Speeches

Dear Chairman, Mrs. Commissioner, first of all congratulates our colleague Šarec on creating a good document that we are discussing today. Montenegro has been leading the Euro-integration process for years with the ambition to join the European Union as soon as possible. On this path, internal problems were often more challenging for Montenegro than negotiation chapters. I recall the uneven pace of democratic transition, change of government and politics with strong polarisation of society, which unnecessarily complicated relations with neighbours. Investment projects such as the recent agreement with the United Arab Emirates also contribute to polarisation and dilemmas. The formula for progress in the accession process implies achieving political and social consensus on membership, as well as promoting values, projects and policies that truly consolidate it. At the same time, the list of problems should be shortened over time, not further extended. I want Montenegro to be the next member of the European Union, but on this path it must successfully resist cap Lingus with the concept of the so-called Serbian world, which cannot be competitive with the process of European integration because it is their complete negation.

Madam President, dear colleagues, the reason for this oral amendment is the need to change a sad fact. Unfortunately, instead of 15 victims of the tragic event in Novi Sad, today we have to count one more: a young man, Vukašin Crnčević, left us in the meantime. So paragraph 23 now reads: 'Expresses its sincere condolences to the families of the 16 victims who lost their lives and to those who were injured following the collapse of the canopy of Novi Sad train station on 1 November 2024; calls for full and transparent legal proceedings following the investigation by the authorities, to bring those responsible to justice; underlines the need to examine more broadly to what extent corruption led to the lowering of safety standards and contributed to this tragedy;'.

Madam President, the European Union has to keep playing an active role in supporting peace in Ukraine, which would be based on fair grounds and not as a quasi solution leading to an unjust frozen conflict. I believe this position is shared also among our like-minded partners. We used to once again stress our respect for international law and for Ukrainian territorial integrity. We must not forget the war crimes done by the aggressor and allow for the aggressor to be rewarded. However, the question is does Russia want peace? With his actions in the past months and his increased aggression, one could only conclude that Putin doesn't want to end the war but to end Ukraine. An additional plan of the Kremlin is the collateral weakening of the European Union in the process of negotiation with Washington. Nevertheless, we must stay committed to defending the values on which the European Union was originally formed. Slava Ukraini!

First of all, thank you to all for your speeches, ideas, support, but also to those who have a completely different opinion. Of course, I would particularly like to thank my fellow shadow rapporteurs and assistants for the excellent cooperation and work they have done to enrich the content of this report. I would just like to point out that Serbia's path towards the European Union is extremely complex because it is a process that cannot be accomplished overnight and without serious changes in the country. But nothing will change without the political will of those most responsible for the current situation in the country, because the long political crisis and polarizations reinforced by the lack of progress in basic criteria such as the fight against corruption, the rule of law, media freedom and electoral reform directly affect Serbia's progress towards membership of the European Union and the stagnation that has been going on for more than three years. For too long, the government in Serbia has tried to use the best of EU funds, while neglecting the fundamental values and geopolitical orientation of the same European Union. Finally, it is important to say that Serbia is a candidate country for membership that has a special weight and influence in the wider area of the Western Balkans, so it is understandable that we will monitor the political situation in Serbia with maximum attention in the future.

