Speeches

28 years ago, there was a genocide in Srebrenica. Victims should never be forgotten. Justice must catch up with all criminals, and politics must prevent such a crime from happening again anytime and anywhere. But today Milorad Dodik denies the genocide in Srebrenica with the same ease as the existence of Bosnia and Herzegovina as a state. He persistently provokes to divert attention from the legal violence he is perpetrating in his entity. The political situation in Bosnia and Herzegovina is the best indicator that progress cannot be made without consensus and without respecting the constitutional order. That is why we need to consistently apply the conditionality policy that is part of the IPA III agreement and the recommendations on the strategy for a new enlargement of the European Union. The Commission should submit its evaluation as soon as possible and Bosnia and Herzegovina must finally fulfil the main part of these commitments. Time is running out as the country loses 1.5 percent of its population annually and ranks first in the world in terms of population decline. Bosnia and Herzegovina is a place in the European Union. Any real move on that path will have our full support.

Dear Chairman, Dear colleagues. Russia again proves that it does not choose the means to achieve the objectives of its aggression against Ukraine. A kada su ti ciljevi ugroženi, njihove zločinačke akcije imaju sve brutalnije posljedice. The destruction of the Nova Kakhovka dam, with its humanitarian, social and economic consequences, is accompanied by an environmental disaster. That is why they are fully supporting the Ukrainian forces in the counter-offensive they have launched. We hope for good news from the battlefield in the coming days and weeks. In the meantime, it is of utmost importance to discuss and take concrete actions for the reconstruction of Ukraine. I support the Council of Europe’s initiative to establish a register of damages caused by Russian aggression. I hope the other two members of the European Union will also recognise the value of this initiative. I also join the calls for a legislative framework that would use Russian sanctioned assets for the reconstruction of Ukraine. Croatian experience with post-war reconstruction can also be used as a reference, with all the successes, but also the flaws. The reconstruction of Ukraine will only be fully successful if it is conducted in a transparent and socially inclusive manner, with a comprehensive reconstruction of state institutions.

Dear Chairman, first of all, my deepest condolences to the families who lost their loved ones in last week's armed attacks. Tragic events are a reminder of the chronic problems of Serbia, the personal power of one man, the occupation of the state and its institutions, the glorification of war criminals and the toxic media scene. Key democratic indicators confirm that Serbia is stagnating, stagnating on the European path. Continuous financial support to the regime of Aleksandar Vucic through investment projects does not bring Serbia closer to the European Union nor does it move it away from Putin's Russia. The transparent tactics of outsourcing internal problems, unfinished Serbian transitions and the export of conflicts to the neighbourhood should cease to surprise. So much expected progress in dialogue with Kosovo, which is not in practice, must not be an alibi for the lack of a more effective EU policy towards the Serbian authorities. But full support for citizens who obviously want a different one in a better, European Serbia, a non-violent Serbia. They prove that there is a capacity for change. Without them, the permanent crisis with negative impacts on the entire region will continue, and the EPP, of which Vucic's party is a part, has a special responsibility for communicating European values to the official Belgrade.

Mr President, of course it’s of great importance to address this revealing topic today. We continue to witness horrendous war crimes executed by the Russian forces as well as continuously forced deportations of thousands of Ukrainian children. Officially, 16 000 Ukrainian children were abducted, but the true number might be even higher. We had a resolution on the special tribunal for the crime of aggression in January, and we strongly welcome the ICC arrest warrants of 24 March too, but in reality, this is the only one way to end these horrific practices: to end the war by defeating the Russian invaders. Therefore, with the upcoming Ramstein conference, we cannot lose the momentum to continue our full support to Ukraine. Forceful abductions cannot change the identity of the nation. Whenever the war ends, it must be imperative that all those responsible are held accountable for their actions. Only full justice can bring healing and enable the recovery of Ukraine.

Mr President, the key question today is, what is our common position on China? We witnessed weekly visits of Member States’ and institutional leaders to China, but we certainly lack coherence. Our relations with China should not become another issue that creates internal divisions. One does not prove strategic autonomy by being autonomous from other Member States, and institution leaders should think twice before providing EU cover for individual visits. Our relations with China also reflect our global ambitions. We have some strategies and Global Gateway, but we are lagging in practice. We are the number one world donor, but China is the number one trading partner for 120 countries worldwide. Moreover, in the last 20 years, more than 40 countries reverted to semi-autocratic or autocratic regimes. Therefore the European Union cannot simply walk away from traditional alliances that define the future of democracy. And only a united Europe is a strong Europe.

