Speeches

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.

–The Honourable Chair, Mr Commissioner, Colleagues and colleagues, the Republic of Croatia fully deserves entry into Schengen as it has fulfilled all the required conditions, both technical and political. Croatia has the longest external land border of the European Union and wants to contribute to greater security on it, and the European Union hereby proves the functionality and attractiveness of its model. Speaking about the future of Schengen, we need to strengthen it as one of Europe's greatest achievements, and new enlargement is one of the best ways, especially in this critical time when war is waged on European soil and when one crisis replaces another, but it is important to continue implementing the Schengen acquis. This strengthens trust between the members of the Schengen area. There is also a need to have confidence in countries that have been working for a long time to meet the Schengen criteria. I look forward to building on our membership of the European Union. Thus, we acquire the same free movement rights for Croatian citizens, who already enjoy 420 million people in 26 countries. This is the equal Europe we stand for.

The European political community must first prove what it is not. It must not in any way slow down the process of further enlargement of the European Union, let alone become an alternative to full membership of the European Union. In the wake of Russia’s aggression against Ukraine and far-reaching geopolitical shifts, we must indeed not water down the renewed interest in enlargement policy after a long time. In addition, it will be very difficult to maintain a structure that would position itself somewhere between the established procedures of the European Union and the looseness of the informal political forum. Also, skepticism is produced by the fact that such a wide network of participants implies an extremely heterogeneous society, according to many characteristics. With so many different interests in the game, there is a growing chance that none will ultimately be satisfied. Finally, I believe that such a community, introducing divergent political values, represents an uncertain benefit to the European project itself. The UK's request to e.g. remove the flags of the European Union from the founding assembly, perhaps best illustrates the depth of the contradiction between the ambitions and realities of the European political community.

Madam President, Mr Commissioner, there are so many evidences of an active role of the Lukashenko regime in the Russian aggression on Ukraine since day one. Belarussian troops may not have been involved in the conflict; still, dozens of thousands of Russian troops were deployed to Belarus. Belarussian airspace was used for launching attacks against Ukraine. The supply of weapons for Russian armed forces in Ukraine was organised over the territory of Belarus. At the same time, Putin and Lukashenko continued holding meetings to discuss even closer cooperation. Therefore, our sanctions on Putin and his regime should be mirrored on Lukashenko and his cronies. It’s evident that Lukashenko is malignant. However, his possibilities to influence geopolitics are lesser than Putin’s. Belarus, the oldest dictatorship in Europe, is a true example of the limited sovereignty theory in practice. Stolen elections and mass protest brought Lukashenko’s regime under pressure. Putin’s aggression against Ukraine might, hopefully, end it.

Madam President, Mr Commissioner, enlargement policy is not only about political and economic unity – it is founded in our values too. Following the common foreign policy might not be defined as key criteria, but it becomes today as one of the critical indicators of the commitment of the candidate countries. It cannot be dismissed or treated as a side issue that will gradually be aligned. Our position is clear. Serbian negotiations can only advance when the sanctions are fully adopted. In Montenegro, persistent political instability affects their front—runner status. On BiH, the new recommendations with the same complex conditions will hopefully bring the country closer to the candidacy status, but we remain cautious. Albania and Macedonia deserve a fast track to compensate for the time lost, and any delay in visa liberalisation for Kosovo is detrimental to our role and perception. We need to build back our credibility by acknowledging the progress and by not ignoring the backsliding when it is obvious.

Madam President, Mr Commissioner, Russian aggression against Ukraine and its multiple consequences remains our focal point, as it should. The most urgent remains energy prices. Taxation of excessive profits, joint purchase, and reallocation of unused EU funding are valid proposals. We need fast, innovative, and common solutions. But we should apply the same strategy and decisiveness to our foreign policy. Increased political, economic and military assistance is essential to help Ukraine and to tackle all other crises caused by Russian aggression too. Illegal referenda, annexation, and the latest attacks on civilians require a severe economic and political response with further sanctions. The last point on the agenda is relations with China following the Communist Party Congress. The framework and definition of our relations with China will directly affect our future as it’s the best test of our geopolitical ambitions for a strategically autonomous EU. A strong, resilient, and united Union is always the proper answer.

