a la cohesión territorial, social y económica dentro de la Unión Europea.
                  

                     Quería preguntarle, en concreto, sobre los intentos de centralización de la política de cohesión. Usted viene de una región que seguramente tiene mucho acceso directo a fondos. La mía también. Me gustaría saber si podemos trabajar juntas para mantener ese acceso directo de nuestras ciudades y nuestras regiones a los fondos de cohesión, sin que sean centralizados en todos los Estados miembros.
                  

Elena Nevado del Campo (PPE),
respuesta de ‘tarjeta azul’
                        . – Muchas gracias por la pregunta, señora García Hermida. Por supuesto que podemos trabajar juntas en esto. Hemos defendido también desde nuestro grupo la necesidad de respetar el principio del paternariado y el principio multinivel. El papel de las regiones y de las entidades locales es clave en la política de cohesión para conseguir esa convergencia.
                  

                     Su territorio y el mío, Extremadura, siguen necesitando esos fondos para poder competir en igualdad de condiciones que el resto de la Unión Europea.
                  

                     Y, por lo tanto, claro que nos vamos a encontrar en esta lucha.
                  

Estelle Ceulemans (S&D). – Monsieur le Président, chers collègues, il semble que les discussions actuelles sur l'avenir de la politique de cohésion soient à nouveau l'occasion pour certains de tenter de fragiliser les politiques sociales européennes. La politique de cohésion représente un tiers du budget européen. Elle est la principale politique d'investissement de long terme et porte sur des investissements sociaux, économiques et territoriaux. Elle est inscrite dans les traités pour réduire les inégalités entre les régions tout en créant des solidarités entre les territoires. Elle n'a pas vocation à être un instrument de gestion de crise. Son objectif n'est pas de répondre à des urgences conjoncturelles et encore moins de couvrir des besoins d'investissement pour l'industrie de la défense, pour lesquels il faut aller chercher d'autres moyens – d'autant que le futur cadre financier pluriannuel doit absolument réserver des budgets pour une véritable mise en œuvre du socle européen des droits sociaux et que le Fonds social européen plus doit rester un instrument fort et autonome pour renforcer la dimension sociale de l'Union européenne.
                  

Joachim Streit (Renew). – Herr Präsident, sehr geehrter Herr Exekutiv-Vizepräsident Fitto, liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Was kann man besser über die Kohäsionspolitik sagen, wie wenn man selbst Lokalpolitiker war? Es gibt für mich drei Schlüssel, und sie haben alle drei mit Verantwortung zu tun. Erstens, verantwortungsvolles Handeln. Zweitens, verantwortungsbewusste Entscheidungsfindung, und drittens, verantwortungsbewusstes Management. Wenn man sieht, dass beim Handeln 5,6 % des Geldes einfach so wegfließen, dann sind das bei einem EU-Haushalt von 190 Milliarden rund 10 Milliarden Euro; dem gilt es, einen Riegel vorzuschieben.
                  

                     Zweitens: verantwortungsbewusste Entscheidungsfindung. Wir müssen die Menschen vor Ort teilhaben lassen an unseren Entscheidungen, damit wir besser eingestellt sind auf die Bedingungen vor Ort. Und drittens: Die Kenntnis der Örtlichkeit ist die Seele des Dienstes. Gelder müssen auch direkt in Regionen fließen und nicht den Umweg über den Bundesstaat oder über die Landesstaaten nehmen. Deshalb, sehr geehrter Herr Exekutiv-Vizepräsident Fitto, darf ich Sie recht herzlich nach Deutschland einladen, nach Rheinland-Pfalz, in meine Heimat, in die Eifel, und ich würde mich freuen, wenn Sie dieser Einladung folgen.
                  

Jacek Protas (PPE). – Panie Przewodniczący, panie Komisarzu! Mówiąc o przeglądzie polityki spójności, chciałbym dzisiaj zwrócić uwagę na jeden bardzo ważny aspekt, a mianowicie konieczność odejścia od sztywnych ram koncentracji tematycznej. Potrzeby rozwojowe, bariery hamujące wzrost gospodarczy, deficyty społeczne są bardzo różne w krajach i regionach Unii Europejskiej.
                  

                     Nasze regiony różnią się od siebie, czasem diametralnie. Nie można zatem przykładać jednego szablonu dla całej Wspólnoty Europejskiej. To działanie nieracjonalne. Bardziej elastyczne podejście pozwoli na uzyskanie lepszych i szybkich pożądanych efektów polityki spójności. Przyczyni się także do przyśpieszenia jej wdrażania. Apeluję zatem o większą elastyczność podczas przeglądu śródokresowego, zwłaszcza w podejściu do regionów graniczących z Rosją, Ukrainą i Białorusią, a także o uwzględnienie moich wniosków podczas planowania nowej polityki spójności po 2027 roku.
                  

Hannes Heide (S&D). – Herr Präsident, Herr Exekutiv-Vizepräsident! Kohäsion ist und bleibt Herzstück der Europapolitik – eine Erfolgsgeschichte der Europäischen Union. Kohäsion ist Zusammenhalt und mehr als ein Akt der Solidarität: ein Gewinn für alle, auch für sogenannte Nettozahler wie Österreich, weil das eingesetzte Geld mehrfach zurückkommt.
                  

                     Damit die Kohäsionspolitik noch effizienter wirken kann, ist eine zielsichere, unbürokratische, rasche und erleichterte Umsetzung unbedingt notwendig. Die Menschen müssen auch erfahren, wer wofür welche finanziellen Mittel erhält. Es kann nicht sein, dass in jenen Regionen, wo die Europäische Union das meiste Geld einsetzt und die Bürgerinnen und Bürger direkt profitieren, die Akzeptanz der EU so niedrig ist, weil den Leuten das alles nicht bewusst ist.
                  

                     Und es muss auch klar sein: Neue Prioritäten wie Verteidigung erfordern neue Finanzierungsquellen. Kein Geld für Regierungen, die europäische Werte untergraben und rechtsstaatliche Prinzipien nicht einhalten. Und es sind Investitionen in Kultur, die den höchsten sozioökonomischen Effekt erzielen.
                  

Catch-the-eye procedure


Nikolina Brnjac (PPE). – Poštovani predsjedavajući, povjereniče, danas ne raspravljamo samo o srednjoročnoj reviziji, nego i o budućnosti kohezijske politike. Ona mora biti jasno usmjerena prema rješavanju problema priuštivog stanovanja, demografskoj krizi te gospodarskom razvoju naših regija. Ako želimo da se naše regije ne razvijaju, ako želimo depopulaciju, onda nema ulaganja u kohezijsku politiku, ali sigurna sam da to nije politika niti smjer ove Europske komisije. Ako želimo sada povećati ulaganja u priuštivo stanovanje kroz kohezijsku politiku, omogućite izmjenu Common Provisions Regulation kôd 126, Prilog I., gdje je sadašnji klimatski utjecaj na priuštivo stanovanje 0, a priuštio stanovanje je klimatski relevantna investicija. Stoga tim potezom odmah utječete na korištenje kohezije za stanovanje. Koheziju moramo fleksibilizirati, a to znači da ona služi našim gospodarstvenicima, našim poljoprivrednicima i u konačnici našim građanima.
                  

Rosa Serrano Sierra (S&D). – Señor presidente, señor comisario, hablar de una Europa fuerte y competitiva es hablar de reducir las desigualdades económicas, sociales y territoriales. Trabajar por una Europa resiliente es también trabajar para que todas y cada una de las regiones alcancen su potencial máximo, porque esa competitividad de la que tanto hablamos no puede ser un fin, sino una herramienta que ayude a mejorar la vida de los ciudadanos. La política de cohesión sigue siendo nuestra mejor respuesta. Por eso, esta revisión tiene que dar lugar a una política moderna y reforzada que ponga a las personas en el centro.
                  

                     Señor comisario, vemos cómo se añaden prioridades políticas a la agenda. Es evidente que los desafíos mundiales son cada vez más complejos, pero en algunos lugares los problemas siguen siendo los mismos. Nuestras regiones, sobre todo las rurales, necesitan inversiones en conectividad o en servicios básicos que agonizan. Díganos cómo va a garantizar que la futura política de cohesión siga dando respuestas a las necesidades de nuestros territorios y que la gestión reserve la voz de los entes locales y regionales.
                  

Ana Miranda Paz (Verts/ALE). – Senhor Presidente, Senhor Comissário, fala-se muito pouco da falta de mecanismos europeus para o controlo de gastos e a boa execução dos fundos.
                  

                     Na Galiza, o meu país, 50 % dos fundos europeus não foram executados em 2022 e isso já vem de anos atrás. Estamos acostumados a reprogramações interessadas do Governo galego, sempre em função de interesses partidários e não do meu povo. O Conselho de Contas da Galiza tem pedido em inúmeras ocasiões ao Governo galego que melhore o grau de colaboração e transparência.
                  

                     De facto, isso não é só um problema galego, é um problema europeu. Os controlos documentais não foram criados para detetar erros nas despesas. Por isso, deve fazer mais auditorias no terreno para verificar o cumprimento das regras, Senhor Comissário. A Comissão deve fazer auditorias suficientes sobre a execução dos fundos pelos Estados-Membros. Não sou eu que o digo, é o Tribunal de Contas Europeu. Pelo contrário, permite-se a esses Estados-Membros reutilizar essas correções em projetos adicionais.
                  

Diana Iovanovici Șoșoacă (NI). – Domnule președinte, politica de coeziune: ce cuvânt globalist! Într-adevăr, trebuie să vedem și ce se întâmplă în țările în care avem acești bani. În România avem la putere de 35 de ani aceiași oameni care fură, fură inclusiv banii europeni. De aceea avem și o foarte mare birocrație. Nu știu dacă știți, dar fondurile europene se dau în România pe pile, doar dacă ești de la socialiști-democrați sau de la liberali.
                  

                     Mai mult decât atât, se fură. Doamna Kövesi de la Parchetul European ar trebui să investigheze aceste lucruri. Dar ce să vezi? Astăzi ați votat la Curtea de Conturi o persoană care este acuzată de furt și face parte din guvernul socialist-democrat, pe care dumneavoastră l-ați ajutat să ne anuleze candidatura mie, să încerce să distrugă partidul pe care îl conduc. Știți că avem școli care nu au toalete, iar toaletele școlilor în România sunt în curte? Știți că avem copii care s-au înecat în toalete? Asta nu știți? Vă spun eu.
                  

Francisco José Millán Mon (PPE). – Señor presidente, la política de cohesión es un pilar fundamental de la Unión Europea. Es esencial para reducir las divergencias entre países y regiones. En Galicia, mi región, por ejemplo, los fondos de cohesión nos han permitido modernizar nuestra economía y mejorar mucho nuestras infraestructuras. Y Galicia y su Gobierno son un modelo en la ejecución de fondos europeos.
                  

                     Con vistas a la política de cohesión para después de 2027, quiero compartir dos ideas.
                  

                     En primer lugar, debemos mantener la asignación presupuestaria para la política de cohesión en un nivel similar al actual. Es cierto que en estos momentos otras prioridades de la Unión acaparan los titulares, pero estas prioridades no deberán perjudicar la política de cohesión. De lo contrario, podríamos obstaculizar el desarrollo equilibrado y armónico de la Unión y de sus Estados y regiones.
                  

                     Y, en segundo lugar, tenemos que preservar el rol de las regiones en el diseño e implementación de la cohesión. En esta misma línea se manifestó el Consejo la pasada semana, y es que la centralización sería un error. Desgraciadamente, lo hemos visto en España con el fracaso en la implementación de los fondos Next Generation EU.
                  

                     Los Gobiernos regionales conocen de primera mano las necesidades de sus regiones. Este conocimiento hay que aprovecharlo.
                  

Juan Fernando López Aguilar (S&D). – Señor presidente, señor vicepresidente Fitto, ¿sabe que la política de cohesión es seguramente, junto con el derecho fundamental a la libre circulación, el activo más preciado de la integración europea? Si necesita reforma, en ningún caso es para acabar con su gestión compartida, con su enfoque territorial y con su gobernanza multinivel.
                  

                     Seguramente necesita reforma, para empezar, para incrementar sus recursos en el próximo marco financiero plurianual y para permitir además agilizar su gestión para atender a catástrofes naturales, que son cada vez más frecuentes. Pero, sobre todo, necesita reforma para impulsar la dimensión social de la cohesión en la política regional, que es absolutamente sensible, particularmente para las regiones más vulnerables y las regiones ultraperiféricas. Y no digamos para asegurar la inclusión social: introducir una política de vivienda a escala europea que dé esperanzas a las nuevas generaciones y también, por supuesto, garantizar una política social que siga siendo el principal motor de legitimación de la integración europea.
                  

Paulo Do Nascimento Cabral (PPE). – Senhor Presidente, Senhor Vice-Presidente Executivo, a política de coesão é a maior política de investimentos na União Europeia e beneficia, direta ou indiretamente, todos os Estados-Membros e regiões.
                  

                     Fomos confrontados com a necessidade do encerramento do quadro financeiro plurianual anterior com o PRR, com o quadro financeiro atual e também com uma crise inflacionista, com a pandemia de COVID e a guerra na Ucrânia, que criou disrupção nas cadeias de abastecimento de matérias-primas e mão de obra.
                  

                     Por isso, a baixa taxa de execução não pode ser uma responsabilidade apenas dos Estados-Membros e os 6 % não são, de certeza, o resultado do insucesso da política, bem pelo contrário.
                  

                     Vejo com satisfação que esta revisão intercalar permite reduzir a complexidade e a burocracia e aumenta aqui o princípio da confiança nos Estados-Membros para poder desenvolver a política de coesão numa forma mais adaptada com estes novos pilares.
                  

                     Destaco o sucesso dos Açores, que lidera a taxa de execução dos fundos europeus de Portugal 2030, que demonstra que uma gestão descentralizada multinível é fundamental para o bom sucesso desta política e realço também a ideia de termos aqui uma nova estratégia para as regiões ultraperiféricas, anunciada no documento, e que espero que seja muito mais próxima e que permita construir um programa POSEI-Transportes para a questão da competitividade e a descarbonização das acessibilidades.
                  

Maria Grapini (S&D). – Domnule președinte, domnule comisar, coeziunea, politica de coeziune, ține Europa unită. Dacă nu înțelegem acest lucru – și da, v-ați propus acum să modernizați, dar, domnule comisar, cred că ar trebui să existe un exercițiu al Comisiei, să se uite la impact, pentru că am avut mereu bani alocați pentru politica de coeziune și totuși, disparitățile regionale există: diferența între rural și urban, diferența între zonele depărtate de centrele statelor membre.
                  

                     Vă întreb: știți dacă aplicați și criteriul geografic atunci când se dau fondurile de coeziune? Pentru că am avut experiența unui fond strategic de investiții la care am cerut criterii geografice, s-a pus primul venit, primul servit și toți banii s-au concentrat în patru cinci state și a creat o diferență între statele membre.
                  

                     De aceea, eu cred că modernizarea trebuie să țină cont de câteva criterii. Pe de o parte, criteriul geografic ca într-adevăr să diminuăm aceste disparități regionale, dar și eficiența cheltuirii banilor, pentru că este important să vedem ce se întâmplă cu 100 de euro cheltuiți. De aceea, criteriile pe care văd eu că ar trebui să le puneți sunt cele legate și de eficiență, și de criterii geografice.
                  

(End of catch-the-eye procedure)


Raffaele Fitto,
Executive Vice-President of the Commission. – Mr President, Members, I thank you for your valuable contribution to this important discussion. I listened closely to your proposal and I think that it's important to clarify some points.
First of all, I am here to defend the relaunch to work in favour for cohesion policy. I was president of one region that used the resources of cohesion, I was Minister of Cohesion and I was a member of the REGI Committee for three mandates. I know well this policy and my goal is to defend the relaunch of this policy, not other ideas and other goals.
Today, we approved the communication and legislative change. In this communication, we have a lot of answers to your questions. For example, the role of the cities with an important part about the agenda for the cities, the internal rural areas, islands and outermost regions with the strategy for these important matters. Eastern border regions, I said, and this is, in our opinion, an important priority with a new approach. We didn't provide any cut. I want to be clear about this because I listened to this. Any cut or transfer of funds in other parts – there isn't. It's important to clarify this point, but an analysis of the new EU priorities that could be utilised. It is a voluntary choice. I want to underline this point. This is a voluntary choice, not a decision of the European Commission. This is a voluntary choice of the Member States that take into account the specific needs of the territories. And I asked for this reason to the Chair of the REGI Committee to have an exchange of view next week to discuss immediately this proposal. Then there will be some Member States that will use for defence and the other Member States that will use them for housing, for water, for energy transition, for competitiveness, for nothing. Without any change is possible – because it's a voluntary choice.
This is our position, and I think that it's important to have a right approach, because why should it not be possible to give the opportunity to use some fund for the defence exactly as the other priorities that we said in this proposal. Cohesion policy is – and will remain – a fundamental component of the current and the next MFF, where key principle of cohesion policy must remain, like shared management, multi-level governance, the partnership principle and a place-based approach. But we need to modernise and relaunch this policy. Redesign it and put the new priorities inside the cohesion policy.
I often hear from some Member States and regions I visit that the cohesion funding is a way – sometimes the only way – for citizens to connect with Europe. And I agree about this. This is an opportunity to increase this connection.
I will continue my dialogue with Member States' representatives across Europe, all stakeholders at all levels, and with this Parliament and the European Committee of Regions. I will continue to work with you during the entire process as we prepare the next MFF. Moreover, my commitment is to design and implement the policy in close partnership with the national, regional and local authorities – because the regions shall remain at the centre and involved in this process. To shape this future effectively, we must work together and build one single voice, not to defend the cohesion policy, but to relaunch and modernise cohesion policy. This is our challenge and I count on you.

Adam Szłapka,
President-in-Office of the Council. – Mr President, Mr Commissioner, honourable Members, just a few remarks on behalf of the Council.
Thank you very much for this valuable exchange on the ways cohesion policy can be updated to the newly emerged challenges and made more flexible in order to react more quickly and without unnecessary administrative burdens to a fast-changing world.
This can already be done in the current programming period, without postponing our effort to the upcoming debate on the next MFF.
I am looking forward to a fruitful cooperation with the Parliament in our common effort to ensure that cohesion policy keeps contributing to European competitiveness, and to achieving the strategic goals and priorities of the European Union.

President. – The debate is closed.
14.   Safeguarding the access to democratic media, such as Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty (debate)

President. – The next item is the debate on a statement by the Vice-President of the Commission/High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy on safeguarding the access to democratic media, such as Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty (2025/2630(RSP)).

Marta Kos,
Member of the Commission, on behalf of the Vice-President of the Commission / High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy
, – Dear President, honourable Members of the European Parliament, for 70 years Radio Free Europe and Radio Liberty have done exactly what they say on the tin: they have spoken of a free Europe and the value in liberty. They have spread hope for those under the fierce grip of state-controlled media and censorship.
They did this in two ways: one, by acting as a surrogate media, providing news for countries that censored the press and two, by cross-reporting, meaning that the radios – as they were affectionately called – told Poles what the Hungarians were doing and told Estonians what the Kazakhs were up to. And for 70 years, by these two methods, the journalists of Radio Free Europe and Radio Liberty have empowered listeners to make informed choices, to know that they have free will and that their free will matters.
For those who were living in countries occupied by the Soviet Union or in communist countries like Yugoslavia, where I grew up, US funding for Radio Free Europe kept our ears and hearts open to another life. US funding was, as the US campaign was called, a 'Crusade for Freedom', but the world is unfortunately experiencing a decline in freedom. As Freedom House underlined in a report this year, not even the most powerful democratic states will be able to guarantee the freedom and prosperity of their people should the current trends continue.
Do you think people want their freedom less today than those who were trapped in the communist cage? Has the value of freedom declined? Does the world need fewer advocates for freedom? Of course not. With more unmediated content on social media, more threats to the information environment, journalism is more vital today than ever before. As a former journalist, who experienced the fall of the Berlin Wall in Berlin, I speak from my own experience.
The US court's decisions on this year's funding to Radio Free Europe will be key for Radio Free Europe and Radio Liberty to continue operating, and this is key for us. We need to protect Radio Free Europe and Radio Liberty. If we don't, we hand a gift to autocrats the world over. The world needs free journalists like Radio Free's Alsu Kurmasheva, who was imprisoned by Russia under false accusations. It needs the European Union to provide more emergency support to journalists at risk, not less.
We have helped over 12 000 journalists over the last decade from strengthening their legal rights to funding investigative journalism and supporting NGOs that monitor press freedom. The European Endowment for Democracy will continue supporting independent media in restrictive environments, or in countries like Moldova, where Russian interference is constant and comes with a lot of funding.
The world needs the European Union to be a refuge for independent media – including from Russia and Belarus – so journalists and human rights defenders can continue their work, holding their political and business elites to account and exposing corruption. And it needs us all to call our countries for preventing independent journalists from simply doing their jobs.
But in this world where freedom is slipping through our fingers, it is clear we need to strengthen our approach to media freedom, including within the European Union. I will give you three examples of how.
First, through the European Media Freedom Act, which will apply in full as of August this year. This is not just a piece of legislation. It is our message to the world that Europe stands for free media. That in Europe, we fight to ensure journalists are not spied on while they do their work to unveil the truth. That in Europe, public media is not a prop for government propaganda, but a lifeline for democratic choice. The annual rule of law reports also provide important monitoring and recommendations on media freedom in the European Union and monitoring for enlargement countries.
Second, a free media needs critical readers and independent thinkers. It needs us to be active participants because we know a lie travels halfway around the world while the truth is getting its pants on. We know free speech is not the same as speech free from lies, and in a free liberal society we have to live with this. But we don't have to live without fighting against it. On the contrary, we must be curious and critical, always checking information and questioning what we get. We have to educate ourselves. We have to be critical of information sources, and we have to be able to recognise where media is free and where it is not.
Third, for a free media, we must deal more effectively with foreign information manipulation and interference (FIMI). FIMI is not just disinformation. It is not a communication issue. It is not 'my truth' versus 'your truth'. It is a hybrid war tactic and warrants a response to match how dangerous it is. We have to expose it, sanction those responsible and built up our own arsenal to fight back. This is what we are now working on and every journalist, knowingly or not, is also fighting FIMI by reporting on topics our adversaries want to be hushed up.
Honourable Members, in this House of democracy, let me quote American journalist Walter Cronkite: 'Freedom of the press is not just important to democracy, it is democracy.' But a free press is never a given. It is hard won and so very easily lost. Last year's report from Reporters Without Borders shows this all too clearly. If we want a free press, we have to fight for it and defend it every day.
But let me conclude with a simple truth and a message of hope. Even behind bars in Russian detention Alsu Kurmasheva underlined her resolve to find beauty and joy in the smallest things, and we see that in the letters she wrote. You can't stop a writer from writing, just as you cannot imprison a lust for life or a will to tell the truth. And that, honourable Members, is why freedom must and will prevail.

Sebastião Bugalho,
em nome do Grupo PPE. – Senhor Presidente, o não financiamento da ajuda externa norte-americana fez com que 1 300 000 deslocados na Ucrânia perdessem abrigo, com que 2 700 000 feridos de guerra perdessem assistência médica. São 4 milhões de ucranianos em 90 dias.
               

                  Em África, metade da população do Sudão dependia de programas alimentares oriundos da USAID. Hoje, são 25 milhões de pessoas que passam fome.
               

                  Este parlamento pode criticar, ignorar ou aplaudir os cortes na ajuda externa norte-americana, mas, caros colegas, não nos enganemos. Estes cortes afetarão as prioridades de todos nós, da segurança à agricultura, das fronteiras à saúde.
               

                  O não financiamento da Rádio Europa Livre não custa vidas, mas impacta-nos enquanto europeus. Faz parte da nossa História e da vida de alguns de nós, aqui sentados, que atrás da Cortina de Ferro viram os seus avós sintonizar aquela frequência na busca de uma esperança que vinha em forma de som.
               