Madam President, Commissioner, Minister, we are all aware of our long-standing problems in defence: duplication of resources, lack of coordination and collective action, and low speed of developing them jointly. For a long time, there was no real need nor political will. Now there is a both but we have institutional obstacles that prevent us from doing it at the needed speed. The inability of the allies to supply Ukraine with sufficient resources would be a decisive factor in this war. We should do all possible to avoid this scenario. Our political goal should be clear: we should not only help Ukraine to resist Russian offensive actions, we need to supply Ukraine to win this war. More resources allocation and reorientation of existing defence production to meet the current needs are essential. In the past year, we have shown that we can act together. Let us not make our efforts go in vain. Slava Ukraini!

Mr President, the European Parliament will remain a strong supporter of all of the reform processes in Moldova. With a change of political context following the Russian invasion of Ukraine and pro-European orientation of the country, Moldovan efforts should be acknowledged in many ways. We should do more. We cannot forget that part of Moldovan territory has been under Russian occupation for a long time. Citizens of Moldova have been enduring this Kremlin—fuelled separatism which has cost them dearly. It would be irresponsible and naive to think that Russia has now focused exclusively on Ukraine. On the contrary, we need to be very careful in our immediate neighbourhood. That is why it is highly disturbing to witness these attempts to destabilise political leadership in the country: a well—known scenario set by corrupt pro—Kremlin oligarchs and their parties seeks to misuse the dire economic situation to divert the country from its European Union path. It’s a hybrid warfare of cynicism developed by the Kremlin to destroy our European House, our values and our democracy. The defenders of democracy and our values are nowadays our neighbours, and we should not overlook this, but give them strong support.

Mr President, Commissioner, colleagues, the only positive element about the political situation in Georgia is that the law on the transparency of foreign influence is withdrawn. Copying wrong solutions is never a good practice. Citizens did the right thing by standing up to it. It’s good that their pressure had a positive outcome. The similarities with the original law in Russia are as evident as the Russian interference in Georgia. It’s unfortunate that the Georgian Government is threatening the EU perspective of the country. It gives the argument to all those who advocated the unjust separation of Georgia from Ukraine and Moldova last year. Instead of working to fulfil the list of conditions to advance on the EU integration path like other two countries, the Georgian leaders are doing the opposite. There can be only European progress with European commitment and values. The dream of the Georgian people is Europe.

My second question is related to the fact that we are days away from very important presidential elections in Montenegro, following almost three years of political instability and no progress on their European Union path. How much is the US involved in fixing instability concerning the Montenegrin Government, fighting disinformation and external influence and trying to get the country back on track with reforms? Would joint EU—US mediation similar to the joint mediation called the Prespa process in North Macedonia maybe an option for Montenegro?

Mr High Representative, welcome to the House. It is very timely that we met and discussed our global cooperation with the USA today in the deteriorating security environment at our borders and with a number of security challenges arising across the world daily. EU Member States have stood by Ukraine throughout Russia’s war of aggression with every means possible, including through military support, with experts estimating that EU Member States individually and through the European peace facility have donated approximately 12 billion in military aid in this regard. However, the war has put under pressure European defence industry production capacities, which already faced strong competition from American companies which have dominated the market in Europe for years. How do you envisage future collaboration with the US in the field of the defence industry in light of both European industry production capacity shortages and strong preference over the years to procure American—made defence products? What steps are being taken to develop the European defence industry adequately to ensure Member States begin procuring more interoperable equipment?

Madam President, Madam Commission President, Mr High Representative. The ongoing political crisis in Moldova shows us that Russia is not limiting its assertive actions only to Ukraine. Through disinformation and foreign interference, Russia is trying to provoke a political crisis within the European Union and along European borders. With one year since the start of the Russian aggression, what are the lessons to be learned? There are a couple of them – we need to continue supporting Ukraine as long as it takes to defend itself; we need to make our sanctions more efficient and close all the gaps that enabled their evasion; common foreign, defence and security policies cannot remain the soft spots of our integration; we need to be strategically autonomous when it comes to essential industries and services; we need to continue working together on reducing our energy dependence; prioritising trade and economic relations without insisting on our political values leaves Europe exposed to crisis, and we need more Europe to address all these challenges. Slava Ukraini!