Mr President, Mr Commissioner, it’s really hard to say what is worse, Russian war of aggression or Kremlin long—term propaganda. There is a clear political agenda to boost disinformation, propaganda, stimulate regional tensions to destabilise, while supporting radical and populist political options all over Europe. Pro—Russian political options come from the extremes, from populist backgrounds, and they serve as Putin’s ‘useful idiots’, often as well—paid ‘useful idiots’. However, sadly one can find them even among some former and current EU prime ministers. I would also say that the EU was keeping its eyes shut on this matter for years, hence the consequences. Putin’s cronies are using dangerous, cynical and manipulative misinterpretations. They are trying to strengthen pro—Russian sentiment by undermining our cohesion, our unity, and by speaking against the sanctions. They are using the rising costs of living, the energy crisis and inflation to speak favourably of Russia and to advocate for the return to business as usual. We cannot return to business as usual and we cannot overlook the vicious Russian war of aggression and their war crimes. Russian attempts to weaponise energy is just a final confirmation of this. We would also add that no one in Europe can now sit on two chairs. Serbia, for example, remains the only European country besides Belarus that has not imposed sanctions on Russia. The recent signing of the agreement with Russia in the UN is a slap in the face for their enlargement perspective, but primarily to their citizens that want to join the EU. We need to continue countering this propaganda, by giving strong support to civil society and fact checkers, not only in the EU, but also in our immediate neighbourhood.

Mr President, more than seven months since the start of its aggression, things are not going as planned for Russia. What was supposed to be a quick special military operation turned into a long battle, where Ukrainian forces showed exceptional bravery and even started to advance. The pipeline that was a significant source of financing for Russian aggression is sabotaged. In desperation the Kremlin began to mobilise. I believe that, once again, this House will confirm a strong-text resolution and this lead the way for future actions. Our demands and suggestions are precise. We want and ask for: another robust package of sanctions targeting anyone involved in these illegal referenda, as we will never recognise their so-called results. Coordinated actions on the visa and asylum applications of the Russian citizens and concrete proposals for advanced military support. I would also like to reflect on the great sense of unity permanently shown by this House since the start of the Russian aggression on Ukraine. One of the most critical tasks is maintaining unity among our governments and citizens as well. We have to be clear and say: the origin of all the problems that our citizens are dealing with – high energy prices, food supply problems, and security threats – are caused by the actions of the Russian regime. The firmer we are with our sanctions, the sooner they will end. And the change in Russia should come from within. Therefore, we should increase our support to those in Russia who raise their voices against the Putin regime and can be the drivers of this change. This war will end Putin’s regime. Slava Ukraini!

Madam President, first of all, congratulations to the rapporteurs for their excellent work. As a shadow rapporteur for the second report, I will focus my intervention on the border regions. The border regions’ importance goes beyond statistics. As the report’s title said, the border regions are living labs of European integration. Given the specificities of their positions and the challenges they face, these regions should also be living labs for European innovation. The fact that the border regions generally perform less well economically than other regions within a Member State is a call for our swift action. We need flexible and feasible programmes that can easily be adapted to the specific needs of the regions. I also join the calls to the Commission and the Council to find a way out of the current blockage of the regulation on a European cross-border mechanism. We need proper implementation and enforcement of relevant EU legislation, the rights of cross-border and frontier workers, improving their employment, working, health and safety conditions. Teleworking too should be recognised. Therefore, we call on the Commission to revise the Regulation on the coordination of social security systems, to put forward legislative proposals for a European social security pass without further delay. I particularly welcome the green dimensions of this report. As recent floods have shown, we must urgently increase our cooperation on disaster risk-management, including improved early warning across border regions. I wish to end my intervention by highlighting the importance of cooperation with border regions at our external borders of the European Union, with their counterparts in the countries that are yet to become members. Our funding programmes should be even more significant too, to promote EU enlargement policy.