Dear Chair, Honourable Commissioner, Colleagues, I am pleased to welcome you at the end of the months-long process of drafting the European Parliament's annual report on Serbia, which I present for the first time as a standing rapporteur. On the personal side, I must say that this was a very challenging duty, which, unfortunately, included non-diplomatic practices, unfounded accusations, manipulations and personal attacks. Nevertheless, I approached this job professionally, with the best intentions, firmly believing in the openness of the common European project, transforming the potential of joining the European Union and the benefits it brings to the citizens of the Member States, but also the candidate countries. The report we are discussing tonight is the result of work with colleagues in Parliament, contact with various stakeholders who wanted to talk, evaluation of the Commission's progress report on Serbia, interpretation of various expert documents, but also visits to Serbia. All this has contributed to the analysis of the current political reality in the country, and this political reality has been extremely complex for a long time, especially in the last six months. The fall of the canopy at the station building in Novi Sad, when 16 citizens lost their lives, became a tragic symbol of systemic corruption, nepotism and inadequate control mechanisms that would have to protect citizens. Today we are discussing the situation in a country where electoral legislation has serious shortcomings, the media are generally not free or accessible to all, where the media regulator does not work, justice is selectively shared by the judiciary, and those who point to problems are exposed to public attacks. Likewise, the personal data of protesters is made public, unidentified illegal means are used against them, which is then investigated by Russian services, European Union citizens are detained and expelled from the country for their social media status, and European Union member states and their officials are accused of being behind the so-called color revolution. In addition, Serbia consistently refuses to align with the geopolitical commitment of the European Union and impose sanctions on Russia, while voting in the United Nations is justified as a mistake. Despite some progress, notably in the area of competitiveness and inclusive growth clusters, Serbia still faces major obstacles that must be overcome: improving internal political dialogue, the rule of law and the fight against corruption, reaching a comprehensive normalisation agreement with Kosovo and full alignment with the European Union’s foreign policy. Ensuring the independence of key institutions, including the regulator for electronic media, and the full implementation of all OSCE/ODIHR and Council of Europe recommendations on electoral reform in a transparent and inclusive process are missing. Certainly before the new elections, which would be crucial. All this is highlighted by the Commission in its reform plan. Economic data, although improved, cannot be the only measure of success, as the European Union is not just a common market either. In the last decade, the EU has invested billions of euros in Serbia, but the public perception and communication of the leaders of Serbia, for the most part, does not reflect this. Often, economic growth is also based on non-transparent contracts that are excluded from the application of public procurement law. Such agreements, in addition to economic ones, also have direct political influence. For this situation, the European Union must also assume its own, certainly smaller, share of responsibility. From the top political messages on progress in the rule of law, to bilateral trade agreements between the largest members, to the extremely low rate of investment of European money where it brings the greatest transformational benefit – in strengthening the judiciary and fighting corruption. Commissioner Kos, I followed with interest your visit to Serbia last week. I think some very important messages have been sent from your side and I hope that you will have the support of the Commission's leadership for them. At the same time, the statements of the Serbian leaders on the formal commitment to European integration sound really inconclusive, while this week he is planning a trip to Moscow and new energy agreements with Russia, and there are no necessary reforms in sight that are crucial for a successful European path. After all, accession to the Union is primarily the responsibility of a member state, not an alibi that avoids its own responsibility for problems in the state. Finally, I would like to mention students who plan to run to Strasbourg to convey their messages. I appreciate their sacrifice and their struggle. I have heard their messages clearly from the very beginning and in the report I highlight the same goals that they are committed to. Since they as young people represent the future of their country, the attitude of the authorities towards them speaks much more than any party programs about the future. The European Parliament, as the institution that votes on the accession agreement at the end of the process, will remain the most vocal proponent of enlargement, but we want this process to be based on merit, real reforms and clear alignment with European values and the geopolitical positions of the European Union.

Madam President, Madam High Representative, dear colleagues, the sound of the US walking away from the long-term partnership is loud and clear. These provocative statements about Greenland coming from the Trump administration are not part of the summer ranting at a rally. On the contrary, these problematic messages reach global audiences. Some say disregard the rhetoric, just look at executive orders, but rhetoric is important too. After all, is a rule-based order just some buzzword that decorates speeches? Just opposite. It's a clear system of values, something that brings us together and forms the European Union as we know it. It's a legacy of the Europe built from ashes, as these days we remember 80 years from the end of the Second World War. The rules-based order is now under threat due to aggressive leaders getting space after different crises, bringing a crisis of its own. Greenland serves as an example. That's why this threat must be an opportunity for the European Union to evolve and proceed stronger. There is no other way.