I would like to remind the Commissioner that I also asked about the ‘Open Balkan’ initiative, about your stance on it – what’s your take on the ‘Open Balkan’ initiative?

Mr Commissioner, I reflect on two subjects from your portfolio: Montenegro and the rule of law. As the former leader in accession progress, Montenegro, alongside Serbia, is the only country that did not progress on the EU accession path in the last year. We have witnessed almost two years of political instability and we still do not have a new government in place. Nor is there any decision on the extraordinary elections. What does the Commission plan to do to get the country back on track with progress on EU-related reforms? Another source of political tensions there is the ‘Open Balkan’ initiative. What is the view of the Commission regarding the initiative? Finally, the rule of law should be a crucial precondition for progress in accession, and the main feature of the new methodology. Is this provision formally confirmed in practice? Is the rule of law really a key provision that sets the tone for overall progress of the accession countries?

Dear Chairman, Mr Commissioner, I extend my deepest condolences to the citizens of Turkey and Syria. This is an unimaginable tragedy of immense proportions and endless sadness. I want the survivors to have the strength to rebuild their lives from the ruins, not to be overcome by despair, however difficult it may be. I call on the European Union to provide all possible assistance to alleviate the suffering of people in Turkey and Syria. Many thanks to the rescue teams from all over the world! I also use this opportunity to share the experience gained after the earthquakes in Croatia, Zagreb and Petrinja in 2020. I would like to thank the institutions of the European Union for sending a generous package of assistance to Croatia. Thanks to it, the city of Zagreb managed to renovate a certain number of public buildings: schools, kindergartens and museums. But we also learned some lessons in a very painful way. It is necessary to pool administrative capacity in one institution in order to prevent European Union assistance from being used in a timely manner. Unfortunately, the slow pace of our administration at national level has slowed down the renovation of private buildings to such an extent that it is likely that the opportunity to use most of the allocated European Union funds will be missed.

Madam President, I welcome this initiative to gather in Kyiv to witness the extraordinary courage and resilience of Ukrainians and show our support. Yes, this is the first European Union summit to be held in the country where war is raging, so its historical significance must meet tangible results with clear guidelines and plans for immediate future. The key message of the summit must be that we stand with Ukraine and count on its European Union perspective. Furthermore, I think it’s essential for our citizens to clarify some doubts, fears and even propaganda that Ukraine is rejecting diplomatic solutions. Since the 90s, there have been many diplomatic initiatives, Minsk 1 and 2, the Normandy Format, let alone the Budapest Memorandum, and they were all bluntly disrespected by Russia when it started its aggression. Yes, peace should remain the ultimate goal, but as they pay the highest possible price in this war, true peace for Ukrainians only means their victory over invaders.

Madam President, dear colleagues, we must not stay silent on what is happening in Iran. People are dying fighting for freedom, and the actions of the Iranian regime are twilight of humanity. That punishment and torture are weaponised on people that are exercising their basic rights. The Iranian regime is brutal, cynical and barbaric. In their desperation and increased isolation, the regime is even using technology and facial recognition for repression of its citizens. Moreover, we can only condemn their drone—based partnership with Russian invaders in Ukraine. We have to continue to strongly support the Iranian people. It is crucial to call for decisive EU response, and the Revolutionary Guard must be put on the list of terror organisations. Our message to the regime needs to be loud and clear: stop killing your people.

Madam President, Commissioner, dear colleagues, I wish to start by giving my full support to establishing a tribunal of crime of aggression in Ukraine. In this House, I have been calling for it since May. Last week’s attacks on civilians in Dnipro are the most brutal reminder of why we need to establish this court without delay. The ongoing investigation by the Prosecutor of the ICC into the situation in Ukraine based on war crimes and crimes against humanity is by no means important. But we are also aware of its limitations. It will be crucial that this court has the explicit backing of the United Nations and its establishment is closely coordinated with Ukraine. As the EU, we have to work towards increasing consensus among international partners and organisations to make this possible. It must be imperative that all those responsible for war crimes are held accountable for their actions. Only complete justice can enable the true recovery of Ukraine.