Thank you for your response. My second question will be a follow—up related to the Russian influence in the Western Balkans, and its effect evidently and for the long time has surpassed disinformation campaigns. Are there any new ideas and proposals, possible consequences, being considered in the case of the Western Balkans, in particular related to the countries and stakeholders where Russian influence is the most present, where they are not aligned to our sanctions and the majority of citizens does not support European Union accession and support Russian aggressions on Ukraine instead?

Mr High Representative, six months into an unjustified and illegal Russian aggression on Ukraine, we are encouraged very much by the resistance and successful counterattack by the Ukrainian army. Ukrainians pay the highest price of this war and they need, depend on and deserve our support. However, political, economic and social consequences of the war are felt globally. International reactions to Russia’s war and its serious violation of international law have displayed some rifts in the international community. We note with concern that some third countries have been tempted to listen to Russia’s manipulative allegations, according to which EU and Western sanctions were responsible for food shortages and famine in third countries. My questions: do you see the need to adapt EU policies promoting multilateralism and the rules-based global order? If so, in what way? And finally, which main challenges for EU strategic communications does Russia’s war of aggression against Ukraine impose?

–Dear President, first of all, I would like to thank the Council and the Parliament for their support for the introduction of the euro in Croatia. The Council also recognised the changed geopolitical circumstances and finally sent a clear political signal on the readiness of the European Union for further enlargement. The European perspective has been confirmed for the three countries that deserve it, and because of the resistance to Putin's Russia they really need support. However, the Western Balkans can be talked about, unfortunately, with less optimism. The conclusions, except to some extent in the case of Bosnia and Herzegovina, did not register any progress. The European perspective in this region was confirmed 19 years ago. The blockade of the start of negotiations with Albania and North Macedonia undermines European credibility. This only proves that the European Union must be reformed in parallel in order to be able to make more effective decisions like this. Bosnia and Herzegovina has however been given a certain chance in the election year, but the ruling policies must not repeat the old mistakes. Changed geopolitical circumstances should be an incentive to change political relations in the country, certainly for the better. Bosnia and Herzegovina is waiting for a place in the European Union. Any real move on this path will have our support.

Thank you, Mrs. Chairman, the decision of the US Supreme Court to overturn the right to abortion is a dangerous precedent and evidence of ‘trumpism’, unfortunately, has not disappeared with his mandate. That is why we must do everything to prevent similar initiatives in our societies that are inspired by this humiliating decision. In these traumatic and never simple situations, women must be able to independently decide on their own body and reproductive health, without pressure and conditioning, and receive adequate care in their city and their country. Unfortunately, the health system in Croatia is also crossed by the most conservative influence, so in the public health system we have entire hospitals where doctors refuse the right to access abortion. It is time that throughout the European Union, including Croatia, we additionally legally ensure the right to abortion by including it in national constitutions and the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union. A woman's right to choose should not be revoked. It is our duty to ensure and defend this right.

Madam President, I would like to thank all colleagues for tonight’s debate but above all, my colleagues the shadow rapporteurs for their great contribution to this report and for excellent cooperation. Tonight, the European Parliament once again showed its full support for the European future of Montenegro. I am more than convinced that Montenegro has the capacity to overcome the current problems outlined in the report. It knew how to prove it in the past, and I have no doubt Montenegro will be able to do it again in the future. Continuously high support of citizens for EU membership binds political options, and they should be stimulated to cooperate to achieve that trans-party goal. In this context, Mr Commissioner, I would like your prediction to be fulfilled that by the end of your term, our term, at least one country in the Western Balkans will conclude negotiations on EU membership. It would be a common endeavour and an important sign that the European Union remains an open project.