Mr President, as the global order is under serious pressure, relations with our key ally are becoming one of the most important challenges we must address. It is clear that President Trump is using tariffs as a tool for blackmail. We must be prepared to respond to them equally. If he backs off, we can de-escalate, respecting our trade and digital services laws. It's not just about the trade in goods: when we add the exchange of services to the overall trade relationship, we almost reach an equilibrium. While politics on the other side of the Atlantic is currently arbitrary and transactional, the European Union must be a factor of global stability that conducts politics clearly and in a way that is based on facts. Moreover, this situation is an opportunity for the EU to take political responsibility, attract experts who share our values, and assume the global role because it has the democratic strength and economic capacity.

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.

Mr President, Mr Commissioner, dear colleagues, four years ago, many expected that NATO would be back to business as usual, and that Trump was a one-time incident. We also had the strategic compass drafted. Unfortunately, the turbulent developments of today’s world show us how that expectation was wrong, and how we cannot take things for granted anymore. Strengthening our collective defence to respond to all kinds of threats in the current circumstances is a must. The responsibility we bear to our citizens is something we cannot betray. We have to provide the right incentives to fully develop our autonomous security and build the European Defence Union. At the same time, funding should not come at expense of our successful social and cohesion policies, which is why we need a viable investment strategy. Finally, you cannot choose your neighbours, but you can choose your friends. This is also an opportunity for the European Union to strengthen foreign and security ties with like-minded allies and partners all over the world.

Madam President, dear colleagues, I welcome the proposal to strengthen European Union defence capabilities with ReArm Europe, and I call on Member States to proceed forward. I also believe that this House will support an even more ambitious position. It goes without saying that the transatlantic disruption caused by the new US administration has brought us long-term geopolitical changes. We must not base European security on voter attitudes in US swing states. The EU needs to plan de-risking policy towards Trump's Washington. This is not America that wants its allies to respect it. This is an America that wants its allies to fear it. Europe must make some historical and responsible steps ahead. Bold leadership and adequate funds are needed, including through seizing EUR 200 billion of Russian assets. I always repeat that our security does not stop at our borders. That's why we have to act fast and to act now. Time is of the essence.

Mrs. Chairman, Mrs. Commissioner, dear colleagues, the tragedy in Novi Sad has sparked civil protests that have grown into a broad social movement. The reasons for the discontent are related to the rule of law situation, respect for democratic standards and financial transparency in Serbia. I once again express my support to all young people who peacefully and with dignity demand a better future for their country. In Serbia, we are witnessing a political crisis, and political crises require political solutions. The solutions cannot be expulsions of European Union citizens or unfounded accusations of foreign interference. The new elections, if any, should be preceded by a reform of the electoral system in line with the recommendations of the OSCE and the Council of Europe. Nor is the solution an opportunistic interpretation of stability backed by European money for infrastructure projects, with a lack of criticality for the state of democracy. The Commission's reports point to problems, but some European leaders praise progress. If we want new members with a credible enlargement policy, we need to communicate more clearly and redirect more European funds towards strengthening democratic institutions and the judiciary. The European Union has long been not only a common market, but also a community of democratic values.

Mr President, Madam Commissioner, dear colleagues, three years after morning news that changed the world, we can only echo our full support and commitment to Ukrainian people and their heroic fight against the Russian aggressor. The war against Ukraine is now in its critical phase. While the situation remains uncertain in so many ways, it is important to stress that no negotiations can result victoriously and gainful for flagrant aggressor. It's not only an issue of negotiating peace, but keeping it. Furthermore, this is not a war only affecting the European Union and the European continent, but also the United States and the rest of the world. The new administration in Washington cannot overlook this and float ideas that may only resonate with transactional logic. We need to reject this information and cynicism, fuelled by the aggressor and his puppets, and stay committed to defend the international rule-based order and values on which European Union itself was formed. Slava Ukraini!