Madam President, Mr Commissioner, the recent attack against civilians in Dnipro is a stark reminder that the European Union must take decisive action in response. Following that attack, the number of civilian victims surpassed 7 000, and we are still missing the data on missing persons. It’s good that we have this discussion today, and it will be even better if the next package strengthening sanctions against the Putin regime is adopted as soon as possible. I wish mainly to stress how important it is that the already adopted sanctions are being implemented, so we do not see, for example, the confiscated yachts of Russian oligarchs leaving the EU waters in the middle of the night. Ahead of the Ukraine Contact Group meeting in Rammstein at the end of this week, our response must also be that increased military support is needed. We must show our solidarity with Ukraine again and provide them with all the resources they need to protect their people and defend themselves against the aggressors.

Mr President, Mr High Representative, first of all, congratulations to the colleagues who worked on these documents. The brutal war in Ukraine marked the past year and exposed several of our shortcomings that we need to address and in many ways we reacted in a positive, unprecedented way. Despite many challenges and some countries regressing, I am particularly content that the enlargement policy is being mainstreamed again. In the past year, three countries became candidate countries. One was given a European perspective. One applied for the membership and two more finally began their negotiations. This is a good example of recognising political realities and necessities and moving things forward. We should apply this approach further. So my main conclusion would be that in the ever-challenging global environment, including a war on our continent, our answer should be ‘more Europe’. It’s time to reform our common foreign security and defence policies so that they are no longer the weakest link of our integration.

Mr President, together with several colleagues, I visited Kyiv two weeks ago. Horrific numbers we hear about victims, destroyed objects and missiles targeted at civilian targets become truly real once you see it first—hand. Russia did not succeed with its military plans, so it is now targeting critical and civilian infrastructure. Over 65 000 destroyed objects and 17 000 airstrikes Ukraine endured since 24 February. Six million people are without electricity. At a certain moment, Kyiv did not have electricity, water, heating or internet. The situation two weeks ago was alarming and now with even lower temperatures, it’s becoming critical. Ukrainians are fighting bravely and we need to do everything we can to help them win this fight with more humanitarian, financial and military assistance. A significant concrete step would be EUR 18 billion in macro—financial assistance. We committed and approved it. Now we need to deliver it urgently.

Mr President, dear colleagues, our identity is under attack and some wrongdoings will have serious consequences for institutions’ reputations. Probably the most expected outcome of the latest corruption allegations is that the ones who profoundly threaten democracy within the EU, and from outside, will use this case as an alibi. So far, we have been more focused on the pride of holding the torch of democracy globally. Unfortunately, we did not complete secure management of democracy internally. As some Member States and officials within the EU showed, democracy can be effectively suppressed even after it was once established. Besides that, our immediate neighbourhood is in many cases a playground for autocratic regimes. Attacks on our democratic structures often have a foreign imprint. But for it to succeed, they are provided by internal allies. To defend our democratic standards we have to address both urgently. We need to build a resilient system that goes beyond simple codes of conduct, increase transparency regarding our meetings and introduce improved clearance of everyone working at and representing our institutions. Immediate course of action should be to set clear rules on lobbying, as well as strong protection of the whistleblowers. To strengthen the confidence in democracy we have to lead by example.

Madam President, Mr Commissioner, thank you all once again all of you for your remarks and contributions. I want to thank first of all the shadow rapporteurs for our excellent cooperation throughout the process. Of course, thank you all colleagues who took part in the debate with ideas, contributions, hopes and in some cases scepticism. As my introductory remarks were mostly focused on what the EU should do to accelerate the enlargement process, now I wish to focus more on the countries aspiring to become members. The success of the enlargement process also depends on them, as you said Mr Commissioner, it’s true. It is a twofold process and a partnership. Excluding Ukraine, which is fighting for its freedom, we see persistent political crises these days, tensions between the countries, and foreign interference. However, we need good news and positive examples of development and cooperation. We need to see that you follow our principles and values in practice. Moreover, we need to see political consensus in your countries on the EU accession that would be above internal political differences. A European future is what your citizens support and deserve. Europe is where you belong.