                  A caneta é mais forte do que a espada, costuma dizer-se, mas o som não é uma arma menos poderosa. Não é por acaso que aqueles que nos querem mais vulneráveis no nosso futuro também nos querem menos conscientes do nosso passado. Uma Europa com memória é uma Europa que não esquece o que já ultrapassou.
               

                  Senhor Presidente, eu não duvido, por um segundo, que a minha geração também será capaz de o fazer, lembrando as palavras de quem uma vez disse:
               

                  'We shall pay any price, bear any burden, support any friend, oppose any foe for the success and survival of liberty, and for Radio Liberty, too'.
               

Nils Ušakovs,
on behalf of the S&D Group. – Mr President, distinguished Commissioner, dear colleagues, apart from Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty, there are thousands of independent media outlets operating across the European Union in the Russian language. This means they are owned by EU citizens, they employ EU citizens and they produce content for Europeans, but they do so in Russian and they have no connection to Kremlin.
The best way to simultaneously defend our values, freedom of speech and liberty, and also combating disinformation and propaganda, is to establish a transparent and effective support mechanism for free media operating across Europe and sometimes outside Europe in third country languages, starting probably with Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty. Unfortunately, different Member States take different approaches. The current Latvian Government, for example, is actively undermining its own public broadcasting in Russian, which effectively serves local linguistic minorities for decades. That is why a united European approach and regulation are urgently needed.

António Tânger Corrêa,
em nome do Grupo PfE. – Senhor Presidente, Senhora Comissária, antes de dizer algumas palavras, gostava de dizer o grande orgulho que sempre tive na minha mãe por trabalhar na Rádio RARET, em Portugal, que era uma entidade financiada pelos americanos e que transmitia para a Cortina de Ferro os ideais de liberdade, os ideais que hoje nos fazem mover na Europa e na Europa que é nossa.
               

                  A liberdade de expressão não é um detalhe da democracia. É o seu coração. E neste momento, dentro da União Europeia, esse coração está a ser atacado.
               

                  Chamemos as coisas pelos nomes: há uma ofensiva coordenada contra a verdade livre.
               

                  São os ‘fact-checkers oficiais’, são as ‘narrativas autorizadas’, são as ‘diretivas de segurança’. Tudo embalado numa linguagem muito bonita, mas a verdade dos factos é que apenas, e só, podem ter um caminho, uma direção: é a dos amigos, porque os outros, que são contra, que são dissidentes, são perseguidos de uma forma ou de outra, como se tem visto nos últimos tempos.
               

                  Portanto, acho que estamos no mau caminho. Acho que a democracia a uma só voz não é democracia. É autoritarismo, é totalitarismo e é contra isso que nós temos de lutar.
               

                  Acabar com a censura disfarçada. Acabar com o controlo pelo dinheiro. Deixar a verdade competir. Deixar a dissidência viver.
               

                  É por aí que temos de ir, são esses os princípios que têm de nos nortear, porque só onde há liberdade para discordar, há liberdade para viver em democracia.
               

Małgorzata Gosiewska,
w imieniu grupy ECR. – Panie Przewodniczący! Fundamentem demokracji i swobód obywatelskich są wolne media. Politycy europejscy dyskutują o konieczności ich wsparcia, jak w przypadku Radia Wolna Europa, lecz ich działania o tym nie świadczą. Przykłady, Telewizja Biełsat – środek przekazu dostarczający rzetelnej informacji Białorusinom, ale też Ukraińcom i Rosjanom. Do niedawna niezależna. Dziś to jedynie redakcja w strukturach polskiej telewizji publicznej nielegalnie przejętej przez rząd Donalda Tuska. Sekcja Białoruska Radia Wnet, Białoruskie portale, Karta 97, Nexta, Radio Racja, Radio Svoboda. Drastycznie ograniczono im środki. Te media to okno na wolny świat dla Białorusinów. Przejęcie ciężaru finansowania przez Unię to tylko kwestia szybkich i zdecydowanych decyzji, Szanowni Państwo. Uderzacie w Amerykanów za cięcia finansowe mediów. Tymczasem jest to przede wszystkim zadanie dla Europy. To właśnie za walkę o przynależność do europejskiej wspólnoty spotykają Białorusinów prześladowania, tortury czy więzienie. Czas, aby wreszcie wziąć za to odpowiedzialność, Panie i Panowie Europejczycy.
               

Irena Joveva,
v imenu skupine Renew. – Gospod predsednik! Združene države Amerike so se odločile zadati hud udarec liberalni demokraciji z ukinitvijo financiranja neodvisnih medijev.
               

                  Radio Svobodna Evropa, ampak tudi Voice of America, ruska Meduza, beloruski Belsat in mnogo drugih, ravno tam, kjer to ljudje najbolj potrebujejo. Zakaj ZDA počnejo vse to, kar počnejo? S takimi vprašanji, čeprav so na mestu, ne rešimo nič.
               

                  Poskusimo tako. Kako zapolniti vakuum, ko se za demokratične ideje ne moremo več zanašati na ZDA? Nekateri veliko govorite o vojski, celo o orožju, toda prepogosto se neupravičeno spregleda precej učinkovitejša, mehka moč.
               

                  Sovjetska zveza je padla brez metka, s pomočjo radia Svobodna Evropa. Zato je v interesu Evropske unije, seveda, podpreti te neodvisne medije. Ampak poglejmo tudi onkraj tiska, na splet, kjer se vedno bolj oblikuje javno mnenje.
               

                  Izgubljamo informacijsko bitko proti avtoritarnim režimom. Ne samo zunaj EU. Omenila sem Voice of America, ali se še spomnimo Voice of Europe?
               

                  Moramo se odločneje boriti proti lažnim narativam. Morda smo izgubili zaveznika, ampak naše najmočnejše orožje ostaja demokracija.
               

Virginijus Sinkevičius,
on behalf of the Verts/ALE Group. – Mr President, dear Commissioner, dear colleagues, in times of rising disinformation and geopolitical tensions, independent media is not just important, it is essential. Free and fearless journalism is one of the strongest foundations of a healthy democracy. It gives voice to the voiceless, holds power to account, and ensures that citizens have access to truth.
That is why the recent situation faced by Radio Free Europe (RFE) is so alarming. Earlier this month, the Trump Administration abruptly moved to cut RFE's funding and dismantle the agency that oversees its operations. And while this happened outside the EU, its message echoes loudly here. When a respected outlet, like RFE, can be threatened so easily, we must ask ourselves, who is next? And what are we doing to protect the space for independent journalism within and beyond our borders?
We must ensure that RFE and other essential outlets have access to long-term, stable funding, including from the European Union. This is not just about filling a gap, but about preparing for a future where transatlantic support for independent media can no longer be taken for granted. Let's support those who risk everything to report the truth, not only with words, but with action, funding and solidarity. Because defending the media is, first of all, defending democracy.

Milan Uhrík,
za skupinu ESN. – Vážený pán predsedajúci, prosím vás, tam treba pomáhať farmárom na Slovensku bojujúcim so slintačkou a krívačkou, a nie platiť zbytočných darmožráčov z akože nezávislých médií. Viete, ja keď počujem to slovo nezávislé mainstreamové médiá, ja sa už len z toho smejem, pretože tie vaše mainstreamové médiá sú v skutočnosti opakom nezávislosti. Vy nezávislé názory umlčiavate a likvidujete, cenzúrujete sociálne siete, pokutujete spoločnosti, ktoré tú cenzúru zavádzať nechcú, zakazujete alternatívne médiá a akýkoľvek iný názor označíte za šírenie extrémizmu, dezinformácií alebo ruskej propagandy.
               

                  Prosím vás, akýmže nezávislým médiom je to Rádio Slobodná Európa?
               

President. – (reacting to an interruption by Helmut Brandstätter) Please don't interrupt the speaker.

Milan Uhrík,
za skupinu ESN. – Prosím vás, akýmže nezávislým médiom je to Rádio Slobodná Európa, ktoré bolo platené priamo vládou Spojených štátov amerických? Samotný Elon Musk, človek zo Spojených štátov amerických, hovorí: ‘Áno, vypnite ich! Európa je teraz slobodná, ak teda nepočítame tú dusivú byrokraciu. Nikto ich už nepočúva. Sú to len radikálni ľavicoví blázni, ktorí sa rozprávajú sami so sebou a pritom míňajú miliardu dolárov ročne z peňazí amerických daňových poplatníkov.’ A to teraz akože my máme platiť z našich európskych peňazí takéto veci? No rozhodne nie. Rozhodne nie. Čiže ja hovorím úplne jasne, nech ich vypnú.
               

Андрей Ковачев (PPE). – Г-н Председател, ще започна с примера на Свободна Европа от моята страна България. В България Свободна Европа започва излъчването на 11 август 1950 г. с предаването ‘Гласът на свободна България’. Аз израснах с радио Свободна Европа, слушайки тайно вкъщи от моето семейство. За мен то бе гласът на истината, от което научавахме какво се случва в комунистическа България и по света.
               

                  Искам тук и сега да благодаря на българите, работили в радио Свободна Европа преди падането на комунистическия режим в България. Ще изброя някои от тях: прекрасният Стефан Груев, автор на книгата за цар Борис Трети ‘Корона от тръни’, българските достойни дипломати в изгнание Евгени Силянов и Мильо Милев, д-р Милчо Неболиев, Любен Мутафов, Николай Калчев, Методи Захариев, Владимир Найденов, Кирил Панов, Христо Огнянов, Димитър Инкьов, Душко Петров, Владимир Костов, Румяна Узунова и не на последно място незабравими за поколения българи ще останат прочетените по радиото забранени в България ‘Задочни репортажи’ на Георги Марков, убит от режима с отрова посредством така нареченият български чадър.
               

                  На тях и на всички българи, които по времето на комунизма работиха в радио Свободна Европа, както и на всички други така наречени от комунистическия режим вражески радиостанции като Радио Горяни, Гласът на Америка, БиБиСи Лондон и Дойче веле дължим благодарност за службата в полза на свободата и справедливостта.
               

                  Смятам обаче сега, че Радио Свободна Европа, Радио Свобода трябва да се концентрира върху основната си мисия да продължат да предават обективна информация към държави, управлявани от комунистически, диктаторски, авторитарни и затворени режими извън Европейския съюз в полза на истината и поробените народи по света. Радио Свободна Европа и Радио Свобода не са обикновенна медия и не трябва да се превръщат в такава, а да служат на свободата там, където тя не съществува и където е опасно да кажеш истината.
               

Francisco Assis (S&D). – Senhor Presidente, Senhora Comissária, a União Europeia não vive apenas de políticas, de planos, de estratégias, de acordos, de regulamentos e de diretivas.
               

                  Uma união entre povos, como é a nossa, também precisa de símbolos e a dimensão simbólica da Europa tem sido secundarizada em benefício de outras prioridades. Ora, a Rádio Free Europe é um dos símbolos da identidade e da memória europeias, pois ela foi criada no pós-guerra para dar voz aos valores europeus, para ser uma luz para os povos que no Leste viviam sufocados por regimes totalitários comunistas, esmagados por símbolos postiços e por falsos ídolos.
               

                  Nos tempos sombrios que estamos outra vez a viver, a União Europeia não pode deixar que essa luz, que esse símbolo, se apague. É que os ventos que sopram do Leste — da Rússia, muito particularmente — são, outra vez, ventos contrários à liberdade e às democracias ocidentais.
               

                  A Rádio Free Europe não é uma relíquia da Guerra Fria. É um símbolo da Europa livre por direito próprio e a União Europeia deve assumir, se for caso disso, o seu financiamento.
               

Hermann Tertsch (PfE). – Señor presidente, me acuerdo de cuando los socialistas todavía llamaban provocación a Radio Free Europa y a la Voice of America.
               

                  La llegada de Trump a la Casa Blanca no ha gustado ni a la Comisión ni a la mayoría menguante de este Parlamento. Su forma de acabar con el abuso del dinero público para hacer propaganda ideológica les gusta mucho menos. Y ahora pretenden utilizar dinero público europeo para seguir haciendo propaganda woke, en la que se gastaban los Estados Unidos miles de millones desde la época nefasta de Obama.
               

                  Yo conocí la grandeza de Radio Free Europe y Radio Liberty y de la Voice of America cuando fui corresponsal detrás del telón de acero. Grandes emisoras para combatir el comunismo, pero no para promocionarlo, no para difundir propaganda antinacional de ideología de género y demás productos tóxicos del progresismo, del socialismo y del comunismo.
               

                  La Unión Europea no tiene por qué financiar medios que encima llama independientes cuando son un aparato de propaganda inmenso para difundir ideología nefasta del progresismo irracional y defender los intereses de esa mayoría decadente que se ha bunkerizado en la Unión Europea contra los intereses de los ciudadanos europeos y de las naciones.
               

Alexandr Vondra (ECR). – Pane předsedající, dámy a pánové, Rádio Svobodná Evropa je součástí naší historie, ale i mého osobního života. Z jeho rozhlasových vln se v komunistickém režimu širší česká veřejnost mohla dovídat o aktivitách odpůrců komunistického režimu i věznění nás disidentů. Ale nejenom to. V červenci 1989 jsem jejímu redaktorovi propašoval nahrávku legendárního tragikomického projevu posledního vůdce KSČ Miloše Jakeše, který si na vnitrostranickém mítinku nejen pletl bojlery a brojlery, ale zároveň bezelstně přiznal: ‘Soudruzi, jsme sami jako kůl v plotě’. Svobodná Evropa to pak vysílala každý den, a tím naplnila nejenom svou misi v šíření svobody, ale i pomohla změně režimu. Dneska jsou okolnosti jiné, ale stále pomáhá šířit informace v Íránu, Rusku, Bělorusku. Buďme otevřeni možnosti financovat i ze zdrojů Evropské unie a najděme shodu, jak by ta podpora měla vypadat. Bude dobře, když to dokážeme.
               

Dan Barna (Renew). – Domnule președinte, când mergeam la școală în România comunistă, părinții îmi aminteau aproape zilnic să nu cumva să spun cuiva că ascultăm Europa Liberă, acel post de radio care ne oferea o fereastră spre lumea liberă în plină dictatură comunistă, acel post de radio care a informat poporul român că la Timișoara începuse în '89 o revoluție care a schimbat apoi întreaga țară. Nu credeam că voi ajunge să trăiesc ziua în care Europa Liberă și, în general, presa corectă, să se afle sub asediu, așa cum se întâmplă astăzi.
               

                  La Casa Albă, Associated Press este interzisă pentru că refuză să redenumească Golful Mexic. În schimb, o adunătură de figuranți din New Media este curtată ca să laude un președinte american cu simpatii autoritare. Unde este astăzi libertatea aceea de exprimare pe care o apărau conservatorii din SUA? Este alungată pe social media, îmi spune, doar că acolo accesul la libertate nu mai e deloc liber. E controlat de niște algoritmi în posesia unor miliardari gata să facă orice pentru bani și resurse.
               

                  Misiunea noastră, astăzi, este să apărăm și să susținem o presă corectă, nu să împiedicăm și să sancționăm manipularea de pe social media. Pentru că, doamnă comisar, umanitatea nu poate exista fără fapte reale și adevăr. Nu există adevăr alternativ, există doar adevăr.
               

Mary Khan (ESN). – Herr Präsident! Wissen Sie, in Deutschland steigt die Altersarmut, und Rentner, die ihr ganzes Leben lang gearbeitet haben, müssen jetzt Flaschen sammeln, und hier überlegt man, noch mehr Geld an ein vermeintlich unabhängiges Medium reinzupustern. Ist ja klar: Ist nicht ihr Geld – Deutschland ist der größte Finanzbückling hier in diesem Laden.
               

                  Und das letzte Mal, als die EU ein unabhängiges Medium auch finanziell unterstützt hat, da war es CORRECTIV mit knapp 400 000 Euro. Und wir alle wissen, was CORRECTIV letztendlich auch bei uns in Deutschland getan hat: Es wurde die Potsdamlüge kreiert.
               

                  Und wenn Ihr Medium ja so unabhängig ist, dann kann dieses Medium sich ja auch selbst finanzieren, so wie viele freie Medien bei uns in Deutschland, wie die Junge Freiheit, Kontrafunk usw. Die zeigen, wie wirkliche Meinungsvielfalt geht.
               

(Die Rednerin ist damit einverstanden, auf eine Frage nach dem Verfahren der ‘blauen Karte’ zu antworten.)


Tomáš Zdechovský (PPE),
otázka položená zvednutím modré karty. – Paní kolegyně, chci se Vás zeptat: Co je pro Vás svoboda projevu? Myslíte si, že by mělo existovat něco jako Rádio Svobodná Evropa, které vlastně změnilo komunistický režim ve východní Evropě? Nebo si myslíte, že ve státech, jako je Rusko, Írán nebo Čína, existuje svoboda slova?
               

Mary Khan (ESN),
Antwort auf eine Frage nach dem Verfahren der ‘blauen Karte’
                     . – Ich halte nicht viel davon, dass Medien jetzt von einem Europäischen Parlament finanziert werden sollen. Genauso wie ich es auch für falsch halte, dass wir in Deutschland den teuersten Rundfunk dieser Welt haben – 8 Milliarden Euro zahlen wir jährlich an Zwangsgebühren. 8 Milliarden Euro an ein Medium, das letztendlich nur noch dafür dient, um diese Regierung, vor allem denen als Bückling zu dienen.
               

Erik Kaliňák (NI). – Vážený pán predsedajúci, Rádio Slobodná Európa bolo od svojho vzniku koncipované ako americký nástroj antikomunistickej propagandy. Išlo o vplyvovú operáciu počas studenej vojny, ktorá bola financovaná priamo CIA. Preto považujem za absolútnu absurdnosť, že tu dnes, keď od nás je akýkoľvek komunistický režim vzdialený tisíce kilometrov, debatujeme o tom, či by Európa nemala prevziať financovanie projektu, ktorý na našom území šíril americkú a neskôr globalistiskú propagandu. To sme fakt až tak nesvojprávni v zahraničnej politike, že si ešte zafinancujeme aj vlastnú propagandu proti nám?
               

                  Áno, Donald Trump dal pred globalizmom prednosť Amerike a namiesto tajných vplyvových operácií používa tie najtvrdšie ekonomické páky. A my namiesto toho, aby sme sa tešili, že nadvláda americkej propagandy v Európe končí a sústredili sa na ochranu nášho priemyslu pred protekcionistickou politikou Donalda Trumpa, tu rozprávame, ako ďalej financovať americké vplyvové operácie. Boh ochraňuj Európu.
               

(Rečník súhlasil, že odpovie na otázku položenú zdvihnutím modrej karty)


Veronika Cifrová Ostrihoňová (Renew),
otázka položená zdvihnutím modrej karty. – Ak tomu teda správne rozumiem, pán Kaliňák, tak teda komunizmus bola propaganda alebo to, že sme mali komunizmus aj na Slovensku, to je propaganda? Alebo mal by sa vrátiť, keď hovoríte, že si financujeme – čomu teda úprimne ani v slovenčine nerozumiem – že si financujeme propagandistické mechanizmy? Máme sa teda vrátiť k režimu spred osemdesiateho deviateho? To je vaša idea toho, ako to má vyzerať? Máme sa vrátiť ku krajine bez slobodných médií?
               

Erik Kaliňák (NI),
odpoveď na otázku položenú zdvihnutím modrej karty. – Ak si myslíte, že slobodné médiá sú financované zo CIA, tak vám k tomu naozaj gratulujem. A propaganda, čo bola, bol napríklad rok 1956, keď práve toto rádio šírilo propagandu pre maďarských občanov, že v prípade, že skúsia protestovať, tak prídu zo západu im na pomoc, a nestalo sa tak a sami to uznali, že to bola úmyselná propaganda. Takže nie, nemyslím si, že slobodné médiá financuje CIA.
               

Ondřej Kolář (PPE). – Mr President, dear Commissioner, dear colleagues, I can see that the debate about freedom of speech and all the freedoms that we value and cherish can be pretty tough. I would say that the Radio Free Europe is a matter of the heart for people from Central and Eastern Europe and from the Balkans as well, because it served as a window into the free world for the people of countries that were under communist regimes and under communist and totalitarian suppression. And it serves as such a tool for us even today, not into the countries which are in Europe, but which are outside of Europe. Some of them are geographically in Europe, some of them are more distant.
For me, actually, this debate is not only about Radio Free Europe and how it's going to be financed. It's about our approach and relationship with the United States as such. The world is changing. We have a president of the United States who denies what the United States have been building for the last 80 years. He's stepping out from many, many things that we have achieved together, and the US is actually becoming an unreliable and unpredictable partner, and we must be ready for that. I think that it's time for Europe now to stand up and be the one who has the duty and knows that he has the duty to defend all the freedoms that we are talking about, and for that we must be proactive, determined and courageous.

Robert Biedroń (S&D). – Panie Przewodniczący! Pani Komisarz! Chciałem powiedzieć, przede wszystkim, słuchając tej debaty, że nie byłoby mnie dzisiaj tutaj, gdyby nie Radio Wolna Europa.
               

                  Pamiętam z opowieści mojej mamy, że kiedy na początku lat 80. Radio Wolna Europa było jednym z niewielu mediów, których mogliśmy w Polsce słuchać, wolnych mediów, moja mama dowiedziała się o rodzącym się ruchu Solidarności – największym w historii ruchu ludzi dobrej woli, którzy marzyli o życiu w wolnym kraju, w wolnej Polsce. I ci ludzie, ludzie Solidarności, słuchający właśnie Radia Europa, doprowadzili do tego, że dzisiaj żyję w wolnej Polsce, że dzisiaj Polska jest częścią Unii Europejskiej i polska flaga, podobnie jak flagi innych krajów, których społeczeństwa słuchały Radia Wolna Europa, mogą dzisiaj być na tej sali.
               

                  I to jest także nasz obowiązek. Unia Europejska nie może zostawić Białorusinów, Rosjan dobrej lub złej woli dyktatorów. Wolne media powinny także funkcjonować w tych krajach i to jest nasz obowiązek, żeby nie tylko je finansować, ale wspierać z każdej możliwej pozycji.
               

Virginie Joron (PfE). – Monsieur le Président, chers collègues, l'administration Trump veut arrêter les frais et stopper le financement de Radio Free Europe, un outil de propagande de la guerre froide – et il a raison. Cent quarante millions de dollars par an: comme Trump ne veut plus, vous voulez payer à sa place – avec notre argent, bien sûr. Pourquoi devrions-nous financer une vieille relique de la guerre froide alors que nos besoins nationaux exigent des investissements concrets? L'Union européenne, avec son obsession de contrôle et ses budgets inflationnistes, cherche à s'immiscer là où elle n'a pas sa place, sapant la souveraineté des nations – comme avec ces soi-disant vérificateurs d'informations, qui, en réalité, ne servent qu'à promouvoir le système européen, ici et à l'étranger.
               

                  Alors, aujourd'hui, vous voulez parler de la manière de préserver l'accès aux médias démocratiques. C'est un poisson d'avril? Vous étiez où pour vous offusquer de ceux qui voulaient fermer la chaîne CNews? Vous étiez où lors de la fermeture de C8, avec ses journalistes virés du jour au lendemain? Allez expliquer, en France, à la presse subventionnée qu'il faut recevoir équitablement l'opposition! Allez expliquer au peuple français que la justice politique empêche Marine Le Pen d'accéder à des élections!
               

                  Personne ne vous a donné mandat pour faire votre autopromotion à l'aide d'ONG politiques, et que ceux qui, ici, veulent investir dans une radio le fassent avec leur propre argent!
               