Mr President, unfortunately, all the worrying expectations were confirmed during yesterday's inauguration day. The United States stepped into the new era of transactional politics, where merits, facts and values mean little and international law is not a standard. It's all wisely masked under many labels to gain larger public support. After the super election of 2024, we have entered the super uncertain 2025, and good part of the uncertainty comes from the direction of Trump's new term. The most important question is: where does this leave European Union? One of our members is being directly threatened. A high-level member of the new administration is directly interfering in our national election processes while repeating – let's be polite – disputable salutes. So far, our response is brief, hopeful, and wait to see what will happen. But is it realistic? Our priority must be to protect our values, achievements and security internally through long-delayed inclusive and transparent reforms.

Madam President, the Western Balkans Summit is coming up in the middle of the busy enlargement week. As enlargement policy becomes again mainstream, it is crucial to uphold the merit-based process based on all of the Copenhagen criteria. Lack of consistency from the EU leadership, mixed with the particular interests of Member States, affects our credibility. We can rebuild trust in the European Union only by addressing the main challenges: the rule of law, judiciary, widespread corruption, freedom of media and democratic standards. Investments and infrastructure projects are very welcome, however, economic convergence and the common market can't be our only goal to achieve in the region. We need to redirect significantly more funds towards projects that produce democratic, not only economic, values. Our enlargement policy shouldn't be a transactional tool sponsoring 'stableocracy'. Western Balkans countries belong to the European Union. Let us not miss this opportunity to do it right for them and for us.

Madam President, Madam High Representative, dear colleagues, I would like to start my speech by strongly condemning Russia's persistent disinformation and historical falsification to justify its war of aggression against Ukraine. Why does Russia use disinformation and falsification? Because their actions have no justification under international law. Most probably, this debate will enable a number of opinions and attempts to justify the actions of Russia, which might then be misused and miscommunicated on social media platforms. That's also an additional reason for us to be even more committed to defending the historical facts, as well as the present premises of international law. We insist on a special tribunal on Russia's crime of aggression and for international justice to deal with Russia's war crimes and crimes against humanity. We call for a legal proposal to use the EUR 200 billion frozen Russian state assets in order to arm and reconstruct Ukraine. The use of profits is not enough. It is also high time to have reached a common position on the use of long-range weapons against legitimate military targets on Russian territory. The best way to fight disinformation, apart from calling it out, is to respond to them with concrete action to help Ukraine for as long as it takes.

Madam President, during 1 000 days of war, EUR 122 billion available for assistance and, finally, one million artillery shells delivered. European perspective step by step became a reality. As Europeans, we can be proud of our actions, but we must continue. On the other side, direct involvement of North Korea and the new nuclear doctrine, warmongering and war crimes. More support to Ukraine and stronger sanctions for all direct and indirect enablers of Russian aggression are needed. Our transatlantic allies voted for a change that is difficult to predict, but we cannot get overprepared for reaction to any way their action may take. If NATO will no longer be enough, Europe needs to step up. If rules and values become transactional tools, we must oppose it. While Ukraine fights for our security, Europe must lead the fight for the rule-based international order. As long as it takes.

Of course, thank you for the question. Reality, facts show that the US and EU economy combined matters 40 % of world GDP. I do not think that President Trump will do anything which might hurt American business interests. So I do hope – and I believe that there will be a rational approach towards the European Union – that he will not be very harsh in planning his next moves. If you don't know, I would like to remind you that, unfortunately, we did not succeed to settle some disputes with the Biden administration, and we got only a truce until March of next year, so we in Washington got approximately half a year at least to avoid open trade war. But, nevertheless, the European Union must be ready for a different course of action.

Madam President, High Representative, dear colleagues, the election of Donald Trump most probably will have enormous repercussions. It will not affect only EU-US relations, but it will also define what we want from our Europe. It will face us with many challenges, economic, trade, military and defence-wise. That is why we need to be more prepared than we were eight years ago when 'Trump Part 1' happened. It's important to monitor whether the new American President will try to translate his harsh rhetoric and announcements of radical moves into the content of his new mandate. Dilemma remains: how to cooperate with an administration so preoccupied with dismantling multilateral order while the European Union is the most remarkable multilateral community? Let's stay united, just as we were when Brexit took place, when we showed that remaining united is our biggest strength. That's something we have to repeat once again if needed.