Madam President, Commissioner, dear colleagues, thank you for the opportunity to present recommendations of the House on the new enlargement strategy. Thank you also for entrusting me with this important task at a time when enlargement becomes geopolitically strategic policy after 10 years of fatigue. The Russian aggression in Ukraine has had a tectonic impact on many of our policies. We all agree that a new impetus is needed to re-energise the enlargement process, ensuring its continuity, efficiency, credibility, and impact. Council conclusions, the agreement on the candidacy status for Ukraine and Moldova, and the recognition of the European perspective for Georgia are strong political signs of support. With this decision, the scope of the enlargement policy was officially extended to the Eastern Partnership countries. Therefore our internal administrative structures and external financial instruments will need to be adjusted accordingly. In the context of the before-mentioned conclusions and the expectations from the Western Balkans, I wish to highlight one of the main messages of the draft text. Each enlargement country should be judged on its own merits. As the EU, we should overcome the enlargement gridlock by revamping the accession process both as a political goal and methodology. For that, we believe we need a new EU strategy for enlargement in which we have to define clear and transparent policy objectives and implement the necessary and timely institutional reforms. The reform processes of the enlargement policy and internal reforms of the EU should go hand in hand. In fact, the enlargement process can encourage much-awaited EU reforms. The rule of law should be at the centre of the process. We should strategically apply targeted conditionality based on clear progress benchmarks. That means timely rewarding reforms and reacting on the regression or a persistent lack of progress. In the same context, we must emphasise the alignment of accession countries with the EU’s common foreign and security policy. EU membership means more than just EU funds and transport corridors. Before anything, it represents a set of values and principles to share and respect. I would also like to briefly present several novelties that are proposed in this document. Clear deadlines for concluding negotiations with the accession countries, and these negotiations should finish by the end of this decade. Qualified—majority decision on the start of the negotiations, and opening and closing of individual chapters. The final decision would still be unanimous, but I believe this would be a leap of trust in the process that some issues can be solved through negotiating. We cannot lose time once again, like in the case of North Macedonia and Albania. Chief negotiator from the EU side for each country: this could benefit the transparency of the process, primarily when we communicate with the citizens of candidate countries. Establishing a framework for effective cooperation between the European Public Prosecutor’s Office and the accession countries to facilitate close cooperation and the prosecution of the misuse of EU funds. A formal assessment of accession countries under the EU’s rule—of—law mechanism and report, and the EU Justice Scoreboard, using the same indicators that apply to the Member States to prevent a persistent lack of progress, severe deficiencies and regression. The creation of a special dedicated rule—of—law task force to be entrusted with developing more substantial and effective support to candidate and potential candidate countries. This goes along with the active involvement of judges and prosecutors from the Member States. Phasing-in of candidate countries to respective EU policies, initiatives and the single market, including access to EU funds in the respective areas. This will enable citizens to experience the benefits of accession throughout the process and not only upon its completion to reward sustainable progress. This House was always a prominent supporter of enlargement. With our joint work and by adopting solid recommendations on how the future enlargement policy should be implemented, we can once again set the tone and standards to enable the Union to grow and prosper.

Madam President, Mr Commissioner, after the horrific tragedy of 22-year old Jina Mahsa Amini we are continuously witnessing inhumane actions in the Iranian regime. Iran is trying to suppress the fundamental right to protest in the most brutal way, including by issuing death sentences. More than 400 protesters have been killed and around 17 000 have been arrested by the security forces. News coming from Iran is very disturbing, and unfortunately, the most vulnerable are not spared from the horrors. The fact that about 50 children have already been killed is bloodcurdling and shows the barbarism of this regime. Yesterday we also saw the Iranian football players at the World Cup standing in solidarity with the protesters and refusing to sing the national anthem. The regime’s response was expected – censorship, darkness, and ignoring. Their brutal repression is trying to crush the protests, but it cannot break the spirit of freedom that has inspired many Iranian people to risk their lives for the common good. We as the European Parliament have to send a strong message of support and put forward a decisive EU response to sanction the deeply compromised Iranian regime. It’s our duty to those courageous people looking for their freedom.

Madam President, Mr High Representative, yes, it’s high time we debate our relations with China, which are essential for the European Union, our role as a global actor and our future development. The most essential task is to unite the position of Member States on this, and we continue to see individual actions that affect us all. We should simultaneously work on our industry redeployment as we work on energy independence. Members of this House are still sanctioned for speaking the truth about evident human rights violations. Moreover, we see reports on illegal Chinese policing in the European Union. Russian aggression in Ukraine is also testing our relations. It’s essential to talk, open up a long list of difficult questions and stand firm in defending our stances. But while we can discuss with China global challenges and negotiate the rules on how we trade in goods, we should never trade our values.