Rihards Kols (ECR). – Mr President, cear colleagues, Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty has been a pillar of democratic resilience since the Cold War, reaching into dark corners where propaganda thrives and truth is a threat. Today, it still does in Russia, Belarus, Iran, but also in EU candidate countries and even within the Union itself, where independent media remain under pressure. Recent developments in Washington expose how fragile its funding is. US support has been restored for now, but the long-term risk remains. And in that vacuum, authoritarian regimes gain ground. Europe must act, not out of nostalgia, but because democratic media are strategic assets in the fight against disinformation and authoritarian influence. Any EU support must be long-term, insulated from political shifts and conditional, not on content, but on clear goals, democratic values and impact. We either fund truth or let the others distort it.

Veronika Cifrová Ostrihoňová (Renew). – Vážený pán predsedajúci, ‘Volá stanica Slobodná Európa, ktorú spravujú vaši priatelia v slobodnom západnom svete. Cieľom nášho vysielania je poskytovať trvalý a spoľahlivý zdroj informácií.’ Takto znelo prvé hlásenie v roku 1950 do totalitného Československa, do krajiny, v ktorej som sa narodila aj ja.
               

                  Dnes je rok 2025 a svet vyzerá inak. Nehovorím spoza železnej opony, ale spoza tohto pultíka Európskeho parlamentu. Napriek tomu, že niektorým kolegom by sa možno tá železná opona bola páčila. Ja som za to vďačná, že som občiankou slobodného sveta. Spojené štáty, dlhodobý garant našej slobody, dnes čelia bezprecedentným časom a ja im držím palce, no zároveň vidím realitu. Táto debata nie je o Amerike, je o nás, o tom, že je čas prevziať zodpovednosť za náš vlastný osud a za spoločnosť, v ktorej chceme žiť.
               

                  Slobodné, nezávislé informácie pre občanov, ktorí k nim nemajú prístup, sú súčasťou tohto sveta. Je ňou ale aj to, že dnes už nestačí byť kdesi v závetrí. Úspešné krajiny sú dnes tie, ktoré náš priestor aktívne budujú a posilňujú. Spoluprácou, jasnou zahraničnou politikou a spoločnou obranou. Pretože je rok 2025 a svet sa mení.
               

Petar Volgin (ESN). – Уважаеми колеги, по време на Студената война, когато моята страна България беше управлявана от комунистическата партия, радиостанции като Свободна Европа и БиБиСи олицетворяваха за мен плурализма и демокрацията. Те бяха противоотровата на тотално контролираните от тогавашната българска власт радио и телевизия. Само че днес, медии като Свободна Европа, БиБиСи и СиЕнЕн не са символ на свободата, те са инструмент за унищожаване на разномислието и за налагане на една единствена гледна точка. Тези медии обслужват интересите на глобалистките елити, които искат всички да мислим еднакво и да говорим еднакво. Това не са медии, това са пропагандни инструменти на Брюкселската партия на войната.
               

                  Преди 1989 г. управляващата комунистическа партия в България заглушаваше Свободна Европа и БиБиСи, за да не чуваме справедливите критики срещу тогавашния режим. Днес, глобалистката власт в Брюксел потиска и забранява алтернативните медии, за да не чуваме справедливите критики по адрес на безумните политики, които биват налагани от евроначалниците. Обаче цензурата е една и съща, нищо, че преди я наричахме комунистическа, а днес е брюкселска.
               

Fidias Panayiotou (NI). – Mr President, we have a big problem here in Europe. A 'democratic' and 'independent' media outlet, Radio Free Europe, might close because the US might stop funding it. And here in Europe we are panicking and we are even thinking to use taxpayers' money to save it. But let's be honest, how 'independent' and 'democratic' can a media be if it's funded by a foreign government?
But I'm afraid that the real question is this: are we scared of losing the truth or losing control over it? I believe democracy is not about controlling the narrative. It's about trusting people to choose their own. I love you all.

Rasa Juknevičienė (PPE). – Mr President, when entering the Lithuanian city where I grew up, two towers still stand, built by the Soviets. Their purpose was clear: to block the signals of Radio Free Europe, Voice of America and Vatican Radio, silencing the voices of freedom. I even remember the hour when my grandma would try to catch free speech through the crackling.
Personally, I am grateful to the United States for supporting free speech. Because of that, I stand before you today as a citizen of a free country. I can only imagine the joy communists would have felt if Radio Free Europe had been shut down by Washington. Now it is happening before our eyes. All autocrats are happy. The space of democracy, especially on the European continent, is our security interest. Therefore, the EU, together with its partners, must have a plan on how to preserve the spread of free speech.

Hannes Heide (S&D). – Herr Präsident, Frau Kommissarin! Die Stimmen der Freiheit dürfen nicht verstummen. Radio Free Europe, Radio Liberty, Voice of America oder Radio Free Asia sind unverzichtbare Stimmen für Freiheit und gegen Desinformation. Sie unterstützen Medienfreiheit in Ländern wie Russland, China, Iran, Belarus oder Afghanistan. Sie geben Menschen Zuversicht und den Glauben an eine bessere, freie und demokratische Zukunft.
               

                  Von dieser Verantwortung will sich die Trump-Administration verabschieden. Wenn dazu Autokraten Beifall klatschen, wird uns in Europa bewusst, dass unsere Verantwortung für Freiheit und Demokratie nicht an unseren Außengrenzen endet. Eine Initiative der Tschechischen Republik zum Fortbestand von Radio Free Europe unterstützen bereits zwölf Mitgliedstaaten, darunter Österreich. Der polnische Ratsvorsitz hat dankenswerterweise weitergehende Maßnahmen angekündigt.
               

                  Die Europäische Union muss die Verfügbarkeit unabhängiger, sachlicher Nachrichten für Bürgerinnen und Bürger in Regionen mit eingeschränkter Medienfreiheit sicherstellen und damit zu unserer eigenen Sicherheit in Europa beitragen.
               

Csaba Dömötör (PfE). – Tisztelt Elnök Úr! Azt akarják itt mondani, hogy azon múlik a sajtószabadság, hogy az EU átvállalja-e a Szabad Európa Rádió finanszírozását. Egy olyan médiumét, amely eddig 90%-ban az amerikai demokrata kormányzat pénzéből élt. Mondják már meg, hogy vajon mennyire független az a médium, amely 90%-ban politikai támogatástól függ, és rögtön a megszűnés fenyegeti, ha nem kapja meg a havi összeget tengerentúlról? Hát semennyire. Miért akarják átvenni azt a demokratapolitikát, amelyik Amerikában megbukott?
               

                  De nem ez az egyetlen terület, ahol ezt csinálják. Amerikában például kirúgják a tényellenőröket, a Bizottság viszont tovább akarja bővíteni a cenzorrendszert. Nem én mondom, hogy cenzúra, hanem Mark Zuckerberg. Az elmúlt hetekben többször is feltettünk erről kérdéseket a Bizottságnak. Azt, hogy nyilvánosságra hozzák-e, hogy melyek a tényellenőrök, és hogy milyen módszertan alapján dolgoznak. Mind a két alkalommal hallgatás volt a válasz.
               

                  Szóval, hogyha szeretnének valamit tenni a sajtószabadságért, akkor ne a cenzúrát erősítsék, és ne csak liberális médiumokat támogassanak, és leginkább hozzák nyilvánosságra a szerződéseket.
               

(A felszólaló hajlandó válaszolni egy kékkártyás kérdésre)


Gabriella Gerzsenyi (PPE),
kékkártyás kérdés. – Azt szeretném a képviselő úrtól megkérdezni, hogy az Orbán kormány miért alkalmaz kettős mércét, amikor külföldi támogatásokról van szó? Miért elfogadható az, hogy a Heritage Foundation-től például az Ön frakciótársa is támogatást kap, hogy szoros kapcsolatokat ápolnak ezzel a szervezettel? Miért fogadható el az, hogy orosz és kínai befolyás van az országban, és eközben el akarják hallgattatni a független szabad sajtót és minden támogatást megvonni tőlük?
               

Csaba Dömötör (PfE),
kékkártyás válasz. – Köszönöm a kérdését és külön köszönöm, hogy Ön tette fel. A frakciótársam már cáfolta az ezzel kapcsolatos állításokat. Ami pedig a véleménynyilvánítás szabadságát illeti, hát az Ön pártelnöke fenyegette az újságírókat Dunába lökéssel, rendszeresen uszít rájuk tömeget. A kérdésekre nem válaszol, viszont itt a házban megfenyegeti az újságírót azzal, hogy kivizsgálja a lakhatását. És Önöknek ehhez egy szavuk nincsen, de azt elnézik, hogy ez a ház egyébként ne engedjen be jobboldali újságírókat a házba, és azt is elnézik, hogy csupán liberális médiumoknak kiosztanak 50 milliárd forintnak megfelelő összeget a választási kampányban.
               

                  Ezek után megpróbálnak minket kioktatni sajtószabadságból. Csak a szokásos képmutatás, amihez most Önök is csatlakoztak.
               

Claudiu-Richard Târziu (ECR). – Domnule președinte, stimați colegi, pentru Europa de Est, Radio Europa Liberă a fost vocea libertății în anii de totalitarism comunist. O ascultam cu părinții mei cu o pioșenie aproape religioasă. Mai târziu, eu am fost corespondent la Radio Europa Liberă timp de șapte ani. Au fost ani de libertate și de descoperire a democrației pentru România. Am cunoscut oameni care au făcut istorie la Radio Europa Liberă, secția românească, precum directorul acestei secții, domnul Nicolae Stroescu-Stînișoara. Mi-au fost călăuze spre libertatea adevărată.
               

                  De Radio Europa Liberă este nevoie și astăzi la fel de mult ca până în 1989, pentru că libertatea este din nou amenințată în Europa și chiar în Uniunea Europeană. Cei care au obligația de a garanta această libertate și de a o apăra, nu o fac. Din păcate, în lipsa unei finanțări din partea guvernului american, mă tem că Radio Europa Liberă nu își va mai putea îndeplini rolul de altădată, pentru că onor Comisia Europeană este mai înclinată spre cenzură.
               

Laurence Farreng (Renew). – Monsieur le Président, Madame la Commissaire, Radio Free Europe, pour des millions d'Européens, c'est la voix de l'Occident, celle qui a fait tomber des régimes autoritaires et s'écrouler le Rideau de fer. Le 15 mars, par un simple courriel, Trump a mis fin à soixante-quinze ans de défense par les États-Unis de la liberté de la presse et de la liberté de s'informer dans les pays où ces libertés se trouvent menacées. L'annonce a été sévèrement critiquée, et à juste titre, car la justice a suspendu la décision de couper les financements. Mais ce n'est là qu'un répit de quelques mois.
               

                  C'est à l'Union européenne de prendre le relais. Nous avons le cadre juridique nécessaire, avec le règlement européen sur la liberté des médias et la directive contre les poursuites-bâillons. Nous avons le cadre qu'il faut, avec des services de médias publics et privés parmi les plus indépendants au monde. Ce qu'il nous manque, c'est une véritable volonté.
               

                  Nous devons en effet considérer que cette époque, faite de crises démocratiques, d'ingérences et de guerres, a besoin qu'un vrai budget européen soit mis en placepour la protection des journalistes et pour la promotion d'une information libre et indépendante.
               

Елена Йончева (NI). – Уважаеми колеги, дълго време смятахме, че цензурата е присъща на авторитарните режими. Днес обаче тя превзема медиите в Европа с аргументи за сигурност и борба с дезинформацията. Вече има правилна и неправилна информация, а критичното мислене, журналистическото разследване заменихме с фактчекинга.
               

                  Под свобода на словото все повече се подразбира поднасяне на предварително одобрена, съгласувана с властта информация. Често инструментите за налагането на тази коректна, филтрирана информация са държавно финансирани, често от чужди правителства. Например чрез Американската агенция за международно развитие, както и с частни фондации като Сорос, са финансирани медии в Източна Европа, които не само влияят върху определени политики, а формират общественото мнение десетилетия.
               

                  Филтрирането на съдържанието на медийна информация, забрана на определени сайтове, блокиране на теми и личности, защото са се отклонили от официалната линия на властта, това са част от проблемите днес и трябва да ги решим, ако искаме Европа да е свободна, а не да вървим към нова студена война.
               

Isabel Wiseler-Lima (PPE). – Monsieur le Président, notre monde, aujourd'hui, a plus que jamais besoin de lumière contre l'obscurantisme et d'information contre la propagande. Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty donne des informations fiables et pertinentes là où les autoritarismes sévissent, là où l'on veut maintenir les gens dans l'ignorance.
               

                  En démocratie, nous défendons non seulement que les journalistes ont le droit d'informer, mais aussi que les citoyens ont le droit à l'information. Les régimes autoritaires remplacent la vérité par la propagande mensongère. Aussi est-il de la plus haute importance, pour la défense de la démocratie, que l'information et la vérité des faits puissent se frayer un chemin jusqu'aux citoyens.
               

                  Ainsi, nous ne pouvons laisser tomber Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty. Sa disparition, d'ailleurs, n'équivaudrait absolument pas à la création d'un vide: elle reviendrait à laisser le champ libre à la propagande, ennemie de la démocratie. Accepter cela serait faire le jeu de nos adversaires dans la guerre hybride qu'ils mènent contre nous.
               

                  Trouvons les moyens de soutenir Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty. Elle porte l'information là où il est impératif qu'elle parvienne. Si la propagande mensongère est une arme, la vérité en est une aussi. Cette guerre là, nous nous devons de la gagner!
               

Evin Incir (S&D). – Mr President, Trump has made it clear that he doesn't care about free and independent media. I'm not surprised that there are people in here that are making themselves his useful idiots, but I'm ashamed. In an era of disinformation, hybrid warfare and democratic backsliding, the protection of independent media is not just important, it is one of the last lines of defence against authoritarianism.
Truth is under attack by the far right and authoritarian regimes that seek to spread their false and dangerous narratives, to polarise, to silence, to dissent and to destroy public trust. Without independent journalism, citizens cannot make informed decisions about their future and their leaders.
The EU and all our Member States should be ready and must be ready to step in to secure the future of Radio Free Europe. There should be no doubt that we stand ready to defend free, independent and democratic media. When the US abandons this vital institution, then Europe must take responsibility, because the fight for press freedom is a fight for democracy.

(The speaker agreed to take a blue-card question)


Fidias Panayiotou (NI),
blue-card question. – My question is, where do you draw the line between misinformation and truth? Thank you, I love you!

Evin Incir (S&D),
blue-card answer. – Well, I think most everyday people know that blue is blue, red is red, yellow is yellow, so it should be very, very clear what is misinformation and disinformation. And in the end also this discussion is about Radio Free Europe and the protection of journalism. And journalism is the ground foundation of strong democracies. If we cannot see that, I don't think we can call ourselves democrats.

Julien Sanchez (PfE). – Monsieur le Président, mes chers collègues, je désapprouve ce que vous dites, mais je défendrai jusqu'à la mort votre droit de le dire. Personne de normalement constitué ne saurait remettre en cause la liberté d'expression, car c'est par la confrontation d'idées et par les échanges que l'on s'élève et que l'on progresse. Le groupe des Patriotes pour l'Europe est sans doute ici le groupe le plus attaché à la liberté d'expression.
               

                  Alors, vous nous demandez de débattre aujourd'hui sur le thème ‘Protéger l'accès aux médias démocratiques, comme Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty’, qui est hélas une vaste blague, autant qu'il est d'une grande hypocrisie. D'abord, car vous vous ingérez encore une fois dans des décisions américaines, qui ne nous regardent pas. Les États-Unis sont souverains, ils font ce qu'ils veulent de leur budget, et ici ce sont eux qui financent. Nous pourrions à la rigueur entendre vos souhaits d'ingérence et vos grandes leçons si l'Union européenne et ses États membres étaient eux-mêmes tous exemplaires en la matière. Mais imaginez les États-Unis entendre nos grandes leçons aujourd'hui et s'apercevoir, dans le même temps, qu'en Europe, en France, on ferme deux chaînes de télévision, notamment la chaîne C8, pour des problèmes de liberté d'expression, notamment.
               

                  Pis, en Europe, en ce moment, on s'en prend à la démocratie même: en truquant les élections, en empêchant, en Roumanie, des candidats, notamment celui donné favori, de se présenter, en annulant des élections sans raison valable. Et hier, en France, la justice a aussi décidé d'empêcher Marine Le Pen, la candidate donnée en tête des sondages avec 37 %, de se présenter. Cela a fait réagir Elon Musk et de nombreux dirigeants, mais cela n'a pas fait réagir ici. Vous avez même refusé d'organiser un débat. Alors, avant de nous intéresser aux États-Unis, garantissons la liberté d'expression et la démocratie ici, en Europe!
               

PRESIDENZA: ANTONELLA SBERNA


Vicepresidente


Helmut Brandstätter (Renew). – Madam President, Commissioner, colleagues, I had a wonderful teacher as a journalist, Hugo Portisch. He learned in America, and he told me it's the land of the free speech – that's what we have to take to Europe. And that's what he did, and that's how we grew up. And now if I listen to Mr Trump, he hates journalists, he wants to decide who's reporting, and this Mr Vance is coming to Europe and he says there is no freedom of speech. No, no, it's the other way round. There is no freedom of speech in America any more. It's worse. There are TV stations in America where they publish Russian propaganda. And now we have to tell that that's why we need strong media in Europe.
But also, I mean, all the right-wing extremists are gone, but they should know, in Hungary, they also publish Russian propaganda, and there is no freedom in Hungary. And they don't want to realise that.
And one more important sentence: if it's Mr Trump, if it's Madam Le Pen, you have to accept the verdict of courts. That's rule of law. That's the division of power. That's how our freedom, that's how Europe works, and it's very important. And we will fight that it remains like this.

Mika Aaltola (PPE). – Madam President, well-functioning free media is democracy's beating heart, exposing corruption and amplifying the voiceless. But it is under siege, censored, silenced by anti-democratic forces and those who fear facts and fully informed citizens.
Radio Free Europe has been a relentless beacon defying tyrants, delivering clarity to millions. Now the US Administration is killing it. We must fight and fund to protect its factuality and keep freedom's voice alive for the oppressed. Without the free press, there is no free society. Without honesty, democracy rots into demagogy and freedom of expression into hostile antagonism, fed by Russian actors. We can't let that happen. Let's fund Free Europe.

Michał Kobosko (Renew). – Przez ponad 20 lat byłem dziennikarzem i redaktorem naczelnym znaczących mediów w Polsce. Wychowałem się jeszcze w komunistycznej Polsce, słuchając na zmianę Radia Wolna Europa i Głosu Ameryki. To mnie kształtowało jako świadomego obywatela i przyszłego odpowiedzialnego dziennikarza. Dziś Radio Wolna Europa dociera codziennie do milionów ludzi w Europie i w Azji, będąc często jednym z niewielu lub wręcz jedynym źródłem rzetelnej, uczciwej i niezależnej informacji.
                  

                     W sytuacji, w której Stany Zjednoczone zachowują się w sposób nieodpowiedzialny Europa musi znaleźć rozwiązanie, by wypełnić lukę. Cieszę się, że Komisja nad tym już pracuje, a polska prezydencja w Radzie spotkała się i rozmawiała z delegacją Radia Wolna Europa i Radia Swobody. Cieszą deklaracje Czech, gdzie znajduje się rozgłośnia, ale także innych krajów o gotowości zapewnienia Radiu odpowiedniego finansowania. Apeluję o jak najszybsze znalezienie rozwiązania dającego stabilność Radiu i pracującym w nim dziennikarzom, tak, by mogli kontynuować swoją kluczową misję.
                  

Alice Teodorescu Måwe (PPE). – Fru talman! ‘Du får aldrig berätta för någon vad vi lyssnar på.’ Mitt femåriga jag nickar och upprepar förmaningen. Att lyssna på Europa Liberă, alltså Radio Free Europe i Ceaușescus ofria kommunistiska helvete kunde vara förenat med livsfara.
                  

                     Beslutet från Trump, som nu lyckligtvis dragits tillbaka, om att finansieringen av kanalen avvecklas, är oroväckande och ännu ett bevis på Trumps sviktande moraliska kompass.
                  

                     Fria medier spelar roll i våra dagar när de iranska ayatollorna, kinesiska och nordkoreanska kommunistledarna, liksom autokraterna i Moskva och Minsk, vädrar morgonluft. De spelar en lika betydande roll som under kalla kriget. Ofriheten är nämligen densamma oavsett geografiska koordinater.
                  

                     Mot dessa regimers propaganda finns bara ett botemedel i form av fri åsiktsbildning och yttrandefrihet. Det är därför Putin och hans gelikar väljer censur framför pluralism. Det var i kampen för frihet Europa och USA en gång förenades, och det är i denna kamp vi behöver återförenas.
                  

Tomáš Zdechovský (PPE). – Paní předsedající, víte, my, co jsme zažili dobu, kdy naši rodiče tajně poslouchali Hlas Ameriky a Rádio Svobodná Evropa, tak si pamatujeme tu dobu i jako malé děti, že jsme o tom nesměli mluvit. A já si myslím, že dnes je doba, kdy musíme šířit svobodné informace tam, kde není svoboda. Pokud my tady, demokraticky zvolení poslanci EP, budeme spát v demokracii, potom se probudíme v době diktatury.
                  

                     If you sleep in the democracy, you will wake up in dictatorship. And I think it's very clear message.
                  

                     To je něco, co bychom si měli zapamatovat. To je důvod, proč musíme odmítnout všechny extrémisty, kteří mluví o penězích. Svoboda a demokracie, lidská práva se nedají změřit penězi, které do nich investujeme. Je potřeba neustále o ně pečovat a je potřeba zachovat rádio, které šíří svobodné informace.
                  

Procedura ‘catch-the-eye’
                        


Радан Кънев (PPE). – Г-жо Председател, радио Свободна Европа беше създадено, за да съхрани единството на западния свят във времена на насилствено разделение, окупация и диктатура, да съхрани единството между политически свободните в Западна Европа и свободните само духом в Източна Европа. И успя да го направи, основно благодарение на общността от хора, раждани във всички отделни държави от изток до запад, които работеха в него, както и в много други демократични институти.
                  

                     Искам да подчертая, че продължава да го прави и днес, дори в демократични държави, в които обаче има нужда от журналистически стандарт на свобода на словото, няма свободен медиен пазар. Днес сме изправени пред ново разделение на свободния свят. Аз съм убеден, че то също ще е временно и че хората в радио Свободна Европа и хората в тази общност от свободни граждани ще бъдат основният ни човешки капитал, когато започнем да го възстановяваме.
                  

Juan Fernando López Aguilar (S&D). – Señora presidenta, señora comisaria, este debate sobre la decisión ejecutiva de la presidencia de Trump de retirar a través de la Agencia de Estados Unidos para los Medios Globales toda financiación y todo apoyo a Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty, que tienen un gran valor simbólico, es, a mi juicio, uno de los muchos debates en los que podemos entretenernos en el detalle sin perder de vista la categoría, el problema de fondo.
                  

                     El problema de fondo es esa presidencia de Trump, completamente disruptiva y contra las libertades, en un ejemplo de manual en el que un populismo votado en las urnas se da la mano con los autoritarismos y con las autocracias, y ataca directamente una libertad tan fundamental como la que permite en una sociedad libre la formación de una opinión pública formada a través del contraste de la veracidad de las noticias y del pluralismo informativo.
                  

                     Por tanto, la Unión Europea tiene el deber ahora de acelerar también su misión de llenar ese vacío, y solo puede hacerlo si actúa unida con los recursos necesarios para no solamente apoyar esos medios, sino también para garantizar que esa libertad de información no se queda desprotegida.
                  

Diana Iovanovici Șoșoacă (NI). – Doamnă președintă, și eu când eram mică, ascultam cu bunicii Europa Liberă. Bunicul, din cauza mea, a și fost luat la securitate, și eu la fel, pentru că am spus că ascult Europa Liberă. Știu ce înseamnă și cenzură, știu ce înseamnă și dictatură, știu ce înseamnă și bătaie la securitate. Ulterior am aflat că securiști, foarte mulți securiști, erau la Europa Liberă și mai și manipulau, și mai și mințeau.
                  