Dear President, dear colleagues, on November 1st this year there was a terrible, tragic incident in Novi Sad in the Republic of Serbia when a concrete canopy collapsed at the main railway station in the city. This unfortunate event resulted in the loss of fourteen lives. The railway station has been under reconstruction for the past three years. Investigations into the causes of the collapse are currently underway. After the tragedy, citizens staged protests to pay tribute to the victims, demanding justice and accountability for the tragedy. Dear colleagues, we mourn the victims of this tragedy in Serbia and pay tribute to them.

Madam President, dear colleagues, blasts in Stockholm and Copenhagen, as well as the verdict of the court in Düsseldorf two years ago, should be convincing arguments for the European Union to take decisive actions against the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps. While we fully respect the heritage of the JCPOA agreement, our relations with Iran are multifaceted and more complex. Women's and human rights in Iran in general, Iran's growing foreign interference within the European Union, rising global challenges such as the Russian aggression on Ukraine, escalation of military actions in the Middle East and involvement of Iran, to name just a few. We should keep the dialogue and comprehensive approach with Iran, but we must not shy away from directly addressing all growing issues of concern, to be critical, and to make decisions to protect our interests. Sanctioning the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps would be a possible step in the right direction.

Mr President, colleagues, fighting interference and disinformation does not stop at our borders, as all sorts of authoritarian regimes are increasing their activity in our immediate neighbourhood. Russia, with its ongoing military presence in Transnistria, is a destabilising factor per se, meaning that the hybrid warfare to put Moldova under the Kremlin's control should be unacceptable for all pro-European democratic forces. Let me remind you that for supporting Moldovan EU aspirations, the economic and energy security is crucial in all these efforts. The recently signed Security and Defence Partnership is a welcome framework for our support. I also call on the Council to adopt targeted measures against pro-Russian actors involved in hybrid attacks against Moldova. As for the European Parliament, we need to increase our own resilience throughout this mandate and adopt new and innovative approaches, continuing the legacy of the INGE Committee in these new, even more troublesome geopolitical circumstances.

Mr President, dear colleagues, in the last two and a half years, the European Union supported Ukraine substantially more than many would have predicted. However, our to-do list is still very long. The start of the new legislative mandate is an opportunity to live up to the existing commitments, but we must continue to improve the efficiency of our sanctions and our military and economic support. There cannot be any fatigue in delivering our support when the immediate threat is still present. Trade with Russia should be avoided while the aggression is ongoing. Better burden-sharing between the Member States is also needed. Due to the issue of restrictions on the use of Western weapon systems against military targets on Russian territory, Ukrainian operations are subject to international law provisions and, as such, should be enabled. Ukraine must be given a fair chance in this war to fight for their country and our security.

More than 200 days after Hamas' terrorist attack on Israel, the catastrophic humanitarian situation in Gaza will clearly need to be further addressed by urgently de-escalating new conflicts erupting across the region. The chronic desperate situation in the Middle East is putting increasing strain on the involvement of Iranian proxies operating in countries such as Lebanon and Yemen. But what can really lead to threats to global security in this regional skirmish is the escalation of tensions between Iran and Israel that culminated in Israel's attack on the Iranian consulate in Damascus, Iran's unprecedented response to a massive counterattack and, finally, Israel's revenge response last week. Israel and Iran must stop the spiral of further confrontation, as it can only exacerbate already difficult security conditions and chronically poor relations in the region. That is why, in this context, we cannot and should not be passive observers. We expect European leaders to work more effectively to de-escalate the situation. Everyday images of horrors coming from the region are evidence of a disaster that we should have reacted to a long time ago, uniquely and decisively. In conclusion, the initial step is de-escalation. In this process, the European Union must play a key role and not let down expectations. Success would in parallel reinforce the idea of a more geopolitically influential Union, a project that must continue in the next mandate of the Commission and Parliament.