Dear Chair, Honourable Commissioner, Honourable Colleagues, it is honourable to present the report on Montenegro for the second time, this time for 2021. At the beginning, I would like to highlight two key facts. Montenegro is the furthest away on the Eurointegration path and has opened all chapters. And almost 80% of Montenegrin citizens support the country's accession to the European Union. Montenegro is at the forefront of enlargement policy in practice. This fact must not be overlooked in discussions on granting candidate status and accelerating accession to the European Union. The past year, to which this report refers, has been marked by internal political blockages and stagnation along the European path. This year we also mark ten years since the start of negotiations on Montenegro's membership in the European Union, but no chapter has, unfortunately, been closed since 2017. The main political priority should therefore be to close the negotiating chapters, i.e. to meet the interim benchmarks for rule of law chapters 23 and 24. This requires a complete negotiating team, and it is precisely the negotiating structure that has not been operational for a long time. The report highlighted concerns about insufficient progress in judicial reform and the prevalence of corruption, two key sectors seeking legislative support. Progress in the fight against organised crime and in international police cooperation is to be welcomed, while limited progress remains in the area of media freedom. We reiterate the importance of strengthening the protection of journalists, stepping up efforts to fight disinformation, hate speech, online harassment, politically biased reporting and foreign influence in Montenegrin media. Foreign influence in Montenegro is evident. We have witnessed dangerous events in Cetinje. We note the direct influence of the Serbian Orthodox Church on political events in Montenegro. In addition, Russia's continued interest in destabilising the region was underlined, which could also be felt directly in Montenegro. The report condemns the protests against the then unnamed minority government, which were used from some political options to show support for Russia and on the day of the start of the aggression against Ukraine. We have made it clear that the denial of genocide, rhetoric to fuel intolerance or the glorification of war crimes must not be tolerated. For this reason, it is important to welcome Montenegro’s continued and full alignment with the European Union’s Common Foreign and Security Policy, including through European Union sanctions against Russia and its active participation in missions and operations under the European Union’s Common Security and Defence Policy. Problems recorded in the report are primarily obligations that require the dedicated work of all branches of government in Montenegro. Right now we need to speed up the pace of their resolution because too much time as the most precious resource has been spent in vain. We welcome the formation of a new minority government composed of pro-European parties as well as the election of a new speaker of parliament. We also call for the appointment of the co-chair of the EU-Montenegro Stabilisation and Association Parliamentary Committee as soon as possible. Montenegro needs a continuous and engaged dialogue between all parliamentary parties and relevant stakeholders with a view to building a strong pro-European and democratic platform. This would be the optimal way to mitigate political polarisation or possible radicalisation. The aim is to permanently ensure social stability, respect for democratic processes, norms and standards, as well as the pro-European aspirations of the vast majority of Montenegrin citizens. Montenegro in the European Parliament has proven sincere support from all pro-European political groups. There is a consensus on the implementation of the reforms necessary to address the shortcomings of the institutions that are essential for adapting to the standards of the European Union. Russia’s brutal aggression against Ukraine has once again given a strong impetus to the static enlargement policy of the European Union. When it comes to the European Southeast, the EU's enlargement policy needs to demonstrate its credibility by opening blocked negotiations with Albania and North Macedonia. However, I also believe that Montenegro can be a collateral winner in the new situation. Of course, provided that the operational capacity to address the still open issues of the negotiating agenda brings it to the level of stated ambition. In this regard, I wish the most responsible for the process in Montenegro a lot of success so that we can welcome Montenegrins as full citizens of the European Union as soon as possible.

Mr President, the summit this week is of historical importance that we cannot miss to use. Enlargement policy should cease to be a side policy but part of the EU’s mainstream again. We have to grant candidacy status to Ukraine and Moldova as a sign of our clear political support and our recognition of their commitment. Georgia deserves the same, but has to follow up on the clearly determined conditions for its candidate status. Granting candidacy status must be accompanied finally with the start of the negotiations for North Macedonia and Albania. The European Union’s recommitment to the Western Balkans is more urgent than ever. It would also be the best message for the people of accession countries to still believe in the European Union and their European future. The enlargement process must remain a merit-based approach. After years of fatigue, let’s fuel new energy into the enlargement process. Everything else would be a strategic and historic mistake that would weaken the credibility of our Union.