                     Din păcate, Europa Liberă de azi nu mai e Europa Liberă de ieri. Dacă nu reușesc să se autofinanțeze, atunci să facem un muzeu de istorie pentru ceea ce a fost Europa Liberă. Pentru că Europa Liberă, ca post și ca entitate continentală, nu mai este liberă demult.
                  

                     Libertatea nu are nicio valoare dacă nu include libertatea de a greși, spunea Mahatma Gandhi. Vă întreb: cine poate alege ce este adevăr și ce este minciună? Ceea ce este adevăr pentru mine, este minciună pentru dumneavoastră. Adevărul dumneavoastră este minciună pentru mine. În pandemie ne-ați distrus, inclusiv cu Europa Liberă, pe noi, avocații, și medicii care aveam altă opinie, deși avem studii și ne permiteam să avem aceste opinii.
                  

Gabriella Gerzsenyi (PPE). – Tisztelt Elnök Asszony! 1956-ban a magyar szabadságharcosok utolsó segélykiáltása a Szabad Európa Rádión keresztül jutott el a szabad világba. SOS volt, egy kétségbeesett üzenet a szovjet agresszió ellen. Ez a rádió a szabadság hangja volt akkor, és most is az. Ezért aggasztó, hogy veszélybe került a léte, mert Amerika megvonja a támogatását.
                  

                     Ennek a magyar kormány örülhet, hiszen kiemelt célja, hogy elnémítsa a független sajtót. Magyarország példáján láthatjuk, mire képes ez a logika: a Fidesz propaganda teljesen uralja a hazai médiát, hazugságokat terjesztenek, félelmet keltenek, abszurdabbnál abszurdabb törvényekkel próbálják megállítani a növekvő ellenzéket, akinek nem hagynak teret a médiában sem.
                  

                     Mi azonban a Tiszánál azt hisszük, hogy a szabad sajtó minden demokrácia alapja, és ezt Orbán Viktor is kénytelen lesz tudomásul venni legkésőbb 2026-ban, amikor a Tisza kormányra kerül.
                  

(Fine della procedura ‘catch the eye’)


Marta Kos,
Member of the Commission, on behalf of the Vice-President of the Commission / High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy
, – Madam President, honourable Members, it was interesting to listen because many of you have experienced listening to this radio, or have parents who told you not to tell, so we all know that today we don't speak only about Radio Free Europe. You have said that we are speaking about us, and we are speaking about the European values.
That's why I'm very happy that freedom has champions here in the European Parliament, and that free media has champions here in the European Parliament. And there is a common understanding here in the European Parliament of our collective responsibility to promote and defend media freedom as a core pillar of democracy. If we allow independent media to be silenced, we hand a victory to autocrats. We allow them to control our information space. We allow them to suppress dissent.
In the European Union, where freedom prevails, we can never allow this to happen, and we shouldn't allow that journalists are put in jail, like Joakim Medin – a Swedish journalist – now in Türkiye.
And in a world where facts are increasingly contested and distorted, our investment and protection of independent public interest journalism is more important than it has ever been – and we live in 2025. The European Parliament is an essential ally in this fight and I, as well as journalists all over the world, are counting on your continued support.

Presidente. – La discussione è chiusa.
                  


Dichiarazioni scritte (articolo 178)



Ивайло Вълчев (ECR),
в писмена форма. – Темата за радио ‘Свободна Европа’ и радио ‘Свобода’ са силно сантиментални за мен. Не само защото съм имал удоволствието да работя в медийна среда, а и защото имам реален спомен какво представляваше ‘Свободна Европа’ за хората, останали зад Желязната завеса. За нас, които искахме свободата и се борехме за нея и в крайна сметка успяхме да посрещнем, и то именно докато слушахме радиото за случващото се в Германия и падането на Берлинската стена.
                  

                     Безспорно радио ‘Свободна Европа’ е символ на борбата с комунистическата диктатура, която 45 години задушаваше Източна Европа. Но после радиото, което символизираше свободата, изгуби лицето си. Каналите на ‘Свободна Европа’ в България сега по-скоро могат да бъдат сравнени с ‘Работническо дело’.
                  

                     Колеги, мина времето, в което информацията беше държавна собственост. Сега имаме свободата само с няколко клика да открием безброй различни мнения по конкретен въпрос. Затова смятам, че трябва да загърбим сантимента и да оставим ‘Свободна Европа’ да защити мястото си в медийното пространство, базирайки се единствено на професионализма и на пазарните принципи.
                  
15.   Crackdown on democracy in Türkiye and the arrest of Ekrem İmamoğlu (debate)

Presidente. – L'ordine del giorno reca la dichiarazione della Vicepresidente della Commissione/Alta rappresentante dell'Unione per gli affari esteri e la politica di sicurezza – Repressione della democrazia in Turchia e arresto di Ekrem İmamoğlu (2025/2642(RSP)).
               

Marta Kos,
Member of the Commission, on behalf of the Vice-President of the Commission / High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy
, – Madam President, somehow the topics are connected. Honourable Members of the European Parliament, faced with the current geopolitical challenges, it is ever more important that we stand up for our common European values and principles, including in our relations with partners. The European Union is deeply concerned by the detention and arrest of Istanbul Mayor Ekrem İmamoğlu and other public figures, including members of the press and civil society representatives.
These acts significantly reduce the space for exercising fundamental freedoms, weakening democracy and political pluralism. The detention and arrest of an elected official and prime opposition figure, right after his announced intention to stand as a candidate for the presidency of the country, raises fundamental questions.
We want Türkiye to be anchored in fundamental democratic principles and values. As I said on Saturday, as a candidate country and longstanding member of the Council of Europe, Türkiye is expected to apply the highest democratic standards and practices, including with regard to freedom of assembly, media freedom and free and fair elections.
We also expect Türkiye to provide full transparency over the process. Access to impartial justice and due process, in line with principles of rule of law and Türkiye's international commitments must be guaranteed.
Hundreds of thousands of people that gather on the streets of Istanbul and other cities in peaceful protest are a clear proof that democracy and rule of law matter to the Turkish people. And here I would encourage the authorities to listen to their people, to continue to allow these peaceful demonstrators to express their views and to make sure that these protests can continue in a safe space. The consequences for Türkiye, as a state and for its society could otherwise be devastating.
The developments we are witnessing are the result of backsliding in democratic standards. The Commission has been critical on this in our annual reports on Türkiye. We have repeatedly stated that Türkiye needs to effectively reverse the negative trend in the areas of fundamental rights and rule of law. We have passed the message also in various bilateral meetings with Turkish authorities, and we have taken concrete measures.
In 2018, the European Council took the extraordinary step of putting the negotiations on Türkiye's candidacy to the EU at an effective still stand. The EU's financial assistance has been reduced and recalibrated to the EU priorities, only including people to people contacts and support for civil society.
At the same time, the relationship that we have with Türkiye has many different dimensions that transcend EU accession negotiations. Türkiye is also a NATO ally, an important actor in foreign policy and regional issues, as well as a crucial partner countries for dealing with illegal migration. And it is a neighbour whose geographical location, straddling Europe and Asia, puts it at a geopolitical crossroad. In Syria, on the Russian war of aggression against Ukraine, in Lebanon or in the southern Caucasus, Türkiye is a strategic partner of Europe.
Shutting our channels and areas of cooperation would benefit no one, least of all the people of Türkiye who call for the respect of fundamental freedoms and values and an EU orientation of Türkiye. We will continue calling on Türkiye to adhere to its international commitments and as a candidate country and a member of the Council of Europe. And because of what is happening in Türkiye, I cancelled my participation at the Forum in Antalya and I will not go to Ankara to meet the Turkish Minister of Foreign Affairs.

Εμμανουήλ Κεφαλογιάννης,
εξ ονόματος της ομάδας PPE. – Κυρία Πρόεδρε, κυρίες και κύριοι συνάδελφοι, η Τουρκία βρίσκεται σε ένα επικίνδυνο μονοπάτι αυταρχισμού. Η σύλληψη του εκλεγμένου δημάρχου της Κωνσταντινούπολης είναι ένα ακόμη πλήγμα κατά της δημοκρατίας και του κράτους δικαίου στην Τουρκία. Από το 2016, 150 δήμαρχοι στην Τουρκία έχουν καθαιρεθεί και αντικατασταθεί.
               

                  Από τον Μάρτιο του 2024 —έναν χρόνο πριν— δεκατρείς δήμαρχοι καθαιρέθηκαν και αντικαταστάθηκαν από εντεταλμένους δημοσίους υπαλλήλους. Όλοι όσοι υψώνουν φωνή εναντίον της κυβέρνησης αντιμετωπίζουν διώξεις και φυλακίσεις. Ανάμεσά τους δημοσιογράφοι, πολιτικοί αντίπαλοι, μειονότητες, ακτιβιστές. Η Ευρωπαϊκή Ένωση δεν μπορεί να σιωπά. Πρέπει να στείλει ξεκάθαρο μήνυμα στην Άγκυρα.
               

                  Κυρίες και κύριοι συνάδελφοι, με την ιδιότητά μου ως Προέδρου της Επιτροπής Ευρωπαϊκής Ένωσης-Τουρκίας και τη σύμφωνη γνώμη του Προεδρείου, ομόφωνα αποφασίσαμε την αναβολή επ' αόριστον της σύγκλησης της Μικτής Διακοινοβουλευτικής Επιτροπής Ευρωπαϊκής Ένωσης-Τουρκίας, που επρόκειτο να συνεδριάσει σε δεκαπέντε μέρες, 14-16 Απριλίου 2025. Στην Επιτροπή αυτή συμμετέχουν 50 ευρωπαίοι και τούρκοι βουλευτές. Συγχαίρω την κυρία Επίτροπο για την απόφασή της να μην συμμετέχει στο Φόρουμ της Άγκυρας. Αγαπητοί συνάδελφοι, για τις υπό ένταξη χώρες της Ευρωπαϊκής Ένωσης, συμπεριλαμβανομένης και της Τουρκίας, η Δημοκρατία δεν είναι αλά καρτ, δεν είναι αλά τούρκα.
               

Nacho Sánchez Amor,
en nombre del Grupo S&D. – Señora presidenta, señora Kos, con Turquía se nos presenta el mismo dilema que con otros países en clara deriva autoritaria: ¿cómo combinar los intereses con los valores? Pero con una diferencia esencial: Turquía es, formalmente al menos, un país candidato y ser candidato significa alinearse progresivamente con los intereses, con los valores y con los puntos de vista europeos. Membership is about democracy; partnership puede ser otras muchas cosas transaccionales y reversibles.
               

                  En el actual panorama en Turquía hay un verdadero aluvión de textos y comentarios en todos los medios progubernamentales, es decir el 90 %, en el que se dice ‘nuestro poder militar nos abrirá las puertas de ser miembros de la Unión Europea’. Por eso hay que insistir en que no hay atajos, en que ser miembro de la Unión Europea va de Demirtaș y va de Kavala y va ahora de İmamoğlu.
               

                  ¿Por qué detener ahora a İmamoğlu? No solo para anularle como candidato, y de ahí la acusación de corrupción, también aprovechando que Europa está buscando amigos y Erdogan espera una respuesta de Europa menos fuerte que otras veces.
               

                  Le agradezco su decisión de no ir a Antalya, en línea con la decisión de este Parlamento de no acudir a la reunión de la Comisión Parlamentaria Mixta.
               

Susanna Ceccardi,
a nome del gruppo PfE. – Signora Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, l'arresto e l'interdizione politica dalle elezioni agli oppositori è una delle caratteristiche più evidenti dei regimi autoritari e purtroppo la Turchia di Erdoğan ce ne offre da tempo esempi concreti.
               

                  Ma siccome chi vuole fare entrare la Turchia da vent'anni in Europa non ci è riuscito, ha deciso di far somigliare il più possibile l'Europa alla Turchia; perché è paradossale che noi, mentre siamo qui a commentare e a condannare, giustamente, l'arresto del sindaco di Istanbul, in Francia la leader del principale partito di opposizione è stata condannata all'interdizione dalla candidatura per i prossimi cinque anni. In Francia, non in una repubblica del Centrafrica qualsiasi!
               

                  Ieri è toccato alla Romania, oggi alla Francia. Ci hanno provato con Trump, ci hanno provato con Matteo Salvini. Oggi ci sono riusciti con Bolsonaro, con Marine Le Pen, con i rumeni. E chi sarà il prossimo? Chi sarà il prossimo?
               

                  La democrazia non è in pericolo solo in Turchia, è in pericolo proprio qua a casa nostra! Ecco perché la voce dei Patrioti deve levarsi sempre più forte, perché a sinistra la libertà e la democrazia non l'hanno mai amata: sono sempre i soliti. Giù la maschera: siete sempre i soliti, poveri comunisti!
               

Assita Kanko,
on behalf of the ECR Group. – Madam President, dear colleagues, if there is anyone left here who trusts Erdoğan, I wonder what possesses him. In his relationship with the EU, Erdoğan has sufficiently demonstrated that he can only be trusted in one area: he will stab you in the back. What did he not do? Abuse of power at home, interference in conflicts, violation of international law, failure to respect agreements, so on.
After yet another act, Erdoğan thinks the impeachment of Istanbul mayor, İmamoğlu, is a good idea. It's important that such a large number of citizens in Türkiye took to the streets to protest this, and we must support them. As EU, we do business with Türkiye and I stressed this several times: we must do it while respecting our own values and standards, especially with Erdoğan in charge. When an elected leader is removed like this from office, it strikes at the heart of democracy. The protests show that people do not want this. All people deserve fair elections, respect for the rule of law and politicians who serve and not oppress. What he does paralyses the potential of people and amputees the future of a nation. We cannot accept this for the people.

Malik Azmani,
on behalf of the Renew Group. – Madam President, the arrest of İmamoğlu is not just an attack on an opposition leader, it is a politically motivated effort to silence opposition. And it becomes worse, protesters are facing brutal force and journalists are being arrested. And yet, the European Union remained silent until this evening. I'm very glad to hear that the Commissioner decided to cancel her official visit to Ankara – I'm very glad to hear it. But still, a high-level political dialogue is still scheduled for this Thursday.
The hesitations come from concerns of security cooperation. But rest assured, the European Union and Türkiye have a deep and long-standing relationship, one that has withstood harsh arguments before and will remain to do so. Friends can be critical of each other and can point out mistakes being made. The EU must take a firm stand: suspend also the dialogue, unless the Turkish government immediately releases İmamoğlu. Europe cannot be silent or we will find ourselves on the wrong side of history.

Vladimir Prebilič,
v imenu skupine Verts/ALE. – Gospa predsednica! Turčija se je znašla v odločilnem trenutku. Več sto tisoč ljudi se je po vsej državi postavilo v bran pravice Ekrema Imamogluja, da se poteguje za predsednika Turčije.
               

                  Toda ta zgodba ni turški problem, temveč je predvsem naš. Zgodovina Evrope je za boj za svobodo, ki nas povezuje kot Evropejce, demokracija ni zgolj abstrakten pojem. Gre za svobodno izbiro, ki oblikuje naše družbe in življenja. Na kocki je ogromno.
               

                  Evropa ne more trgovati s turško demokracijo in prihodnostjo milijonov mladih zaradi svojih obrambnih, migracijskih ali energetskih potreb. Namesto tega moramo Erdoğanu poslati jasno sporočilo. To ni sprejemljivo in tega ne bomo dovolili. Zahtevamo svobodo za Ekrema Imamogluja, za Osmana Kavalo in za tisoče novinarjev, učiteljev in županov – takoj.
               

                  Evropa mora prenehati z ustaljenimi praksami in se odločno zavzeti za vrednote, za katere trdi, da jih spodbuja, preden bo prepozno.
               

Γιώργος Γεωργίου,
εξ ονόματος της ομάδας The Left. – Κυρία Πρόεδρε, κυρία Επίτροπε, το ότι δεν πήγατε στην Άγκυρα δεν έχει μεγάλη σημασία. Ας το ομολογήσουμε: ο Erdoğan σάς έχει στο χέρι. Δεν εξηγείται αλλιώς. Φυλακίζει δημάρχους, συλλαμβάνει χιλιάδες Τούρκους πολίτες, εξοντώνει πολιτικούς του αντιπάλους. Οι κυρίες von der Leyen και Kallas και η πλειοψηφία των Ευρωπαίων ηγετών τον κατευνάζουν. Απόντες, σκυφτοί και μοιραίοι είμαστε. Κάνετε πως δεν βλέπετε τον απολυταρχισμό του. Τον κατατάσσετε μάλιστα και στη σωστή πλευρά της ιστορίας. Ποιον; Τον Erdoğan. Τον ανακηρύξατε τώρα και εγγυητή της ευρωπαϊκής ασφάλειας για να εξυπηρετήσετε τα πολεμοχαρή σας σχέδια. Θα του δώσετε και πολλά δισεκατομμύρια από τις τσέπες μας για να σας εξοπλίσει. Ντροπή! Ζητήστε επιτέλους από την Τουρκία τα αυτονόητα —σεβασμό των δημοκρατικών αρχών, του κράτους δικαίου και των ανθρωπίνων δικαιωμάτων. Σταματήστε να κατατάσσετε την ίδια την Ευρώπη στη λάθος πλευρά της ιστορίας. Ή μήπως ο κατήφορος δεν έχει σταματημό; Τι λέτε;
               

Μιχάλης Χατζηπαντέλα (PPE). – Κυρία Πρόεδρε, αξιότιμα μέλη, η πρόσφατη σύλληψη του δημάρχου της Κωνσταντινούπολης Ekrem İmamoğlu αποτελεί ακόμα ένα δείγμα της διαρκώς εντεινόμενης παραβίασης των ανθρωπίνων δικαιωμάτων και της δημοκρατίας από την Τουρκία. Πρόκειται για πρακτικές ασύμβατες με τις ευρωπαϊκές αξίες και το κράτος δικαίου. Αυτά τα φαινόμενα είναι γνώριμα στον κυπριακό ελληνισμό, που εξακολουθεί να βιώνει την κατοχή του βορείου τμήματος της Κύπρου από τον Tούρκο εισβολέα.
               

                  Οι ενταξιακές διαπραγματεύσεις έχουν ουσιαστικά παγώσει. Εντούτοις, η ευθυγράμμιση της Τουρκίας με τις ευρωπαϊκές αξίες πραγματοποιείται μέσα από μία αυστηρή και ενεργή ενταξιακή πορεία. Μία πορεία που πρέπει να έχει σαφείς όρους, δεσμεύσεις αλλά και συνέπειες για την υποψήφια χώρα.
               

                  Η Ευρωπαϊκή Ένωση δεν μπορεί να λειτουργεί ως παρατηρητής. Πρέπει να ανακτήσει τη στρατηγική της επιρροή και να ασκήσει αποτελεσματική πίεση προς την Τουρκία για τη συμμόρφωσή της με το διεθνές δίκαιο. Ξεκινώντας από την πατρίδα μου, ένα πλήρες μέλος της ευρωπαϊκής οικογένειας.
               

Kathleen Van Brempt (S&D). – Madam President, dear colleagues, dear Commissioner, today's debate is not only about İmamoğlu. It's about all the people, the journalists, the researchers, the women, the civil society organisations, and the minorities under attack. It's also about the way Europe deals with rising autocrats and dictators – from Hungary to Türkiye, from the United States to Russia.
Think about the message we are sending to those who defend the values that we stand for, as we let them slip into the hands of autocratic regimes, while wheeling and dealing with the oppressors on migration, on critical raw materials, on defence?
If we fail to act, to be clear on whose side we are on, if we fail to defend democracies, the rule of law and human rights, then ask yourselves, colleagues, when the time comes, who will defend you?

Mathilde Androuët (PfE). – Madame la Présidente, le 19 mars dernier, Ekrem İmamoğlu, maire d'Istanbul et principal opposant au président Erdoğan à l'élection présidentielle de 2028, a été arrêté au motif délirant qu'il dirigerait une organisation criminelle. Malgré cela, M. Erdoğan continuera d'être le partenaire de Mme von der Leyen, qui continuera à lui envoyer de l'argent européen. Mais pourquoi s'en indignerait-on ici?
               

                  Sur la base de suspicions, sans condamnation, on annule l'élection présidentielle roumaine, et vous applaudissez. En Allemagne, on réfléchit à activer les cours de justice pour interdire l'AfD, et vous applaudirez si cela aboutit. Hier, en France, Marine Le Pen, favorite de tous les sondages, a été privée par un petit comité de juges politisés de concourir à l'élection présidentielle – et avec elle ce sont des millions de Français qui ont été mis au silence –, et vous avez applaudi.
               

                  Vous n'êtes pas des démocrates, mais bien des aristocrates dont le pouvoir vacille, et c'est cela qui vous rend fous. La démocratie vous effraie autant que le peuple vous dégoûte. Le peuple, nous, nous l'aimons et nous le défendrons toujours contre vos misérables manœuvres! Marine Le Pen ne se taira pas, et tous les démocrates et les peuples doivent cesser de se taire et défendre aujourd'hui leurs libertés contre vos manœuvres!
               

Bernard Guetta (Renew). – Madame la Présidente, du dictateur ou de la liberté, de l'inamovible Erdoğan ou des centaines de milliers de Turcs qui manifestaient samedi à Istanbul on ne sait pas qui gagnera.
               

                  La bataille reste incertaine, mais la première chose que ces visages tendus d'espoir nous rappellent, c'est que la liberté est la valeur la mieux partagée du monde, une valeur non pas européenne, mais universelle. Ces visages nous disent ensuite qu'il n'y a décidément pas – mais non! – d'incompatibilité entre islam et démocratie. De culture ou de foi, la Turquie est musulmane et son aspiration à la démocratie nous montre que la guerre qui menace n'est pas celle des civilisations. Contrairement à ce que martèlent les extrêmes droites, ce ne sont pas l'islam et le christianisme qui sont aujourd'hui aux prises, mais la démocratie et ses adversaires, ceux qui, à la Maison-Blanche comme au Kremlin, haïssent tout ce que nous chérissons: les Lumières, la séparation des pouvoirs, la liberté de la presse, l'État arbitre et la libération de la femme.
               

Mélissa Camara (Verts/ALE). – Madame la Présidente, Madame la Commissaire, chers collègues, des maires en prison, une population dans la rue et un régime qui répond par la répression. Depuis l'arrestation de son maire, la ville d'Istanbul s'est levée, et avec elle le pays tout entier. Des milliers de jeunes descendent dans la rue, criant un mot simple mais puissant: ‘Justice!’ Ils et elles ne demandent rien d'autre que le respect du vote, de la démocratie, du droit à un avenir meilleur. Et comment le régime leur répond-il? Par des matraques, des gaz lacrymogènes, des arrestations.
               

                  Ces manifestants ne sont pas des criminels. Ce sont les voix d'un pays qui refuse la peur, qui refuse de voir la Turquie sombrer dans l'autoritarisme. Les images sont intolérables: des étudiantes et des étudiants traînés par terre, des universités encerclées par la police, des familles qui pleurent dans l'angoisse d'une disparition. Depuis quand défendre la démocratie est-il devenu criminel? Depuis quand la défense de ses droits fondamentaux est-elle passible de prison?
               

                  Ces personnes font preuve d'un courage immense. À celles et ceux qui ont le courage de descendre dans la rue et qui nous écoutent aujourd'hui je dis merci. Nous ne pouvons rester dans le silence. Aujourd'hui, ils et elles crient ‘Justice’ dans les rues d'Istanbul. Ne les laissons pas crier dans le vide!
               

Özlem Demirel (The Left). – Frau Präsidentin! Trotz Demonstrationsverbot und Repressionen gehen immer mehr Menschen in der Türkei auf die Straße. Auch Pfefferspray und Gummigeschosse lassen sie unbeeindruckt. Sie wissen, es geht um ihre Zukunft gegen Unterdrückung, für Freiheit und Gerechtigkeit. Frau Kommissarin, immer wieder reden auch Sie hier von einem Kampf Autokratie versus Demokratie, warum man hier aufrüsten müsse.
               