Mr President, colleagues, first of all, I would like to thank my co-rapporteur, Mr Karlo Ressler, and all the shadow rapporteurs, as well as Secretariat and staff, but also the Council and Commission for an excellent cooperation we had on this important dossier. If I would have to describe the negotiations, I would say they were tough but constructive. We managed to strongly defend Parliament’s position by keeping united front from our side, which is something I very much commend. The Facility is the centrepiece of the Growth Plan for the Western Balkans, published by the Commission in November last year. The Facility will cover the period from second half of the current year to 2027, and is expected to provide up to 2 billion in grants and 4 billion in loans to the European Union Western Balkan partners. It will complement the existing Instrument for Pre-Accession Assistance (IPA III), considerably increasing financial assistance to partners in the region. As the co-rapporteur from AFET, I would definitely like to emphasise some foreign policy and enlargement points that we have achieved throughout the negotiations. It is important to underline that for European Parliament, alignment of the Western Balkans countries with our Common Foreign and Security Policy was a main point. A reference to the CFSP is kept in the text as this is, for us, one of the key components of the overall policy framework on the enlargement processes. Eventually, convergence with the Council was reached on the following points: a reference to full alignment with the CFSP, including restrictive measures in Article 3, objectives 13 and 14, Reform Agendas. Related to this, a reference was added to fight disinformation and foreign information manipulation and interference, and moving forwards, harmonisation of visa policies with the Union. The placement of the text on Serbia-Kosovo dialogue remained in the Article 5 precondition, with the updated wording from the European Parliament. The Commission initially objected to the European Parliament wording in Article 5.2. Preconditions that the Commission shall also take into account recommendations of relevant international bodies, including the Venice Commission, Council of Europe or OECD. Finally, it was added to the text in the article after free and fair elections, which is especially important considering the recent elections in Serbia. We also managed to agree to add Commission Rule of Law Reports into the text as a part of the definition of the enlargement policy framework in Article 2. I also want to reiterate that the European Parliament went through a process in a uniquely unprecedented speed, having such a short time to come to negotiate in view of reaching an agreement, has proven very challenging, both on the political and technical level. The outcome in such a quick procedure has to be considered as an achievement. However, the European Parliament should not agree to such an extremely rushed procedure in the future. I believe that support for enlargement will continue in the next mandate. We, as the European Parliament, also stress the consistent message that enlargement can go hand in hand with internal EU debates. Therefore, I would like to point out several key points. Every candidate country should be judged on their merit. Our fundamental values, such as the rule of law and democratic standards, must be the pillar of our assessment if the country is ready to join the European Union. Building bridges, tunnels and highways is welcome, but respect for fundamental values must be a precondition for that. The European Union is more than an economic union, it is a union of values and shared risks. Once the candidate country fulfils all the criteria, there should be no political delays to its accession. EU enlargement is one of the most successful EU policies and it must continue. Dear colleagues, we have always supported EU enlargement and believe that our cooperation with Western Balkans countries is of crucial importance. But we always stress that joining the club is about adhering to certain values and norms that the Union represents. We need to deliver, but Western Balkan countries need to deliver too. Having said that, the waiting room before the European Union door is now completely full. The time has come to finally change that and start to fulfil the enlargement ambitions. As the mandate is ending, I am also proud to have authored the Parliament’s recommendations on the new EU strategy for enlargement. Revived enlargement policy will be an excellent legacy for this term and a message for the future. Thank you once again for your support.

Mr President, Mr Commissioner, Mr Michel, the presence of Chinese police has been so far registered in many Member States. These cases illustrate very well the increasingly aggressive foreign policy of China in the last ten years. Such a foreign policy of Beijing is also a reflection of the growing repression against its own population. These precincts were allegedly established to help Chinese citizens with administrative procedures, such as renewing their passports or driver’s license. However, these unofficial police stations are used to hunt down not only Chinese criminal suspects but dissidents abroad. Human rights activists report a lot about this malign practice. The question is whether, when signing the agreement, EU Member States were aware of the fact that China would act like this on their territory. This is why we have to step up our work to tackle foreign interference. We must better prioritise our resilience with the new Parliament and Commission after the election too. While trading with China, we must not trade with our core values.