                  Doch was unterscheidet Herrn Erdoğan und seine Vorhaben wirklich von dem von einem Autokraten wie in Belarus. Wie glaubwürdig sind alle, die jetzt die militärische Zusammenarbeit mit Erdoğan vertiefen wollen und dreckige Flüchtlingsdeals mit dem Autokraten machen, während er versucht, die komplette Opposition in der Türkei auszumerzen?
               

                  Kolleginnen und Kollegen, ich habe nie geglaubt, dass die EU der Türkei die Demokratie bringen wird – das können nämlich nur die Menschen vor Ort. Aber alle, die es ehrlich meinen mit den Werten, müssen jetzt klar und deutlich von der Kommission und den Regierenden fordern: Besorgte Worte reichen nicht mehr. Hören Sie auf mit den dreckigen Deals mit dem Erdoğan-Regime!
               

Reinhold Lopatka (PPE). – Madam President, dear colleagues, as many colleagues mentioned already, the recent arrest of Istanbul Mayor Ekrem İmamoğlu is not just an attack on an individual, it is an attack on democracy.
Detaining a leading opposition figure, along with 100 others on politically motivated charges, is an attempt to eliminate political competition ahead of a crucial election. This repression extends beyond politics. Independent media is being silenced. International journalists are being expelled, and peaceful protesters are met with brutal crackdowns.
Still, an EU candidate country and a member of the Council of Europe, Türkiye must uphold democratic principles and the rule of law, and the EU must respond with more than words. We must apply diplomatic and economic pressure to demand accountability.

Joanna Scheuring-Wielgus (S&D). – Pani Przewodnicząca! Pani Komisarz! Prawda jest taka, że sytuacja, która teraz jest w Turcji, to jest sytuacja makabryczna. Na naszych oczach upadają najbardziej podstawowe fundamenty demokracji. Aresztowanie opozycyjnego kandydata Ekrema İmamoğlu to apogeum nielegalnych ataków Erdogana na jego oponentów politycznych. Ostatnio aresztowano szwedzkiego dziennikarza Joakima Medina, który przyjechał do Turcji, aby raportować z antyrządowych protestów. Został on aresztowany na lotnisku pod zarzutem przynależności do organizacji terrorystycznej i obrazy prezydenta Erdogana. A co zrobił? Wziął udział w legalnym proteście w Sztokholmie przeciwko Erdoganowi.
               

                  Pani komisarz, bardzo proszę o interwencję również w tej sprawie i zwracam się do wszystkich Turków i Turczynek. Kochani, przez 8 lat byłam na ulicy w Polsce i protestowałam przeciw dyktatorskim rządom. Wytrwajcie! Dyktatury kiedyś się kończą. Bardzo Was wspieramy, nawet tak symboliczne gesty, jak odmowa naszego przyjazdu do Ankary, naszej delegacji Unia Europejska-Turcja jak odmowa Pani komisarz przyjazdu do Turcji, to są te symbole, które też muszą się odbyć, ale wytrwajcie.
               

Željana Zovko (PPE). – Madam President, although Türkiye's public diplomacy remains the most prestigious art for showcasing the positive aspects of why Türkiye is an essential ally in the current geopolitical turmoil, let us be clear about our stance. We must unequivocally express our concerns about the partner that is arresting political opponents. Putting journalists in a jail and silencing civil society.
The recent crackdown on democracy, including the arrest of the mayor of Istanbul, failed to provoke strong responses from the European Union, while the European Union does not hesitate to condemn other autocratic regimes. This raises a troubling concern.
Is the EU applying double standards when it comes to condemning those who process free voices? Türkiye continues to play a significant role by hosting refugees and providing military support in regions where the EU lacks sufficient forces. However, are we going to be blackmailed by a NATO member that uses the weaponisation of migrants and its biggest role in Syria as leverages?
Turkish society needs the EU to protect freedom of expression and uphold aspiration for democracy. The EU approach. Turkey must stop being hypocritical and must align with the way it addresses other autocratic regimes.

Nikos Papandreou (S&D). – Madam President, Commissioner, it's a bit funny, but we want Türkiye to be in the EU. We in Greece. But not this Türkiye, not the Türkiye that puts in jail the mayor, that puts in jail Kavala, that puts in jail Demirtas for 42 years just because he's Kurdish. And yesterday, as was mentioned, the Swedish journalist was arrested for terrorism – Medin.
We do have a weapon – and that's the weapons, actually. Our new defence architecture seems to include – at least silently – Türkiye, so far. You know that we don't want that. We would only want it if it was really a European country.
So, let's make that effort. Until they release all the political prisoners, our European allies selling arms to Türkiye must stop. And when Türkiye follows the right path, we will be very happy to be their friendly neighbours.

Ελισσάβετ Βόζεμπεργκ-Βρυωνίδη (PPE). – Κυρία Πρόεδρε, κυρία Επίτροπε, η πρόσφατη σύλληψη του δημάρχου Κωνσταντινουπόλεως İmamoğlu, πολιτικού αντιπάλου του προέδρου Erdoğan, με σκοπό τον αποκλεισμό του από την προεδρία του 2028, δεν προκάλεσε έκπληξη. Διότι κατά τη δεκαετή θητεία του Erdoğan καταγράφονται δεκάδες καταδίκες δημοσιογράφων, απαγόρευση λειτουργίας ενημερωτικών μέσων, μαζικές συλλήψεις διαδηλωτών και απόλυτη χειραγώγηση της δικαιοσύνης. Επιπρόσθετα, η αναθεωρητική πολιτική της Τουρκίας σε βάρος της Ελλάδας και της Κύπρου εξακολουθεί να υφίσταται με κατά καιρούς εμπρηστικές δηλώσεις, ευθεία αμφισβήτηση του διεθνούς δικαίου, μη τήρηση συμφωνιών και άρνηση συμμόρφωσης με τις συστάσεις της Επιτροπής.
               

                  Η Τουρκία, συνάδελφοι, χαρακτηρίζεται από σοβαρή κρίση δημοκρατίας και ανυπαρξία κράτους δικαίου. Για αυτό προβάλλει σήμερα, περισσότερο από κάθε άλλη φορά, η ανάγκη στην ετήσια έκθεση της Επιτροπής να αποτυπώνεται με τρόπο απόλυτα σαφή το εξής: μηδενική ανοχή στην υπονόμευση των θεμελιωδών δικαιωμάτων και τη συστηματική περιφρόνηση του διεθνούς δικαίου και των ευρωπαϊκών αξιών από την τουρκική κυβέρνηση.
               

Dario Nardella (S&D). – Madam President, Commissioner, last Saturday I attended a huge rally in Istanbul, where more than 2 million citizens demonstrated peacefully against the arrest of Mayor İmamoğlu and another 1 400 people. On Friday, we met the leaders of the CHP party with a delegation of the European Socialist Party to stand for democracy in Türkiye, but the Minister of Justice refused our visit to the mayor in prison.
This Parliament cannot remain silent in the face of the arrest of journalists, intellectuals, students, lawyers and politicians. The European Union has the duty to protect and promote democratic values and the rule of law in all countries, especially those that are in negotiations to join the European Union.
On 17 April, the Turkish President will be hosted in Italy by the Prime Minister, Meloni, and we expect the Italian Government to distance itself from him. The Commission must firmly condemn the illiberal acts of the Erdoğan Government and must act for the freedom of İmamoğlu and political opponents and for the dignity of the Turkish people now.

Procedura ‘catch-the-eye’
                     


Sebastian Tynkkynen (ECR). – Madam President, Türkiye has become an authoritarian state. The arrest of Erdoğan's political rivals shows the step-by-step process of democratic destruction. It goes against our most fundamental European values.
This is why I want to voice my support for the brave people of Türkiye, who have been protesting against authoritarianism in their country. They are ready to fight for democracy, despite all the restrictions, threats and violence from their ruler. It takes guts.
We, as the defenders of fundamental rights and democratic values in this world, must extend our full support to the brave protesters. One protester wisely stated that during the history of humankind, the people who have stood up against oppression have always won eventually.
I hope this victory comes sooner rather than later.

Ana Miranda Paz (Verts/ALE). – Madame la Présidente, tout notre soutien va au maire d'Istanbul, M. İmamoğlu, chef de l'opposition. En Turquie, le respect des peuples, des élus, du parti HDP de M. Demirtas – toujours emprisonné –, des femmes et des étudiantes, est à la dérive.
               

                  Je témoigne tout mon respect au mouvement social en Turquie, aux gens qui manifestent dans les rues, à ceux qui sont attaqués pour leurs valeurs et qui se tiennent debout pour la liberté. Le dialogue entre la Turquie et l'Union européenne doit être suspendu. Nous ne pouvons pas négocier avec un pays qui n'est pas démocratique, qui élimine toute opposition. Il ne s'agit pas seulement d'annuler une visite, Madame la Commissaire, il s'agit de suspendre la négociation et les accords en cours avec la Turquie.
               

                  Ce n'est pas la première fois que ce Parlement se prononce. Beaucoup de gens sont en prison en Turquie et au Kurdistan. Les minorités et les partis politiques ne sont pas respectés. Liberté pour M. İmamoğlu et liberté pour les autres!
               

Hanna Gedin (The Left). – Fru talman! I torsdags greps den svenske journalisten Joakim Medin i Turkiet. Han sitter nu inspärrad i högsäkerhetsfängelset Marmara, och han anklagas bland annat för att ha kränkt Erdogan. Det här är naturligtvis fullkomligt oacceptabelt och det råder en total politisk enighet i Sverige om detta. Jag skickar mina tankar i dag till Joakim och till Joakims familj i denna svåra stund.
               

                  Pressfriheten är en grundläggande rättighet i EU. Journalister ska vara fria att rapportera även nyheter som makthavare finner besvärande. Och att Erdogan på detta vis försöker skrämma till tystnad måste därför fördömas. Joakim måste friges.
               

                  Jag vill i dag be kommissionen och det polska ordförandeskapet att uttala sitt tydliga stöd för det omedelbara frigivandet av den svenske journalisten Joakim Medin, och att all möjlig press sätts på att Turkiet ska sluta hota och fängsla journalister.
               

Μαρία Ζαχαρία (NI). – Κυρία Πρόεδρε, οφείλουμε να παραδεχτούμε ότι δεν υπάρχουν ούτε δημοκρατία, ούτε κράτος δικαίου, ούτε βέβαια πολιτικές ελευθερίες στην Τουρκία. Το καθεστώς Erdoğan φυλακίζει διανοούμενους, πολιτικούς, Κούρδους, δημάρχους, συνδικαλιστές… Και ποια είναι η στάση της Ευρωπαϊκής Ένωσης; Προωθείτε την εμβάθυνση της οικονομικής και εμπορικής σχέσης της Ευρωπαϊκής Ένωσης με την Τουρκία μέσω της αναβάθμισης της τελωνειακής ένωσης. Προωθείτε την αμυντική συνεργασία και την ένταξη της Τουρκίας στον αμυντικό σχεδιασμό της Ευρώπης.
               

                  Δεν γίνεται να συνεχίσουμε έτσι. Πρέπει να θέσουμε τη σχέση της Ευρωπαϊκής Ένωσης με την Τουρκία σε θέσεις αρχών. Η Τουρκία θα πρέπει να σεβαστεί το κράτος δικαίου και τα ανθρώπινα δικαιώματα στο εσωτερικό της, αλλά επίσης πρέπει να σταματήσει να απειλεί και να παρενοχλεί την Ελλάδα και θα πρέπει έμπρακτα να επιδείξει βούληση για λύση του Κυπριακού, τερματίζοντας την κατοχή ευρωπαϊκού εδάφους και την παράνομη επιβολή εποικισμού.
               

Λευτέρης Νικολάου-Αλαβάνος (NI). – Κυρία Πρόεδρε, η σύλληψη İmamoğlu, άλλων δημάρχων αλλά και δημοσιογράφων και διαδηλωτών στην Τουρκία αποτελεί μέρος της πολιτικής καταπάτησης δημοκρατικών δικαιωμάτων και ελευθεριών. Εκφράζει την έντονη διαπάλη μεγαλοσυμφερόντων για την αναβάθμιση θέσης της τουρκικής αστικής τάξης. Οι χλιαρές δηλώσεις σκοπιμότητας της Ευρωπαϊκής Ένωσης εκθέτουν και στον τομέα αυτόν τους ισχυρισμούς περί κράτους δικαίου και ενθαρρύνουν την άγρια καταστολή της κυβέρνησης Erdoğan. Αυτή η στάση της αποτελεί συνέχεια του ξεπλύματος του καθεστώτος των τζιχαντιστών στη Συρία, που ευθύνεται για μαζικές δολοφονίες σε βάρος εθνικών, θρησκευτικών μειονοτήτων και πολιτικών αντιπάλων.
               

                  Η ένοχη στάση της Ευρωπαϊκής Ένωσης στα γεγονότα στην Τουρκία υπαγορεύεται από τη θέση ότι αυτή αποτελεί στρατηγικό εταίρο της ευρωπαϊκής άμυνας και της πολεμικής οικονομίας, την ώρα που διατηρεί το casus belli εναντίον της Ελλάδας και την κατοχή πενήντα και ενός ετών στην Κύπρο, την οποία βεβαίως και δεν αναγνωρίζει. Κόντρα στη συνενοχή της Ευρωπαϊκής Ένωσης και στην καταστολή, εκφράζουμε την αλληλεγγύη στον τουρκικό και συριακό λαό, στα αναφαίρετα δικαιώματά τους για πολιτική και συνδικαλιστική δράση.
               

Lukas Sieper (NI). – Frau Präsidentin, liebe Menschen Europas, liebe Freunde in der Türkei und in der türkischen Diaspora! Natürlich geht uns die Situation eines Beitrittskandidaten zur Europäischen Union etwas an. Und deswegen besorgt es uns, wenn Ekrem İmamoğlu, der Bürgermeister der größten Stadt des Landes, verhaftet wird, wenn mit ihm der Oppositionsführer verhaftet wird, wenn ihm zufällig genau zum selben Zeitpunkt auch noch das für den Antritt bei der nächsten Präsidentschaftswahl nötige Diplom aberkannt wird.
               

                  Wenn der türkische Staat diesen Mann als korrupt bezeichnet, dann möge er uns die Beweise offenlegen. Dann möge er uns die Ermittlungsprotokolle offenlegen und uns zeigen, dass dieser Mann tatsächlich korrupt ist. Wir haben das bei Marine Le Pen gerade gesehen, wie man ein solch delikates Gerichtsverfahren transparent unter den Augen der Öffentlichkeit rechtsstaatlich zu Ende bringt. Wenn aber der türkische Staat diesen Grundsätzen nicht gerecht werden kann, dann ist er kein Rechtsstaat mehr.
               

Fidias Panayiotou (NI). – Madam President, I'm from Cyprus. Cyprus had an invasion 50 years ago from Türkiye. I'm a bit sad here in the European Parliament because I feel that there is not enough support for Cyprus to solve our problem that we have had for so many years. We talk every week, every day here about Ukraine, and Ukraine is not even a Member State of the EU. So now it's a pivotal point because negotiations started again in Cyprus to solve the Cyprus problem.
So now is the time for the EU to put a lot of pressure in Türkiye, because it's the key player here to solve the problem in Cyprus. And a lot of people in Cyprus are not very happy with Europe, because we don't have the support that we want for so many years to solve the problem. Thank you and I love you all.

(Fine della procedura ‘catch the eye’)


Marta Kos,
Member of the Commission, on behalf of the Vice-President of the Commission / High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy
, – Madam President, dear honourable Members, today's debate was needed and very timely. As an EU candidate country and long-standing member of the Council of Europe, Türkiye must uphold democratic principles and values, especially the rights of elected officials. We expect authorities in Ankara to ensure the respect to those fundamental principles in the face of the most severe security challenges to our continent in our lifetime.
It is in our interest to keep Türkiye anchored to Europe and we will continue engaging. But our future relations will be measured through the commitment to democratic norms and practices, what is expected from an EU candidate country.
During times of geopolitical tension with war on our continent, conflict surrounding it and rising authoritarian tendencies around the world, it is crucial that we uphold to the values that define us. These values are important also for numerous citizens who gather in the streets in Türkiye and express their disagreement with the decisions of their authorities. Democratic values and principles are not only the foundation of the European Union, but also the core of all open societies.
Türkiye is and will remain a strategic partner to the EU, and it is also a very important economic partner. And you are right, Mr Malik Azmani, we will organise the high-level dialogue on the economy. But let me be clear, I will never shy away from raising my voice and recalibrating our engagement when democracy is in danger in a candidate country. Human rights are non-negotiable, and this is the respect we owe to Türkiye and its people, and this is the respect that we owe to Europe, to us Europeans.

Presidente. – La discussione è chiusa.
               


Dichiarazioni scritte (articolo 178)



Matjaž Nemec (S&D),
pisno. – Čeprav je kriz in pretresov po svetu toliko, da so oči uprte drugam, bi nas moralo trenutno dogaja v Turčiji vse zelo skrbeti.
               

                  Že več tednov v državi potekajo množični protesti, ki so že prerasli v največji upor proti vladajočemu avtoritarnemu režimu po letu 2013. Več kot očitno je zadaj politično motivirana aretacija İmamoğlu, župana Istanbula, in likvidacija najbolj resnega opozicijskega politika. Aretacija ni le politični udarec proti İmamoğluju, temveč tudi napad na demokratične vrednote države. Kar gledamo v Turčiji trenutno, gre za novo dno Erdoğana, ki državo spreminja vse bolj podobno Putinovi Rusiji.
               

                  In kje je v tej zgodbi Evropska unija? Razen splošnih pozivov k spoštovanju demokratičnih vrednot, v Turčiji zelo glasno odmeva molk predsednice von der Leyen in tudi visoke predstavnice Kallas. Medli odzivi EU niso so sramotni, pač pa nevarni. Turčija je namreč na razpotju. Demokracija v Turčiji je pod resno preizkušnjo. Zgolj vprašanje časa je, ali lahko nevarno drsenje v bedo avtoritarizma Turki še obrnejo.
               

                  In na katero stran se bo postavila Evropa? EU mora odločneje ukrepati! Evropa mora biti bolj pogumna od besed obžalovanj, namesto da obupanim Turkom priročno zopet nastavlja zgolj svojo dvoličnost. Od besed moramo preiti k dejanjem. Od tvitov k sankcijam.
               
16.   Dramatic situation in Gaza and the need for an immediate return to the full implementation of the ceasefire and hostage release agreement (debate)

Presidente. – L'ordine del giorno reca la dichiarazione della Vicepresidente della Commissione/Alta rappresentante dell'Unione per gli affari esteri e la politica di sicurezza – Drammatica situazione a Gaza e necessità di un ritorno immediato alla piena attuazione dell'accordo di cessate il fuoco e di liberazione degli ostaggi (2025/2644(RSP)).
               

Kaja Kallas,
Vice-President of the Commission / High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy. – Madam President, honourable Members of the European Parliament, last week I visited the Middle East. The visit came at a particularly volatile time, just days after the breakdown of the ceasefire in Gaza, which has caused an appalling loss of life. Through this visit, I wanted to send a clear sign of the EU's commitment to de-escalation and support for immediate ceasefire. My message was clear: in a new war, both sides lose. I had the chance to pass clear messages underscoring the EU's priorities for Gaza, as stated by European Union leaders at the European Council in March – the release of hostages, an immediate return to the ceasefire and the resumption of humanitarian aid deliveries at scale into the Gaza Strip.
I started my visit in Egypt, where I met the Foreign Minister Abdelatty to discuss bilateral and regional topics. I also met the Arab-Islamic Ministerial Committee, with whom we issued a joint statement on the Arab plan for Gaza. And then I travelled to Israel to meet President Herzog, Foreign Minister Sa'ar, and the opposition leader, Yair Lapid.
I also met the relatives of the hostages held by Hamas and paid a visit to Yad Vashem. In Palestine, I met the President Abbas and Prime Minister Mustafa. I also met with the heads of the EU Border Assistance Mission in Rafah and our EU police mission to express my appreciation for the work of the two missions. The resumption of negotiations is the most viable way to find a way forward and get the hostages out. I reiterated the European Union's full support of the efforts of the negotiators.
It's clear that violence only feeds more violence. The Arab plan, albeit still not conclusive on some very important issues of governance, security and cost-sharing, remains relevant even in the context of resumed hostilities. And I was very clear on the two-state solution as the only way to reach sustainable peace and security for Israel, the Palestinians and the region. The EU has repeatedly stated there must be no role for Hamas in Gaza's governance. The popular protests ongoing in Israel are an important development. It is clear that people are making their voices heard to try to shape a better future.
In the West Bank another serious situation is unfolding, which I also raised with my interlocutors during my visit. The Israeli operation against armed militias in the refugee camps of the northern West Bank has led to casualties, displacement of some 40 000 Palestinians and the destruction of vital civilian infrastructure. In parallel, settler violence, the approval of new settlements, evictions, demolitions and forced transfers of Palestinians are increasing. All these actions are seriously undermining the viability of the Palestinian Authority, but also causing grave harm to the Palestinian people.
Honourable Members, the European Union is the biggest donor of aid to Palestinians in Gaza and the occupied West Bank, and the EU is playing its part to try to ease the difficult situation in the occupied territories.
Just three examples – first, through our humanitarian aid. The Commission announced initial funding of EUR 120 million for Gaza in 2025. This brings the total to over EUR 450 million since 2023. Our partners on the ground worked tirelessly to fill the warehouses in Gaza during the two-month ceasefire. The EU also remains committed in its support of UNWRA.
Second, at the request of all parties, our EUBAM Rafah mission was reactivated at the Rafah crossing point. It helped more than 4 000 people to cross the border, including more than 1 600 requiring medical attention, during the temporary ceasefire. The resumed hostilities led to the closure of the Rafah crossing point, but the mission is ready to return when conditions follow, and they are also ready to help give humanitarian aid.
Thirdly, in the context of seeking stability of the West Bank, but also in the view of the Palestinian Authority's return to Gaza, the EU will continue to provide support to the Palestinian Authority, linked with reforms. The first-ever high-level dialogue with the Palestinian Authority is also in two weeks' time, and it represents a significant milestone in our relations with the Palestinians. It is also the occasion to discuss all of these issues in the presence of EU ministers, and confirm our support of peace in the region.

Hildegard Bentele,
on behalf of the PPE Group. – Madam President, dear colleagues, the battle to drive Hamas out of Gaza is getting more and more intense. For the first time, Palestinians themselves have also taken to the streets against Hamas. I think we all hope that Hamas, this terrible oppressor of the Palestinian population and huge threat to innocent Israelis, will be defeated once and for all. That is still missing – living hostages will finally be liberated of Hamas tunnels and see light, food and love again. It has been 543 days.
We, as the EU, as we all know, do not play a role in the current negotiations. But we could and should start to engage ourselves in the competition of ideas for the day after. I recommend that we do this in close cooperation with the Arab neighbours and the key players in the region. We should initiate and support any kind of process which leads to political emancipation from Hamas and to de-radicalisation. We, as the EU, have insisted that the Palestinian Authority engages in reform and becomes an independent, terror-free Palestinian state, potentially also including Gaza.
What we need now are fresh, creative and politically grounded ideas. I would like to invite you, our new high representative, to engage with the Parliament in this regard and to continue visiting the region and testing solutions, together with regional actors, open to our values and respected by both of the conflicting parties.

Evin Incir,
on behalf of the S&D Group. – Madam President, a new debate, a new watered-down title. Let's see what Elvis Presley said: 'Truth is like the sun. You can shut it out for a time, but it ain't going away.'
Let's talk about the Israeli far-right government: an ICC arrest warrant on Prime Minister Netanyahu; over 50 000 people killed in Gaza in just the last 1.5 years – over 70 % women and children; war crimes committed; crimes against humanity; sexual and gender-based violence. On 23 March, Israel killed 50 healthcare workers and threw them into mass graves. Starvation is being used as a weapon through banning the entry of humanitarian aid into Gaza. But hey, the crimes seem to not be enough for the EU to act – to act in accordance with our own values.
Let me remind everybody about the respect for human rights and democratic principle constituting the basis of Article 2 in the EU-Israel Association Agreement. What does the Commission and the Member States do? Nothing. You know what that's called? Hypocrisy.

Fabrice Leggeri,
au nom du groupe PfE. – Madame la Présidente, cinq cent quarante-trois jours. Cinq cent quarante-trois jours et encore 59 otages qui sont toujours retenus par le Hamas, dont 24 présumés vivants. Cinq cent quarante-trois jours d'angoisse et de souffrance. En Israël, nous avons vu l'indicible: des femmes violées avant d'être massacrées, des familles anéanties, des enfants arrachés à leurs parents. Les images étaient insoutenables.
               

                  La semaine dernière, une conférence au Parlement européen nous racontait déjà cette horreur: des viols de masse utilisés comme arme de guerre, une barbarie absolue. Pourtant, certains détournent encore les yeux. L'extrême gauche refuse de voir la vérité. Elle refuse de qualifier le Hamas de terroriste, propage sa propagande haineuse et justifie l'injustifiable.
               

                  Mais aujourd'hui, même à Gaza, la population se soulève contre le Hamas, contre ceux qui l'utilisent comme bouclier humain. Ici, certains réclament un cessez-le-feu immédiat, sans même exiger la libération des otages – une compromission inacceptable.
               

                  Nous le disons ici avec force: il ne peut y avoir de paix sans justice et il ne peut y avoir de cessez-le-feu sans la libération immédiate et sans condition de tous les otages. Cinq cent quarante-trois jours, c'est déjà trop. L'inaction et la lâcheté doivent cesser.
               

Bert-Jan Ruissen,
namens de ECR-Fractie. – Voorzitter, beste collega's, eindelijk waren ze daar: protesten in Gaza tegen het terroristenbewind van Hamas. Maar helaas, het was maar een kleine minderheid. Het overgrote deel van de Palestijnen staat nog steeds vierkant achter Hamas.
               

                  Wij zullen daarom, als we willen werken aan een duurzame vrede in de regio, niet alleen moeten inzetten op een staakt-het-vuren en vrijlating van de gijzelaars, maar zeker ook op deradicalisering. Als belangrijke donor van de Palestijnen heeft de Europese Unie daar ook de tools voor. Wij kunnen president Abbas bijvoorbeeld dwingen de schoolboeken, die doordrenkt zijn van Jodenhaat, grondig aan te passen. Wetend dat ze ook in Gaza het curriculum van de Palestijnse Autoriteit volgen, zou dat een enorme verandering teweeg kunnen brengen.
               

                  Commissie, mevrouw de hoge vertegenwoordiger, maak hier alsjeblieft werk van. Want echt hoor, deradicalisering begint in het onderwijs. Ik weet zeker dat we daar de vredesbetogers en Gaza een enorme dienst mee zullen bewijzen.
               

Hilde Vautmans,
namens de Renew-Fractie. – Voorzitter, collega's, mevrouw de hoge vertegenwoordiger, afgelopen week was er alweer een nieuw dieptepunt in de gruwel die Gaza heet. Een massagraf met humanitaire medewerkers van het Rode Kruis. Laat mij mijn steun en medeleven betuigen aan de families van deze hulpverleners. Dat je zo laf kan zijn om mensen te doden die daar zijn om te helpen. Het is niet te begrijpen! Voor mij is het duidelijk: dit zijn oorlogsmisdaden.
               

                  Mevrouw Kallas, we hebben nu nood aan een eensgezinde Europese aanpak. Orbán ontving net Netanyahu, tegen wie een internationaal aanhoudingsbevel loopt, en Europa blijft oorverdovend stil. Daarom vraag ik opnieuw om de druk op te voeren. Eis alsjeblieft van Hongarije dat het het internationaal recht respecteert en zet artikel 7 eindelijk in tegen Orbán, zoals Merz het vraagt. Zorg ervoor dat beide partijen een wapenstilstand respecteren. Alle gijzelaars moeten onmiddellijk en onvoorwaardelijk worden vrijgelaten. Humanitaire hulp moet nu Gaza binnenkomen.
               

Villy Søvndal,
for Verts/ALE-Gruppen. – Fru formand! I Gazastribens ruiner har to millioner palæstinensere mistet alt. Virkelig alt. Siden 2. marts har Israel blokeret adgangen for nødhjælp, mad og medicin. De har lukket for strøm og vand. 18. marts brød Israel våbenhvilen, og siden har bomberne skabt mere død og ødelæggelse. Netanyahu og Trump taler nu åbent om udrensning af det palæstinensiske folk. Han truede med helvede på jord. Gazas befolkning kender allerede alt til helvede på jord, og selv i den fuldstændige ubærlige situation magter mennesker alligevel at demonstrere mod Hamas. Sikke en modstandskraft. Samtidig forbyder Israel UNRWA, der var garantien for neutral nødhjælp, undervisning og sundhed. Trump og Netanyahu har vendt det internationale retssystem ryggen. Vi europæere må nu vise, at vi tror på regler og rettigheder. At vi har lært af historien og står sammen mod had og vold. Derfor skal vi sikre betingelser for en levedygtig palæstinensisk stat.
               

Irene Montero,
en nombre del Grupo The Left. – Señora presidenta, pensaba que, como no han apercibido a la alta representante por estrechar su mano con un genocida, pues hoy sí que nos dejarían mostrar el apoyo y la solidaridad al pueblo palestino y a las víctimas del genocidio.
               

                  Alta representante, seis días y 730 palestinos asesinados después de la ruptura unilateral del alto el fuego, usted viaja a Israel para mostrarles su solidaridad y reafirmar que son muy buenos socios. Si somos socios de un Estado genocida, ¿dónde quedan los valores europeos? ¿Bombardear escuelas, hospitales, ambulancias en Gaza son valores europeos? ¿Asesinar a 50 000 palestinos, forzar a millones de familias a abandonar sus casas y sus tierras, sitiar a la población sin energía y sin alimentos, quemar a niños y niñas en campos de refugiados son valores europeos?
               

                  Señora Kallas, este genocidio se está llevando a cabo con armas europeas, y nuestros puertos y nuestros aeropuertos están siendo rutas imprescindibles para que lleguen a Israel las armas con las que se comete esta barbarie. Díganos, señora Kallas, con el plan de rearme, ¿seguirá comprando Europa armas probadas en cuerpos de niñas y niños palestinos?
               

                  Señora Kallas, el Estado terrorista de Israel es un peligro para Europa y para toda la humanidad. Su Comisión es responsable de dar apoyo militar, económico y político a los genocidas. Yo hoy tengo la oportunidad de decirle, señora Kallas, lo que muchos europeos y europeas quieren decirle: no en nuestro nombre y no con nuestro silencio.
               

                  Los genocidas, señora Kallas, no pueden quedar en la impunidad. Pero le digo con toda honestidad que yo espero que ustedes, esta Comisión Europea, también termine siendo juzgada en un tribunal internacional por complicidad con los genocidas.
               

Alice Teodorescu Måwe (PPE). – Fru talman! ‘Ner med Hamas’, skanderade nyligen modiga palestinier med livet som insats, alltmedan bortskämda västerlänningar aldrig skulle ta motsvarande ord i sin mun. På europeiska gator och torg skildras nämligen terroristerna fortsatt som frihetskämpar.
               

                  Odai al-Rabei var bara 22 år när han i dagarna torterades och mördades som straff för sitt deltagande i protesterna i Gaza. Samma öde har mött ytterligare andra som uttryckt sin vrede mot Hamas, som fortsatt håller 59 israeler gisslan, samtidigt som de omöjliggör den vapenvila som skulle befria palestinierna från krigets lidande.
               

                  Det folkliga upproret må vara litet i omfattning, men dess symbolvärde är extraordinärt. En tvåstatslösning förutsätter ett Gaza fritt från judehatande terrorister, fritt från dem som enbart ser den palestinska befolkningen som tacksamma civila sköldar i propagandakriget mot Israel.
               

                  Tystnaden från den påstått pro-palestinska gruppen tyder dessvärre på att det aldrig handlade om solidaritet med palestinierna, utan hat mot judarna. Med sådana vänner behöver palestinierna inga fiender.
               

Sebastiaan Stöteler (PfE). – Madam President, High Representative, to address the situation in Gaza, which gets worse by the day, we need to look further than what's happening between Israel and Hamas.
We should look at the whole of the Middle East, because in one way or another, everyone is involved: Gaza, Israel, Lebanon, Jordan, Syria, the IRGC in Iran, Egypt, Qatar – everyone.
But now we have to focus on Gaza. Since Hamas came to power in 2005, they banned or eliminated their political opponents in 2007 and used all their time to indoctrinate the society – to indoctrinate a whole generation of young Gazans with their Islamic, antisemitic and anti-Israel propaganda.
They use resources to dig and build a military infrastructure to start war after war, aiming for the total annihilation of Israel and the Jewish people. Hamas took their best shots on 7 October 2023.
Now, how do we solve this? Long term, the problems in Gaza are massive and plentiful: from deradicalisation to rebuilding civilian infrastructure. But for the short term, there are only two objectives: get the hostages back to Israel and remove Hamas from Gaza. Bring them home now.

Hana Jalloul Muro (S&D). – Madam President, Ms Kallas, thank you for being here – indeed, it's very important that you are here to address the issue of Gaza. Your stance on what is happening Gaza must be more forceful.
Just one week ago, during your press conference in Jerusalem, you failed to mention the 50 200 Gazans who have been killed by Israel. You are well aware that every time we have taken the floor in this chamber, we have called for the release of the hostages and unequivocally condemned terrorism. But Israel ended the ceasefire – and this is something we need to talk about. More than 900 civilians, including children, humanitarian workers and journalists, have been killed. 142 000 people have been forcibly displaced in Gaza – 50 000 in the West Bank, because the far-right Israeli government refuses to recognise the two-state solution. And tomorrow, Hungary will host Prime Minister Netanyahu despite the ICC arrest warrant.
What are you going to do about this? What are we going to do? Under Article 29 of the Treaty on European Union, you, as High Representative, can propose specific sanctions to the Council. You need to do that – you must propose specific sanctions. Have you seen the violent settlers attacking Palestinians, even film directors? If we do not act swiftly, more children will be killed, more families buried under the rubble. And let us not forget about the hostages in captivity. They have the right to be free.

Barry Andrews (Renew). – Madam President, High Representative, just when you think it couldn't get any worse, you see the scenes coming out of Rafah this week. I think it's fair to say that most of us were absolutely stunned at the images. We know how hostile the IDF is towards UNWRA. We know how dangerous it is to deliver aid in Gaza, and we know how little respect there is for international humanitarian law.
Targeting the Palestinian Red Crescent and the Palestinian Civil Defence is bad enough. And I use the word targeting advisedly, given the sophistication of the IDF military, but then seeking to bury the evidence, evidence that bizarrely included an ambulance and a UN vehicle. And victims still wearing medical gloves. This has to count as one of the darkest episodes in the war.
And if the darkest hour is the one before the dawn, then let us hope that the Israelis will wake up to the fact that there is no military solution that will resolve the question of Palestinians right to self-determination. As you say yourself, High Representative, both sides lose. Violence feeds only more violence.

Ana Miranda Paz (Verts/ALE). – Señora presidenta, señora Kallas, la Unión Europea llega tarde. Llega tarde a un genocidio. ¿O no ve que estamos delante de un genocidio? Usted ha ido a Israel la semana pasada y les ha dado la mano a varios ministros. Aquí en el Parlamento se ha permitido también la entrada de varios ministros de Israel. Nosotros lo hemos denunciado, pero ustedes en la Unión Europea los siguen protegiendo, recibiéndolos, amparándolos, dejando que su impunidad esté libre.
               

                  El cese al fuego y el Ejército de Israel preparado para bombardear lo poco que queda de Gaza, sin ayuda humanitaria, incumpliendo todas las convenciones del Derecho internacional que dicen, alto y claro, que la ayuda humanitaria tiene que entrar siempre, con cese al fuego o sin cese al fuego.
               

                  Señora Kallas, el Derecho internacional dice que hay que amparar a un pueblo ocupado. El pueblo palestino es un pueblo ocupado y sobre todo en estos momentos, después de este genocidio y viendo como se ha hecho esta falta de cese al fuego, creo que hay que ir a la inmediata suspensión del Acuerdo entre Israel y la Unión Europea, como le hemos trasladado varios y varias eurodiputadas.
               

Γιώργος Γεωργίου (The Left). – Κυρία Πρόεδρε, κυρία Kallas, διερωτώμαι γιατί συζητάτε ακόμα. Για να τηρείτε τα προσχήματα; Αφού δεν έμεινε τίποτα. Σχολεία, κέντρα υγείας, υποδομές έγιναν ερείπια. 50 000 Παλαιστίνιοι έχουν δολοφονηθεί και άλλοι τόσοι είναι οι αγνοούμενοι. Στην πλειοψηφία τους είναι παιδιά, γυναίκες και ηλικιωμένοι. Πώς μπορείτε να κοιμάστε τα βράδια; Ειλικρινά το ρωτώ. Τώρα ο όλεθρος ολοκληρώνεται —λέει ο Gideon Levy, αρθρογράφος της Haaretz, ακόμα και το Ισραήλ τώρα δεν μπορεί να κρύψει ότι χτυπά άμαχο πληθυσμό. Αυτό από μόνο του συνιστά έγκλημα πολέμου. Εσείς δεν το βλέπετε; Και εμείς εδώ ακόμα συζητάμε.
               

                  Μα πόση υποκρισία; Μπρος στα μάτια σας γίνεται μια εθνοκάθαρση του παλαιστινιακού λαού και εσείς επιβραβεύετε την βαρβαρότητα του Ισραήλ. Η Ευρωπαϊκή Ένωση έχει τα χέρια της βουτηγμένα στο αίμα. Αναστείλετε αμέσως κάθε συμφωνία με το Ισραήλ. Τερματίστε αμέσως την κατοχή. Δώστε στους Παλαιστίνιους το κράτος που δικαιούνται.
               

Ondřej Kolář (PPE). – Madam President, dear High Commissioner, dear colleagues, I think that we tend to have this debate or take it from the bad end. And, you know, we sometimes tend to discuss who is the one to be blamed, who is the one behind this conflict.
And many people say it's Israel. Israel who is stealing land from the Palestinians, who is preventing them from enjoying their freedoms and all that. I think the one who is to blame is Hamas, not Israel. Hamas started the war. Hamas was the one. Or they were the ones who attacked on 7 October. They are the ones who are hiding behind civilians. They are the ones who are using schools and hospitals as shelters for their fighters. They are the ones who are stealing humanitarian aid from the people who need it. They are the ones who are still keeping Israeli hostages in Palestinian, in Gazan tunnels. There is nothing to discuss.

(The speaker agreed to take a blue-card question)


Rima Hassan (The Left),
question ‘carton bleu’
                     . – Je dois dire que vos interventions sont un peu à la hauteur de votre médiocrité politique sur ce sujet. Les questions que vous soulevez sont en réalité déjà traitées par des juridictions internationales. Elles sont déjà traitées par des centaines de résolutions des Nations unies. La colonisation, l'occupation illégale, l'appartheid, le génocide: tout cela est documenté par tout ce que vous prétendez défendre ici, à savoir l'ordre international.
               

                  S'agissant du Hamas, je ne vous entends pas condamner les alliances et le rapprochement qu'il y a avec le régime de Netanyahou – le ministre de Netanyahou Bezalel Smotrich a précisément dit que le Hamas était un atout et que l'Autorité palestinienne, qui a embrassé la voie diplomatique, était un fardeau. Donc, si vous êtes ici pour dénoncer le Hamas, dénoncez donc tous ceux qui le nourrissent, qui l'alimentent, pour nuire au projet palestinien, qui est un projet de libération et d'indépendance.
               

Ondřej Kolář (PPE),
blue-card answer. – I don't agree with you that Israel would be feeding Hamas and Israel is not Benjamin Netanyahu. I never said that. I think that it's up to the Israelis to choose between a prime minister who has gone a bit wild, I would say, and someone who would have the approach of his predecessors, who were much more successful in the solving or the solution of this very complex and difficult question.

Matjaž Nemec (S&D). – Gospa predsednica! Spoštovana visoka predstavnica! Po propadu premirja 18. marca smo v Gazi spet ponovno priča razmahu vojne in vojnih zločinov s strani Izraela. Število civilnih žrtev je medtem preseglo nov žalosten mejnik 50.000, od tega 17.000 otrok.
               

                  V grozljivem napadu izraelske vojske je bilo samo včeraj umorjenih 15 reševalcev, ki so želeli pomagati žrtvam napada pred tem. Do zdaj je bilo ubitih 280 sodelavcev UNRWA. In kljub temu se ob tem še vedno slišijo pozivi k njeni ukinitvi. Kaj bo EU storila jutri, ko bo na Madžarskem Orban gostil vojnega zločinca Netanjahuja?
               

                  Naj spomnim, da smo od Mongolije zahtevali Putinovo aretacijo. Kdaj bomo resnično pričeli uporabljati enake standarde, kot naj bi jih Evropa branila v Ukrajini? Kdaj bomo vendarle prekinili pridružitveni sporazum EU z Izraelom?
               

                  Obsodbe vojnih zločinov Izraela podpredsednice Evropske komisije Von der Leyen in vas, spoštovana visoka predstavnica, še nismo slišali.
               

                  Torej, zahtevamo premirje in da se EU odločno postavi v bran mednarodnemu pravu in človeštvu. Holokavst ni opravičilo za genocid.
               

PRZEWODNICTWO: EWA KOPACZ


Wiceprzewodnicząca


Tomáš Kubín (PfE). – Paní předsedající, vážená paní komisařko, už jsem si zvykl, že tady z levé strany sálu slyším, že od Izraelců se očekává, že zastaví válku, kterou nezačali, budou vyjednávat o míru s těmi, kteří ho nechtějí, a poskytovat humanitární pomoc těm, kteří je chtějí zabít. Takže, od 7. října 2023 bylo do Gazy posláno téměř 30 000 kamionů humanitární pomoci v hodnotě více než 3 miliardy dolarů. A co se s tou pomocí stalo? Hamás, který Gazu ovládá, ji zneužívá, rozděluje zásoby pro své bojovníky, prodává je na černém trhu a nechává obyvatele Gazy v bídě, zatímco jejich propaganda obviňuje Izrael. Hamás využívá toto utrpení jako zbraň k vymáhání dalších peněz od Západu. Jde o nejhorší případ organizovaného zločinu v dějinách lidstva, kdy Hamás zneužívá civilní obyvatele jako zbraň a nástroj k vydírání, a mučí a zabíjí ty, kteří protestují. Je načase, aby svět přestal jen sypat bezhlavě do Gazy pomoc a začal požadovat odpovědnost za to, co se tam děje.
                  

Leoluca Orlando (Verts/ALE). – Signora Presidente, signora Vicepresidente, onorevoli colleghi, il genocidio d'Israele a danno dei palestinesi è ormai diventato l'esempio più pesante di violazione della legalità internazionale nel mondo da parte di uno Stato con un governo che non è stato condannato dall'Unione europea, e impropriamente viene considerato partner privilegiato e democratico.
                  

                     Apartheid e genocidio, signora Vicepresidente, sono incompatibili con la democrazia. Cadono nel vuoto gli appelli a Israele di cessate il fuoco e si blocca, dopo la strage del 7 ottobre, il rilascio immediato di tutti gli ostaggi, negando adesso, arbitrariamente e deliberatamente, il governo israeliano gli aiuti umanitari, anche da parte di agenzie delle Nazioni Unite.
                  

                     Così facendo si commettono crimini di guerra, accertati dalla Corte penale internazionale, e che sembrano ignorati dai vertici europei.
                  

                     Il dramma della Palestina pesa come un macigno sulla credibilità dell'Unione europea: si sospenda subito, signora Vicepresidente, l'accordo di associazione Israele-Unione europea e si metta al bando il commercio con prodotti provenienti dai territori illegalmente occupati.
                  

Danilo Della Valle (The Left). – Signora Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, ancora una volta non voteremo una risoluzione che condanni il genocidio in corso a Gaza. E voglio scandire bene questa parola: genocidio, perché è di questo che si tratta.
                  

                     Quello che sta succedendo a Gaza è l'esempio più lampante dell'ipocrisia di chi guida questa istituzione: a giorni alterni si parla di democrazia e diritti umani, ma si continuano a stringere le mani di chi porta avanti la pulizia etnica del popolo palestinese.
                  

                     Continuate a fare affari con il governo sionista di Netanyahu, mettendo la testa sotto la sabbia, come ha fatto l'Alta rappresentante Kallas qualche giorno fa, durante la sua visita a Israele.
                  

                     Smettete una volta per tutte di parlare di democrazia quando si parla di Israele. Quello che sta facendo a Gaza Israele, dove blocca l'arrivo del cibo per affamare milioni di persone, dove si bombarda indiscriminatamente la popolazione civile da mesi, dove si pratica l'apartheid, ci riporta indietro alle barbarie della storia europea del Novecento.
                  

                     Israele ora ha più volte violato il cessate il fuoco: l'Unione europea deve interrompere immediatamente tutti i rapporti commerciali e militari con Israele, perché non c'è nessun tasso di democraticità che tenga davanti a tutto questo orrore.
                  

                     E voi siete responsabili di aver reso l'Europa complice di tutto questo.
                  

Céline Imart (PPE). – Madame la Présidente, Madame la Haute Représentante, depuis une semaine des milliers de Gazaouis manifestent pour pouvoir décider de leur avenir démocratiquement, hors du joug islamiste et terroriste du Hamas, le même qui s'est arrogé, sans élections depuis 2006, le monopole de la représentation, a fait de la mort un plan de communication et utilise des civils comme boucliers humains dans des écoles et dans des hôpitaux servant de centres d'intelligence au terrorisme.
                  

                     Cette tragédie se déroule avec la complicité active de l'UNRWA, agence de l'ONU infiltrée de longue date par le Hamas, qui couvre des tunnels au lieu de creuser des puits et participe à l'endoctrinement des enfants dans des manuels scolaires, au détournement de l'aide humanitaire et à la détention d'otages, collaborant ainsi avec ceux qui ont assassiné de sang froid les plus jeunes otages du monde, les bébés de la famille Bibas.
                  

                     Madame la Haute Représentante, j'exige, avec mon groupe du PPE – et je serai très attentive à vos réponses: premièrement, la fin du financement de l'UNRWA par l'Union européenne; deuxièmement, la libération immédiate des otages israéliens comme condition préalable à tout cessez-le-feu; troisièmement, des élections libres à Gaza, hors de l'emprise des terroristes du Hamas.
                  

(L'oratrice accepte une question carton bleu)


Benedetta Scuderi (Verts/ALE),
domanda ‘cartellino blu’
                        . – Lei ha parlato tantissimo di tutte le colpe di Hamas, non ha detto una parola sulle colpe di Israele.
                  

                     Quindi, per lei, il fatto che Israele stia bombardando ospedali, li stia mettendo sotto assedio e non permetta la protezione sanitaria; il fatto che abbia ucciso decine di migliaia di bambini; il fatto che non permetta l'entrata di aiuti umanitari; il fatto che abbia ripreso l'assedio e il genocidio di Gaza, dopo non aver rispettato il cessate il fuoco; il fatto di stare colonizzando la West Bank e di star prendendo le terre delle persone e di fare anche una pulizia etnica; di stare violando ogni virgola del diritto umanitario, non è un problema?
                  

Céline Imart (PPE),
réponse carton bleu. – Que le Hamas cesse de prendre comme boucliers humains les civils à Gaza, et Israël pourra cesser de bombarder les hôpitaux et les écoles! On ne pourra pas trouver de solution négociée à deux États tant que le Hamas continuera à refuser aux Gazaouis toute possibilité d'être représentés démocratiquement.
                  

                     Je n'ai aucune leçon à recevoir de vous, Madame, ni de groupes comme les vôtres, qui, sous prétexte d'antisionisme, sont ouvertement antisémites!
                  

Marta Temido (S&D). – Senhora Alta Representante, hoje quero falar-lhe sobre o insuportável silêncio da União Europeia relativamente aos crimes do Governo do senhor Netanyahu.
                  

                     O silêncio em que os nossos Estados-Membros se refugiam, quando nesta Casa pedimos a suspensão do Acordo de Associação com Israel, porque condiciona as relações comerciais ao respeito pelos direitos humanos e todos os dias eles são violados em Gaza e na Cisjordânia.
                  

                     O silêncio que a ouvimos, a si, manter na semana passada, quando lamentou a interrupção do cessar-fogo entre Israel e o Hamas, sem nunca referir quem tantas vezes o violou e, por último, o quebrou.
                  

                     O silêncio a que nós próprios, como deputados ao Parlamento Europeu, somos forçados, quando questionados pela opinião pública da Palestina, de Israel e dos nossos países.
                  

                     O silêncio perante a instrumentalização política dos reféns do Hamas e os protestos em Jerusalém e Telavive, perante a morte de 50 000 palestinianos e o lento extermínio da população que ainda vive em Gaza, privada de tudo, até de água.
                  

                     O silêncio que lhe pedimos hoje que quebre, Senhora Alta Representante. Ajude-nos a não perder a confiança nas nossas instituições.
                  

Saskia Bricmont (Verts/ALE). – Madame la Présidente, 180 enfants sont morts le 18 mars, jour de la rupture du cessez-le-feu par Israël. Le nombre de personnes ayant perdu la vie dans la bande de Gaza depuis le 7 octobre 2023 se monte donc à 50 144. Outre cela, 1,9 million d'autres personnes ont été déplacées, sans soins, sans nourriture, sans aide.
                  

                     La situation se résume en un mot à Gaza: génocide. Génocide, Madame Kallas, dont l'Union européenne se rend complice en maintenant tous les canaux ouverts avec Israël en violation du droit international – complice par son silence, complice par son inaction. Où est passée notre humanité, réellement?
                  

                     L'Union européenne sera jugée avec les responsables du génocide. L'Histoire nous jugera. L'Histoire vous jugera. Respectez la Cour pénale internationale et arrêtez Netanyahou s'il se rend sur le territoire de l'Union européenne, suspendez l'accord d'association avec Israël, adoptez des sanctions et un embargo sur les armes: voilà des leviers qui sont entre vos mains. Nous attendons, Madame la Haute Représentante, une action immédiate de l'Union européenne.
                  

Estrella Galán (The Left). – Señora presidenta, hoy, como usted sabe, en Gaza no entra comida, no hay electricidad, no hay agua potable. En Gaza hoy solo hay horror. Y usted fue testigo.
                  

                     Hablo de más de más de mil personas asesinadas desde que Israel ha roto el alto el fuego por los intereses mezquinos de su Gobierno criminal. Un Gobierno con el que usted, señora Kallas, se ha reunido sin pudor, con su ministro de Exteriores, limitándose a pedir proporcionalidad. ¿Proporcionalidad en un genocidio? ¿Usted es madre? Usted dígale ‘proporcionalidad’ a una madre que ha perdido a sus hijos. Dígaselo mirándola a los ojos.
                  

                     ¿Cuántas personas tienen que ser asesinadas para que ustedes hagan algo de una vez? Frenen de una vez el exterminio del pueblo palestino. Hagan algo ya. Son ustedes una auténtica decepción.
                  

                     Pero no nos vamos a dejar llevar por esto. Vamos a seguir exigiendo que cumplan con sus responsabilidades. Rompan el Acuerdo de Asociación con Israel ya. Apliquen todas las sanciones ya. Y, sobre todo, hagan cumplir las órdenes de detención. Mañana tienen una oportunidad de oro: el señor Netanyahu va a estar en Hungría, pisando suelo europeo. Deténganle. Queremos verle sentado en un banquillo de la Corte Penal Internacional.
                  

Aodhán Ó Ríordáin (S&D). – Madam President, Israel continues to commit the greatest evil the world has witnessed in recent memory. Two weeks ago, we debated its use of starvation as a weapon of war. This week we witnessed the targeting of healthcare workers and rescuers in Gaza – a mass grave discovered containing 15 humanitarian workers executed one by one, buried by an Israeli bulldozer. Their crime: wearing the red crescent. And as Israel bombards Palestinians with relentless airstrikes, enforces mass evacuation orders in southern Gaza and erects new checkpoints to strangle movement in the West Bank, it blocks the very people and medical equipment who could save innocent lives.
Meanwhile, some Members of this Parliament dare to call for the defunding of the only agency that can still help: UNWRA. I now hear two Irish citizens, Roberta Murray and Shane O'Brien, being deported from Germany for engaging in pro-Palestinian protest. Those two protesters have more courage than most MEPs in this Parliament. History will hail them. History will condemn Members of this Parliament who have blood on their hands. End the association agreement with Israel.

Mimmo Lucano (The Left). – Signora Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, a Gaza è in atto un massacro senza precedenti, un genocidio condotto con piena consapevolezza e il sostegno tacito dell'Occidente.
                  

                     Israele viola ogni principio del diritto internazionale e umanitario, colpisce persino ospedali, scuole e rifugi, ma nessuno lo ferma; gode di un'impunità totale e vergognosa.
                  

                     L'Europa è complice di questo orrore: finanzia e arma Israele, intrattiene relazioni commerciali con un governo criminale.
                  

                     In Cisgiordania ogni giorno vengono rubate le terre e distrutte le case del popolo palestinese da gruppi armati di coloni protetti dall'esercito israeliano, che andrebbero definiti per quello che sono: organizzazioni terroristiche.
                  

                     Questo è apartheid, pulizia etnica e colonialismo nel suo stato più brutale. La storia giudicherà severamente chi oggi tace, ma noi non possiamo rimanere in silenzio. Siamo a fianco dei palestinesi per la giustizia, per la dignità, per la libertà di un popolo che rifiuta di essere cancellato.
                  

Marit Maij (S&D). – Madam President, I wanted to make a point of order. Well, actually, I wanted to make probably my colleague's point of order, because I think it's totally outrageous if we disagree and if we disagree, we disagree heavily – that's okay. But we should not accuse each other of antisemitism in this room.

Benedetta Scuderi (Verts/ALE). – I want to call for Rule 10(4) of the Rules of Procedure. This is inappropriate behaviour. Offending another member on no stance, just for the intervention we have done is completely unacceptable and we would like the presidency to do something about it.

Przewodnicząca. – Dziękuję, Pani Poseł. Oczywiście służby Parlamentu przeanalizują tę sytuację.
                  

Zgłoszenia z sali


Davor Ivo Stier (PPE). – Señora presidenta, he pedido la palabra justamente para referirme a lo que la señora Montero ha dicho del Estado de Israel calificándolo de Estado genocida. Me parece una acusación muy grave. Porque uno puede acusar a un individuo de los peores crímenes. Ese individuo, entonces, tiene que ser procesado y juzgado. Puede acusarse a un Gobierno de los peores crímenes. Ese Gobierno tiene que ser censurado, cambiado, tiene que pagar reparaciones. Pero, si se acusa a todo un Estado de ser genocida, es decir, por su naturaleza de ser un Estado genocida, entonces a ese Estado hay que destruirlo. Y decir que hay que destruir al Estado de Israel sí es una postura antisemita.
                  

                     Por eso, cuidado cuando se utilizan este tipo de conceptos. Creo que hay que ser muy claro cuando se utiliza la crítica a lo que puede ser la política de un Gobierno o de un individuo. Está muy bien defender los derechos del pueblo palestino, pero no se puede aceptar que se diga que hay que destruir al Estado de Israel, ni siquiera de manera indirecta que se esté apoyando esa posición.
                  

Daniel Attard (S&D). – Madam President, let's put things into context. Only the last plenary, our colleagues from the right wanted to strongly condemn Thailand for deporting 40 refugees and for having repressive laws. And we rightly condemned Thailand for deporting 40 refugees.
But when it comes to Gaza, where 20 000 children have been killed – the equivalent of how many children we have in Maltese schools – this House loses its voice. It's not antisemitic to call out documented war crimes in 2025. This is not World War II, but the atrocities of World War II have returned in 2025. It is not antisemitic to call for the protection of aid workers and for the access of humanitarian relief.
If we cannot speak out in the face of these atrocities, then what do we even stand for in this House? And I have one piece of advice. I'm only new to this House, but let us call a spade a spade, because we have lost all our moral authority. We cannot speak on anything else if we're turning a blind eye to genocide. Indifference is complicity.

Sebastian Tynkkynen (ECR). – Madam President, why is it that even after over 500 days, the war against Hamas is still raging in Gaza? It is because Hamas has not laid down its weapons and released all of the remaining hostages. There is one thing we all have to understand about Hamas.
Hamas is not fighting against for our two-state solution. They are fighting for the destruction of Israel. Whatever means necessary, whether it is killing civilians or hiding beneath hospitals. They will not rest until all the Israelis are expelled or murdered from the river to the sea.
So we will not rest either. We will not rest until the whole world sees that the biggest obstacle to solving the conflict between Israelis and the Palestinians is the mere existence of the terrorist organisation called Hamas.

Vladimir Prebilič (Verts/ALE). – Gospa predsednica! Kako dolgo bomo mirno gledali genocid, ki se dogaja v Gazi? Kako dolgo bo Evropa, ponosna na svoje imenovane vrednote, molčala, med tem ko množično pobijamo moške, ženske in otroke?
                  

                     Samo včeraj je bilo ubitih petnajst mednarodnih zdravstvenih delavcev, ljudi, ki so svoje življenje posvetili reševanju drugih. To niso bili bojevniki. To so bile medicinske sestre, zdravniki in humanitarni delavci, ki so bili zahrbtno umorjeni. In kaj je storila Evropa? Nič, samo prazne besede.
                  

                     Ta ista Evropa, ki je obljubila – nikoli več, zdaj gleda, kako se bolnišnice spreminjajo v ruševine in kako se lakota uporablja kot orožje. To je popolnoma nesprejemljivo.
                  

                     Zahtevamo ukrepanje, resnično ukrepanje, takojšnjo prekinitev orožja, uvedbo sankcij. In vojne zločince moramo postaviti pred sodišče.
                  

                     Kajti če Evropa še naprej ne bo storila ničesar, se jo bomo spominjali samo kot sostorilko pri množičnih umorih. Zgodovina nas opazuje, svet gleda in mi ne moremo in ne smemo biti tiho.
                  

Marc Botenga (The Left). – Madam President, High Representative Kallas, you speak about a balanced approach, but balanced on what? On war crimes? On genocide? On the killing of 15 humanitarian workers? On mass graves? On the killing of children?
And what would that balance be, exactly? Some nice words for the Palestinians. More weapons for Israel. Nice words for the Palestinians. Weapons for Israel. That is not balanced. That is complicity in genocide.
I mean, in the face of Russian war crimes in Ukraine, I have never heard you speak about a balanced approach. There are 40 EU sanctioned regimes and not one on Israel, which stands accused in front of international courts of genocide. The ICC asks the arrest of Netanyahu. And yet, No EU sanctions.
Stop this complicity now. Adopt sanctions. Palestinians need acts, not words. These empty words, they have not saved one single Palestinian child's life. Stop this now. Act!

(Koniec zgłoszeń z sali)


Kaja Kallas,
Vice-President of the Commission / High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy. – Madam President, honourable Members, I think this debate shows very well why we don't have a common agreement in the Council. I mean, this is exactly why. You heard positions from different angles, and this is the same thing we have in the Council.
But instead of focusing on what we don't agree on, we also agree on very many things. We agree on the immediate priorities: the release of hostages, immediate return to the ceasefire, as well as the resumption of humanitarian aid deliveries at scale into Gaza.
We are condemning the appalling loss of life. And it's very painful to see what is happening in Gaza. We have been condemning this all the time, and we are the ones who are supporting the Palestinians with the humanitarian aid, with the help for UNWRA, with the help for the Palestinian Authority. And when I'm talking about a balanced approach, I'm talking about a two-state solution, because right now it's not balanced. Israel and Palestine are not on an equal basis because it's not the situation.
So, we need to continue to support and encourage the role of mediators. And of course, what was also said here, we are also engaging with our Arab partners for the 'day after'. And when it comes to my meetings in Israel, I only shook hands with one minister – the foreign minister.
And my predecessor stopped the Association Council. Did it make the situation better? It didn't. So, the Association Council or the Association Agreement give us the opportunity to say all these things that you are saying here to Israelis, to the representative of Israel, because this is exactly what we did when we had the Association Council, where 27 Member States were also able to express what they think about this. And I totally agree, the humanitarian law very clearly says you can't attack civilians, you can't attack civilian infrastructure.
And when it comes to the ICC, the European Union supports the ICC and all the Member States who are members of the Rome Statute should also follow the obligations that they have taken under this Rome Statute.
And as we know, the issue we have in the Council regarding the sanctions, we have to have unanimity. It's not even a majority vote. It's unanimity. Everybody needs to be on board. And when we see what is happening with the ICC and what is happening in some Member States right now, then you can see what the difficulty is here, because it is very, very hard to see everything that is going on.
And as for the Association Agreement: if we suspend the Association Agreement, will it stop the killing?
Of course, in the mid to long term, we have supported the Palestinian Authority because it will be crucial also for the stability of the West Bank. And it is being undermined all the time. And we are the ones who are supporting them in view of the governance of Gaza, because I also agree with those Members who say that Hamas should have no role when it comes to governance of Gaza for the 'day after', because it's the question of security of Israel as well as the rights of Palestinians that need to be respected. So, therefore, we also need to engage with our Arab partners and see what more we can do within the rules that we have agreed amongst ourselves with the 27 countries with 27 different views.

Przewodnicząca. – Zamykam debatę.
                  
17.   Targeted attacks against Christians in the Democratic Republic of the Congo – defending religious freedom and security (debate)

Przewodnicząca. – Kolejnym punktem porządku dziennego są oświadczenia Rady i Komisji w sprawie celowych ataków na chrześcijan w Demokratycznej Republice Konga: obrona wolności religijnej i bezpieczeństwa (2025/2612(RSP)).
               

Kaja Kallas,
Vice-President of the Commission / High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy. – Madam President, honourable Members, a few weeks ago, we collectively addressed the escalation of violence in the eastern Democratic Republic of Congo and the unacceptable offensive of the M23 armed group supported by Rwanda. This conflict appears to have diminished in intensity, and there are some hopes that a ceasefire and a credible peace process can be relaunched.
The European Union calls on all parties to refrain from violence and is committed to support the peace process. But the conflict has not stopped. We must not let our guard down. We have to be ready to react to new escalations or violations of key tenets of international law. And we must continue to do our utmost to help those in need. Eastern DRC is plagued by multiple conflicts and numerous armed groups. These vary in size and nature, but all engaged in deadly violence and horrific human rights violations and abuses.
This is why the EU continues to actively engage with all our partners in the region in their efforts to address these challenges, be it over the phone or face to face, including visits to the region. We welcome and support the decision by the United Nations Human Rights Council of 7 February 2025. This will establish a fact-finding mission to investigate the serious human rights violations and violations of international humanitarian law committed in North Kivu and South Kivu since January 2022.
We also welcome the ongoing work of the International Criminal Court, and we condemn the killings, kidnappings and looting of civilians by armed groups and any violence or persecution against any religious group or any other grounds.
Among the armed groups, I draw your attention specifically to the Allied Democratic Forces, ADF, affiliated with the Islamic State. This group has in the past claimed attacks against Christian communities because of their faith. But they target all civilians with killings, kidnappings and looting. In 2023, ADF was the armed group responsible for the highest number of killings in the DRC, with over 1000 victims. In the second half of 2024 alone, ADF was responsible for over 650 civilian deaths across North Kivu and Ituri.
The EU has been actively engaged against these horrors and the overall violence in eastern DRC. Our diplomatic outreach and a concrete action under the EU Great Lakes Strategy includes restrictive measures targeting individuals and entities responsible for serious human rights violations and abuses, and/or sustaining or exploiting the armed conflict in the DRC. These measures complement existing United Nations sanctions, measures to strengthen DRC security and law enforcement apparatus so that they can better protect the population, including against armed groups.
We are also helping tackle extremism and hate speech. Support for the local and regional conflict mediation initiatives, actions to stabilise border areas and measures to improve the resilience of populations in eastern DRC, delivery of much needed humanitarian assistance to respond to the ongoing humanitarian crisis in the protection of the Congolese people and their rights.
The EU is committed to working with all stakeholders, including churches and faith-based organisations to prevent further violence.

Lukas Mandl,
on behalf of the PPE Group. – Madam President, dear colleagues, dear honourable High Representative/Vice-President Kallas, first, I want to again emphasise, as I do time and again, the difference between Islam and Islamism, between the religion of Islam and the harmful ideology of political Islam, between the religion that deserves and enjoys all the rights of religious freedom, on the one side, and Islamism – a violent, harmful ideology causing bloodshed all over the world.
It's important to emphasise that because we Europeans, we the European Union, defend religious freedom and we also defend ourselves against attacks of Islamism, and we defend those who would be attacked by jihadists, by Islamists all over the world. This is exactly what we do with today's resolution, because Christians were killed and tortured because they were Christians, because they are Christians.
That's the reason why I want to praise and appreciate, High Representative, your clear stance when it comes to our adversary in Moscow and everything related to that. I want to draw attention to the fact that Moscow is aligned with Tehran, Pyongyang and Islamism, and our adversaries to the east are more or less on the same table against Europe. We have to see the connection. This is also what we address to the outside and to the inside to fight this kind of attacks against our civilisation.

Marit Maij,
namens de S&D-Fractie. – Voorzitter, collega's, hoge vertegenwoordiger, de nood in de Democratische Republiek Congo blijft onverminderd hoog. In het conflict vallen nog steeds enorm veel slachtoffers, veel burgerslachtoffers, waaronder ook religieuze gemeenschappen. Zoals in veel landen in de regio is de Congolese bevolking vooral slachtoffer van de strijd om een rijke bodem. Van de mineralen en de grondstoffen wil iedereen meeprofiteren. Groepen zoals M23 en andere rebellen maken daarbij gebruik van grof geweld. Seksueel geweld wordt ingezet als wapen in oorlogsvoering om gemeenschappen uit elkaar te rukken.
               

                  De EU moet meer humanitaire hulp bieden en met name aan de slachtoffers, vrouwen en kinderen, van seksueel geweld. België is niet stil gebleven en ondervindt nu de repercussies van Rwanda. Wij moeten als lidstaten ons blijven uitspreken en we moeten ook de landen die dit doen, steunen. Tot slot moeten wij ook naar onszelf kijken, hoge vertegenwoordiger, want we moeten onze relatie met Rwanda herzien, daar waar het gaat om het handelen in die kritieke mineralen. Want die mineralen en het geld dat deze opleveren, worden gebruikt om dit conflict te financieren en te faciliteren.
               

Thierry Mariani,
au nom du groupe PfE. – Madame la Présidente, le 13 février 2025, 70 chrétiens ont été sauvagement décapités dans une église à Kasanga, en République démocratique du Congo, par les Forces démocratiques alliées, un groupe islamiste radical lié à l'État islamique. Ce massacre n'est pas isolé: il s'inscrit dans une guerre sans fin, qui, depuis 1998, a tué plus de 8 millions de Congolais, dont de nombreux enfants et femmes. Dans l'est du pays, les régions du Nord-Kivu et du Sud-Kivu sont plongées dans le chaos sous les assauts de groupes armés comme le M23, qui viole, pille et massacre.
               

                  Le principal coupable de ces massacres, de ces désordres, depuis des années tout le monde le connaît: c'est le Rwanda de Paul Kagame. C'est lui qui a lancé son armée sanguinaire et ses supplétifs contre les populations de Goma et de Bukavu, où des millions de Congolais sont pris en otage. C'est lui qui pille les ressources minières de la RDC et bafoue la souveraineté de ce pays. Alors, après de premières sanctions timides, qu'attend l'Union européenne pour sanctionner encore plus durement Kigali? Pour l'Ukraine, l'Union européenne en est déjà à sa seizième vague de sanctions en trois ans. Mais qu'attendons-nous pour des sanctions sur les visas, pour le gel des avoirs rwandais en Europe, pour des sanctions nominatives contre Kagame et son entourage?
               

                  Madame la Commissaire, je n'ai pas du tout les mêmes informations que vous. Tout continue comme avant en République démocratique du Congo, et il n'y a aucune trêve. À la Commission européenne, notamment, vous devez dénoncer immédiatement l'accord sur les minerais, signé par le Rwanda, et dont vos fonctionnaires ont reconnu publiquement l'inefficacité. Tout cet immobilisme devient suspect. On finira par croire que l'Union européenne protège Kagame.
               

Patryk Jaki,
w imieniu grupy ECR. – Pani Przewodnicząca! Pani Komisarz! Chrześcijanie są najbardziej prześladowaną grupą na świecie. Na całym świecie ponad 380 milionów chrześcijan w 78 krajach doświadcza intensywnych prześladowań i dyskryminacji z powodu swojej wiary. W 50 krajach uwzględnionych w Światowym Indeksie Prześladowań prześladowania osiągają poziom bardzo wysoki lub ekstremalnie wysoki.
               

                  I to, co się dzieje ostatnio w Kongu, nie może zostać bez odpowiedzi. Kolejny raz zamordowano tam chrześcijan tylko za ich wiarę, a ciała jako formę oświadczenia bandyci zostawili w kościele. W ciągu ostatnich 15 miesięcy zweryfikowano tam łącznie ponad 600 brutalnie zamordowanych osób, w tym ponad 500 chrześcijan, którzy zginęli w tych atakach. Dane te pokazują systemowy charakter prześladowań. Powiązane z ISIS Sojusznicze Siły Demokratyczne od czasu ogłoszenia wierności Państwu Islamskiemu zintensyfikowały ataki, które stały się bardziej dramatyczne, takie jak zamachy i ścięcia głów, a niektóre z nich są rejestrowane i pokazywane jako propaganda.
               

                  Unia Europejska, która została stworzona przez chrześcijan, musi się upomnieć o najbardziej prześladowaną obecnie religię na świecie – religię wolności, szacunku i dialogu.
               

Hilde Vautmans,
au nom du groupe Renew. – Madame la Présidente, que dire en une minute sur un conflit qui dure depuis trente ans? Avant tout, je tiens à adresser mes condoléances à toutes les familles congolaises. Nous sommes à vos côtés.
               

                  Parlons chiffres: plus de 10 millions de morts, près de 7 millions de déplacés, plus de 2 millions de femmes violées et plus de 200 fosses communes. La situation est horrible. Il ne s'agit pas que de religion. Cette guerre concerne des matières premières critiques volées par le M23, que soutient le Rwanda.
               

                  La Commission doit agir tout de suite, et, très chère Madame Kallas, je n'ai rien entendu concernant le Rwanda. Je veux que vous sanctionniez le Rwanda! Suspendez le mémorandum tout de suite ainsi que le soutien financier au Rwanda! Mettez en œuvre les sanctions! Cela fait quinze ans, déjà, que les victimes attendent que justice soit faite après le rapport Mapping des Nations unies. Créez aujourd'hui un corridor humanitaire, qui permettra de fournir l'aide nécessaire aux femmes et aux enfants! Il est temps d'agir!
               

Amani! Amani! Amani! Pour ceux qui ne comprennent pas le swahili, ça veut dire ‘la paix’ – de vrede. Cela, c'est le nom de ma fille. Ma fille s'appelle Amani – ‘la paix’.
               

Mounir Satouri,
au nom du groupe Verts/ALE. – Madame la Présidente, je retiendrai deux leçons de la négociation autour de cette résolution.
               

                  La première, c'est que l'idéologie aveugle: obsédés par la seule protection des chrétiens, la droite et certains groupes d'extrême droite ont failli invisibiliser des centaines de milliers de victimes civiles.
               

                  La deuxième, c'est que l'influence dévoie le regard: quelques semaines après avoir pointé ici même la responsabilité du Rwanda et de son prolongement armé, le M23, nous avons failli avoir un texte qui effaçait toute référence à l'ingérence rwandaise en RDC.
               

                  Heureusement, les progressistes et les écologistes ont résisté. Nous avons été plus qu'une alerte: un rappel à la vérité et à la justice. Trois acquis majeurs ont été réintroduits dans le texte: la mention du soutien du Rwanda au M23, la reconnaissance du rôle déstabilisateur du Rwanda et l'alerte sur les financements européens aux troupes rwandaises au Mozambique, sans garantie que ces derniers servent indirectement au M23.
               

                  Le texte final ne sera pas celui du renoncement. Il ne discréditera pas ce Parlement. Nous devons retenir la leçon de ce type d'alliances et de leur dangerosité.
               

Marc Botenga,
au nom du groupe The Left. – Madame la Présidente, chers collègues, j'ai honte du titre de cette résolution.
               

                  À l'est du Congo, toute la population risque quotidiennement sa vie à cause des rebelles soutenus par le Rwanda. On dénombre 10 millions de victimes, et les Congolais sont en colère, notamment parce que l'Union européenne continue de coopérer avec le Rwanda.
               

                  Qu'essayez-vous de faire ici, à droite et à l'extrême droite? Brouiller les pistes, cacher l'ingérence étrangère et diviser les Congolais entre eux sur une base religieuse. Vous faites comme si, en RDC, c'étaient les musulmans qui faisaient la guerre aux chrétiens. Pourquoi? Parce que vous voulez diviser les Congolais pour mieux piller leurs ressources. C'est une stratégie coloniale classique. Dans la région des Grands Lacs, les colonisateurs belges, à l'époque, avaient imposé cette division entre Hutus et Tutsis, avec toutes les conséquences dramatiques que nous connaissons aujourd'hui.
               

                  Il ne s'agit pas d'une guerre religieuse, mais d'une guerre pour les ressources. Ne le cachez pas et arrêtez la coopération militaire avec le Rwanda. Prenez vos responsabilités. La complicité européenne doit cesser aujourd'hui!
               

Tomasz Froelich,
im Namen der ESN-Fraktion. – Frau Präsidentin! Weltweit werden 400 Millionen Christen verfolgt. Christen sind damit die am stärksten verfolgte Glaubensgemeinschaft der Welt. Kaum einer weiß das. Christen sind oft Opfer zweiter Klasse. Im Kongo ist das nicht anders.
               

                  Erst im Februar wurden dort über 70 Christen geköpft. Man fand ihre Leichen in einer protestantischen Kirche, und das ist leider kein Einzelfall. Christen im Kongo werden ermordet, vertrieben, oder sie flüchten vor Gewalt. Die Täter kennt man: Der Islamische Staat und seine Ableger in Zentralafrika, aber auch die M23-Miliz, die gemeinsam mit Ruanda im Osten Kongos Rohstoffe plündert.
               

                  Wie kann es sein, dass Ruanda zum größten Coltan-Exporteur der Welt aufgestiegen ist, obwohl es kaum über Coltan-Vorkommen verfügt? Die Antwort findet man im Osten Kongos. Die EU kann drei sinnvolle Dinge tun: Erstens, darauf drängen, dass ruandische Truppen den Osten Kongos endlich verlassen. Zweitens, klare Kante gegen islamistische Christenmörder. Drittens, unseren verfolgten christlichen Glaubensbrüdern beim Wiederaufbau ihrer Gemeinden helfen. Das Hungary-Helps-Programm der ungarischen Regierung könnte dabei als Vorbild dienen.
               

Wouter Beke (PPE). – Voorzitter, collega's, commissaris, amper zeven weken geleden werd er in dit halfrond met een hele grote meerderheid een strenge resolutie aangenomen tegen het geweld in Oost-Congo door Rwanda en de rebellengroep M23. Vandaag is de situatie helaas nog steeds onveranderd. Kigali verbiedt nu zelfs alle ontwikkelingssamenwerking vanuit België ten nadele van zijn eigen bevolking. Met duizenden doden en een veelvoud hiervan aan interne ontheemden woedt in de regio een van de bloedigste conflicten in de wereld. Mijn boodschap is dan ook duidelijk: stop die gruwel nu!
               

                  Hoewel we moeilijke regionale vredesprocessen alle kansen moeten geven, is het ook tijd voor actie vanuit Europa. Na het talmen van de Raad na onze vorige resolutie, moeten we nu echt wel in actie schieten. Ten eerste, door duidelijke sancties te nemen tegen de illegale smokkel van grondstoffen door Rwanda. Ten tweede, door bijkomende individuele sancties tegen oorlogsmisdadigers te treffen. Ten slotte, door een onmiddellijk staakt-het-vuren af te dwingen, waarbij de M23 het Congolese grondgebied verlaat en Kinshasa zelf de controle opnieuw overneemt, samen met de internationale actoren. Ik reken op u, mevrouw.
               

Francisco Assis (S&D). – Senhora Presidente, Senhora Comissária, as atrocidades cometidas sobre os congoleses, de forma indiscriminada, têm de ter consequências para os seus responsáveis.
               

                  Essas atrocidades são, inequivocamente, crimes de guerra e crimes contra a humanidade. E um dos responsáveis maiores pela escalada da violência, que é particularmente cruel para as mulheres, é o Ruanda – sobre isso já ninguém tem a mais pequena dúvida – que está, de resto, a fazer um jogo duplo na região. Compromete-se com a paz, mas vai armando e dando cobertura aos rebeldes do M23, que tomaram recentemente Goma e Bukavu.
               

                  A União Europeia tem o poder de chamar o Governo ruandês à responsabilidade e já aqui foram feitos muitos apelos nesse sentido, aos quais naturalmente me associo, suspendendo os projetos de cooperação que tem com o país, até que este ponha fim a qualquer colaboração com os grupos armados que estão hoje no terreno e dê um contributo para que estes grupos e o Governo da República Democrática do Congo se comprometam com o processo de Nairobi e se empenhem num verdadeiro diálogo nacional.
               

                  Evidentemente, sendo a esmagadora maioria dos congoleses de confissão cristã, daí decorre, naturalmente, que a maioria das vítimas das atrocidades também seja cristã. Só que fazer este tipo de distinções é qualquer coisa de ignominioso e bárbaro.
               

György Hölvényi (PfE). – Tisztelt Elnök Asszony! Hány áldozatra van még szükség? A február 13-i bestiális mészárlás már nem magát a Szövetséges Védelmi Erőnek nevező iszlamista szervezet első támadása volt. Az Iszlám Állam hírcsatornái már öt évvel ezelőtt is arról tudósítottak, hogy ez az a szervezet, amelyik keresztényeket lőtt halomba. Azóta több mint 300 emberrel végeztek.
               

                  Mit tett a kongói vagy a nemzetközi vezetés ellen? A kinshasai kormány évtizedek óta egyszerűen képtelen ellenőrizni a saját területeit, képtelen szavatolni saját állampolgárai biztonságát. Mit tudunk mi tenni ekkor, európaiak? A mostani hetven keresztény életét követelő vérengzés kegyetlensége nem tűr további tehetetlenséget.
               

                  Jogos elvárás, hogy a kongói kormány is tegyen látható, saját polgárai számára is értelmezhető erőfeszítéseket. Mert különben hogyan tudunk mi segíteni az iszlamista szélsőségek visszaszorítására? Világos választ, határozott lépést várunk. Támogassuk mi Kongót ebben a törekvésében! Ne hagyjuk, hogy Kongó is a Száhel sorsára jusson!
               

Alexander Sell (ESN). – Frau Präsidentin! Der Kongo ist ein rohstoffreiches Land – seit Jahren streiten sich Chinesen und Amerikaner, Russen und Europäer um die Bodenschätze. Vor 12 Monaten erst hat Brüssel einen Rohstoffdeal mit Ruanda geschlossen – der Deal versprach auch die Lieferung von seltenen Erden. Das Problem nur: Ruanda hat überhaupt gar keine seltenen Erden, sondern muss diese erst im Ostkongo erbeuten.
               

                  Im Januar sind die Kämpfe dort eskaliert, die ganze Region droht im Chaos zu versinken. Der Krieg im Kongo ist auch die Folge einer völlig weltfremden Außenpolitik – über 1 Milliarde Euro sind in den letzten 15 Jahren aus Brüssel in den Kongo geflossen für Entwicklungshilfe, die nichts bringt und in den Taschen korrupter Politiker versickert. Und das ist das Problem.
               

                  Während sich die Chinesen den Zugriff auf die Bodenschätze im Kongo vertraglich gesichert haben, schicken wir Geld fürs Klima und haben es nicht geschafft, vernünftige Handelsbeziehungen aufzubauen. 60 % des Kobalts in chinesischen Elektroautos kommt aus dem Kongo – unsere Automobilindustrie dagegen ist nicht mehr wettbewerbsfähig.
               

                  Deshalb: Wir brauchen eine realistische Außenpolitik. Entwicklungshilfe sollten wir uns in Zukunft sparen, die brauchen wir mittlerweile nämlich selbst.
               

Νικόλαος Αναδιώτης (NI). – Κυρία Πρόεδρε, κυρίες και κύριοι συνάδελφοι, για την τραγωδία που πλήττει τη Λαϊκή Δημοκρατία του Κονγκό, αντί άλλων, σας μεταφέρω αυτούσια αποσπάσματα από μηνύματα του αφρικανικής καταγωγής ελληνορθόδοξου επισκόπου Γκόμας και Μεγάλου Κίβου κ. Τιμοθέου. Λέει τα εξής: ‘Η χώρα μας έχει υποστεί έναν άδικο πόλεμο από τους αντάρτες που υποστηρίζονται από τη Ρουάντα, καλυμμένοι από ξένες δυνάμεις για εκμετάλλευση του υπεδάφους. Οι εκτελέσεις και οι μαζικές δολοφονίες συνεχίζονται αμείωτα. Η πείνα, οι ασθένειες, η έλλειψη πόσιμου νερού και τροφής επιδεινώνουν την κατάσταση του πληθυσμού. Οι λεηλασίες αμέτρητες μέχρι και στα νοσοκομεία. Χιλιάδες συμπατριώτες μας πιάνονται όμηροι για να υπηρετήσουν ως δύναμη στον στρατό της Ρουάντας και των ανταρτών. Κορίτσια βιάζονται, σκοτώνονται και άλλα αγνοούνται. Θα μπορούσα να είχα φύγει, αλλά δεν ήθελα να αφήσω τους πιστούς μας. Είναι η ώρα που έχουν πολλή ανάγκη της παρουσίας μου για ό,τι μπορώ κι εγώ να τους προσφέρω. Ο Άγιος Ισίδωρος ο Πηλουσιώτης λέει “ο Χριστός έγινε ιερέας στον σταυρό”. Προτίμησα να σταυρωθώ μαζί τους και να αναστηθώ μαζί τους, αν θέλει ο Θεός. Μέχρι τώρα αποτελούσαμε μια προφητική ιεραποστολή, δηλαδή με λόγους, διδασκαλίες, κατηχήσεις και βαπτίσεις στα ύδατα. Τώρα κάνουμε σταυρική και μαρτυρική ιεραποστολή, όπου κινδυνεύουμε κάθε στιγμή, και οι συνάνθρωποί μας βαφτίζονται μέσα στο ίδιο τους το αίμα.’ Πρέπει να καταπολεμήσουμε τον θρησκευτικό εξτρεμισμό.
               

Reinhold Lopatka (PPE). – Madam President, the targeted attacks against Christians in Congo are horrific acts of violence which demand our immediate attention and decisive actions. What do we have to do? We must intensify, of course, diplomatic efforts with DCR authorities to ensure the protection of all religious communities. We must establish a comprehensive monitoring and reporting mechanism, and we have to hold perpetrators accountable. We must provide stronger support to civil society organisations that are working tirelessly to promote interfaith dialogue. And we must collaborate with international partners, including the United Nations and regional organisations, to enhance our collective capacity to address religious persecution effectively.

Anja Arndt (ESN). – Frau Präsidentin! Am 12. Februar ereignete sich im Kongo ein grauenhaftes Massaker: 70 Christen – Männer, Frauen und Kinder – wurden von der islamistischen ADF-Miliz verschleppt und auf barbarische Art und Weise mit Macheten und Hämmern ermordet. Diese islamistische Brutalität im Kongo ist kein Einzelfall. Ich danke der Kommission, dass sie diesen Terror hier zum Thema macht und sich endlich für Religionsfreiheit und Sicherheit von Christen einsetzt.
               

                  Im Kongo sind 95 % der Bevölkerung Christen, in Europa sind es 72 %. Trotz dieser überwältigenden Mehrheit werden sie gezielt ausradiert. Auch bei uns sind islamistische Morde wie in Aschaffenburg, Mannheim und Solingen grausame Realität. Mein Mitgefühl gilt allen Opfern und Angehörigen bei uns, im Kongo und auf der ganzen Welt.
               

                  Die EU muss sich mit dieser Gewalt auseinandersetzen. Sie muss Anwalt der Christen sein – mit sicheren Grenzen, klarer Härte gegen Islamisten und echtem Schutz. Deutschland braucht die AfD, und Europa braucht die ESN.
               

Ingeborg Ter Laak (PPE). – Voorzitter, beste collega's, geachte hoge vertegenwoordiger, de humanitaire crisis in Congo blijft duren. In minder dan drie maanden zijn meer dan honderdduizend Congolezen gevlucht naar hun buurlanden door het aanhoudend geweld. Opvanglocaties waar mensen verbleven, zijn volledig verwoest. Humanitaire hulp komt er maar beperkt aan, ook door het gebrek aan financiering. Er voltrekt zich een stille ramp.
               

                  Conflictmineralen, zoals coltan, worden ondertussen nog steeds gewonnen. Niet alleen door Congolezen, maar ook door Russen, Chinezen én Rwandezen. Mensen werken in gevaarlijke omstandigheden met het risico van conflict en gevechten die op ieder moment uit kunnen breken. Als gewapende groeperingen dorpen binnenvallen, is het doel meestal vernietigen en het systematisch inzetten van seksueel geweld en het werven van kindsoldaten.
               

                  De rijkdom van Congo — de grondstoffen — zorgt voor een totale ontwrichting. De illegale handel en de illegale exploitatie van de mijnen moeten echt stoppen. Wij zouden ons als Europese Unie in moeten zetten om die kritieke grondstoffen te beschermen en humanitaire organisaties draaiende te houden. Dit conflict moet stoppen.
               

Davor Ivo Stier (PPE). – Poštovana predsjedavajuća, između 12. i 15. veljače više od 70 kršćana, uključujući žene, djecu i starije osobe, brutalno je ubijeno u crkvi u Kasangi, u pokrajini Sjeverni Kivu. I to nije zločin koji je izoliran slučaj. Nažalost, od početka ožujka najmanje 47 kršćana ubijeno je na sjeveroistoku zemlje. U Demokratskoj Republici Kongo, kršćani su sve češće meta napada i uznemiravanja upravo zbog svoje vjere, zbog toga što crkveni lideri znaju i kritizirati vlast i oružane skupine. Stoga Europska unija mora poduzeti odlučne korake. Moramo podržati inicijative koje promiču međureligijski dijalog i u tom pogledu vanjskopolitički odbor ovog parlamenta je uputio jedan pilot-projekt. Očekujem sada da ga podrži i Europska komisija. Moramo učiniti nešto za kršćanske zajednice i općenito za ljude u Demokratskoj Republici Kongo.
               

Zgłoszenia z sali


Margarita de la Pisa Carrión (PfE). – Señora presidenta, realmente es incomprensible la postura de la Comisión. Habla de conflictos de diferente naturaleza. Un discurso rebuscado para no mencionar a los cristianos. Veintitrés asesinados en marzo de 2025, una mujer quemada viva, niños degollados, en febrero setenta cristianos decapitados con machete dentro de una iglesia. Es intolerable que no sean claros, que no llamen a las cosas por su nombre. Es una brutal persecución religiosa. El islamismo radical mata a nuestros hermanos solo por ser cristianos. Masacres continuadas.
               

                  Son vergonzosas las excusas que se han mencionado hoy con tal de no reconocer o denunciar la persecución cuando se trata de cristianos.
               

Joachim Stanisław Brudziński (ECR). – Pani Przewodnicząca! 12 lutego, około godziny czwartej rano terroryści przyszli do wioski Maika, leżącej nad jeziorem Edwarda na północnym wschodzie Demokratycznej Republiki Konga. Najpierw wyciągnęli z domu 20 osób. Gdy mieszkańcy wioski, obudzeni hałasem, zaczęli gromadzić się na placu, porwali kolejnych 50 mężczyzn, kobiet i dzieci. Skrępowali im ręce i wyprowadzili z wioski. Po dwóch dniach w nieodległym kościele ewangelicko-baptystycznym w Kasanga znaleziono 70 skrępowanych ciał pozbawionych głów. To byli ludzie, którzy zginęli tylko i wyłącznie dlatego, że byli wyznawcami, wierzyli w Jezusa Chrystusa. Oni nie zginęli, tak jak słyszeliśmy to od rozedrganych przedstawicieli lewicy, bo pasterze walczyli z rolnikami o pastwiska albo wskutek walki o minerały.
               

                  Ci ludzie zginęli dlatego, że byli chrześcijanami. A my w chrześcijańskiej Francji dzisiaj debatujemy na ten temat znowu pod osłoną nocy. Tak jakbyśmy się wstydzili nazwać rzecz po imieniu i nie ma znaczenia wasza polityczna poprawność. Ci ludzie zginęli dlatego, że byli chrześcijanami. Jeżeli my będziemy milczeć, kamienie będą wołać.
               

Saskia Bricmont (Verts/ALE). – Madame la Présidente, je voudrais rendre hommage à l'ensemble des victimes du conflit en RDC, un conflit dont une des origines est, bien évidemment, les minerais, la richesse du territoire congolais.
               

                  On sait que l'agresseur est le Rwanda, qui soutient les milices M23. On sait que l'Union européenne a aujourd'hui du sang sur les mains parce qu'elle n'utilise pas tous les leviers, notamment politiques, qu'elle a à sa disposition. Le Parlement européen a rendu des demandes très claires au travers de sa résolution. Vous ne pouvez pas, cette fois, vous retrancher derrière des divergences de vues politiques.
               

                  Le Parlement européen a demandé la suspension du protocole d'accord sur les minerais avec le Rwanda, mais ce n'est toujours pas appliqué. La suspension de l'aide militaire à l'égard du Rwanda n'est elle non plus toujours pas appliquée. On a d'autres leviers, éminemment politiques, et il faut les actionner. C'est tout ce qu'on attend de vous aujourd'hui pour mettre fin au ‘deux poids, deux mesures’ de la politique étrangère de l'Union européenne, pour avoir une politique identique à l'égard des agresseurs. Ce sont des leviers que la Commission européenne a la capacité d'utiliser, et elle ne doit pas non plus se retrancher derrière l'absence d'unanimité au Conseil pour agir.
               

                  Dans le cas de l'agression de la Russie, les positions étaient très claires du côté de la Commission européenne. On n'en attend pas moins à l'égard du Congo.
               

Bert-Jan Ruissen (ECR). – Voorzitter, collega's, het conflict in Oost-Congo kent verschillende dimensies: verschillende rebellengroepen die actief zijn, strijd om de grondstoffen. Maar vandaag leggen we als Europees Parlement met onze resolutie nadrukkelijk ook de vinger bij het feit dat het conflict zeker ook een religieuze dimensie heeft. En dan hebben we het met name over de jihadistische groepering ADF, die dood en verderf in de regio zaait en het daarbij vooral op christenen gemunt heeft en hun kerken vernielt.
               

                  Dat we dit als Europees Parlement benoemen en erkennen is een hele belangrijke stap. Maar laten we nu ook alles doen wat in ons vermogen ligt om dit geweld daadwerkelijk te stoppen door Congo en Oeganda te steunen in hun strijd tegen de jihadisten, sancties op te leggen aan de verantwoordelijken en steun te geven aan de getroffenen. Het overgrote deel van de bevolking in Congo is christelijk, maar ze worden nu ernstig bedreigd door extremisten en dat mogen we niet laten gebeuren.
               

Sebastian Tynkkynen (ECR). – Madam President, the Democratic Republic of Congo, a nation that is 95 % Christian, has become a slaughterhouse for Christians. Let us not forget that Christians are the most persecuted religious group in the world. Now, in the Democratic Republic of Congo, our fellow Christians are being abducted, butchered and driven from their homes by bloodthirsty jihadists.
People were massacred in a church due to their faith, people were executed for refusing to convert to Islam. Churches have been bombed. Christian villages are being abandoned. Where is the outrage? Where is the action?
Europe must not stay silent. We share a long Christian heritage. We must protect it against jihadism that is a threat both globally and in our home continent.

(Koniec zgłoszeń z sali)


Kaja Kallas,
Vice-President of the Commission / High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy. – Madam President, honourable Members, thank you for this debate. All human rights violations and abuses need to be thoroughly investigated. Every victim must be recognised and supported, and all perpetrators must be held accountable for their crimes, when it comes to Rwanda, when it comes to Gaza, when it comes to Ukraine everywhere. And that is also why we push for the sanctions and and also the suspension of the agreement on raw materials. I mean, in the Foreign Affairs Council, we have a broad support for this. And now I think the wording was that we, the Foreign Affairs Council calls on the work that the Commission has to do to suspend the memorandum of understanding of the raw materials. So the Commission has gotten this point.
I think it's important that all the violations and abuses are really investigated. And this is not fundamental not only for the justice, but also to tackle the long-term drivers of instability and insecurity across the DRC and and the Great Lakes as well.
So we are committed to working with all key stakeholders to prevent further violence and to support Congolese people and the peoples of the Great Lakes region in their pursuit of peace and justice. And only concerted effort by the region, supported by the international Community, can bring the end to a recurrent cycle of crisis and violence that has affected the DRC and the Great Lakes for too long.
Serious human rights violations and abuses are part and parcel of this cycle, so the EU is ready to do its part to contribute to this effort. So thank you again for this debate.

Przewodnicząca. – Na zakończenie debaty otrzymałam, zgodnie z art. 136 ust. 2 Regulaminu, siedem projektów rezolucji.
               

                  Zamykam debatę.
               

                  Głosowanie odbędzie się w czwartek 3 kwietnia 2025 r.
               
18.   Explanations of votes

(Pisemne wyjaśnienia dotyczące stanowiska zajętego w głosowaniu, w rozumieniu art. 201 Regulaminu, figurują na portalu internetowym Parlamentu na stronach zastrzeżonych dla posłów)

19.   Agenda of the next sitting

Przewodnicząca. – Następne posiedzenie odbędzie się jutro, w środę 2 kwietnia 2025 r., od godz. 9.00.
               

                  Porządek obrad został opublikowany i jest dostępny na stronie internetowej Parlamentu Europejskiego.
               
20.   Approval of the minutes of the sitting

Przewodnicząca. – Protokół dzisiejszego posiedzenia zostanie przedłożony Parlamentowi do zatwierdzenia jutro po głosowaniu.
               

                  Zamykam posiedzenie, życząc Państwu dobrej nocy.
               
21.   Closure of the sitting

(Posiedzenie zostało zamknięte o godz. 22:07)



ELI: 
ISSN 1977-091X (electronic edition)