Mr President, the Russian invasion of Ukraine caused a reset and tectonic shift in many political attitudes and policy responses. One of the main lessons is that the common foreign, security and defence policies of the Union can no longer be the weakest link in our integration. We all agree to condemn Russian aggression in the strongest possible terms. By defending itself, Ukraine defends us too, and we can no longer avoid responsibility for our security and defence. Taking more significant responsibility also means larger investments from our side. However, being strategically autonomous means that our focus cannot only be on security and defence spending: foreign policy can’t lag behind too. Enlargement policy, for example, one of the most successful policies, must also be at the centre of our action. The credible perspective of enlargement and the merit-based regatta approach must be our political response already at the next Council meeting in two weeks.

Dear Chair, Mr Commissioner, I congratulate the rapporteur, Mr Omarjee, and welcome the debate on this important report. For several years now, in the European Parliament, we have been continuously fighting for European islands and islanders, almost 20 million of them on 2,400 inhabited islands, but we can do more and better at both European and national level. The methodology and all relevant Commission proposals must start to take into account insularity as a factor, and member states must support and implement such proposals in national programmes. We already have a legislative basis for this in Article 174 of the Lisbon Agreement, and we also have an example of good practice – a specific percentage for the islands in the Just Transition Fund. Developing islands lag behind the mainland on average about 20 percent. The availability of public services is significantly lower, the prices of products are higher. Transport and energy are dependent on often inadequate connections with the mainland, and economically mostly on seasonally unsustainable tourism. But we should not only talk about problems, but also about opportunities for development. The pilot project on the energy transition of islands has proven that islands can be at the forefront of the green transition process at European level. A similar innovative model should be applied to other aspects of their development. Cohesion policy, the Fit for 55 package and the Resilience and Development Mechanism should be financial platforms. The islands don't just live in the summer. Islanders deserve a level playing field and availability of services throughout the year. I therefore join the call on the Commission to make 2024 the year of islands and to adopt the European Action Plan for Islands as soon as possible.

Mr President, I would like to congratulate the rapporteur, Mr Waitz, because I believe the report is timely and shows that this House is a leader in topics that will shape our future. The world has changed since 24 February, and so the view of many on our defence. We need more cooperation between our Member States and with our partners, through a set of actions. I believe in importance to prepare for new security challenges affected by the climate change, which could increase threats and have geopolitical consequences. We can already witness that in areas such as the Arctic or the Sahel. I also want to point out the water issue. Due to climate change, water supplies will be affected, while global water demands will rise. Therefore, I believe we produced an ambitious report to respond to some of the biggest challenges of our time. Our response definitely should be both more environmental and without endangering our safety in these unstable times.

Mr President, congratulations to the rapporteur, Mr Kyuchyuk, but it’s another report on North Macedonia where we, unfortunately, cannot welcome an intergovernmental conference and the start of the accession negotiations with the European Union. North Macedonia did everything it was requested to do, and yet we still do not know the date the country deserves. They underwent substantial reforms, including to strengthening its democracy and fighting against corruption, and even changing their name. And contrary to some others, North Macedonia has fully aligned with the European Union sanctions against Russia. There must be no excuses for further delay if we want to preserve our credibility. It is also necessary to keep the pro—European aspiration in North Macedonia and the whole Western Balkans region. Given the changed geopolitical context of the Russian aggression on Ukraine, strengthening the enlargement policy is more important than ever. In June, a positive decision on starting the accession negotiations with North Macedonia and Albania is a must.

Mr President, Mr Commissioner, I want to thank the rapporteur on this valuable reflection on the state of play of our relations with Moldova. We acknowledge many of reforms undertaken, and specify the ones that should remain a priority in the upcoming months and, most notably, the strengthening of the state institutions and justice reform. The European Parliament will remain a strong supporter of all of the reform processes, as confirmed by the Memorandum of Understanding with the Parliament of Moldova last year. We cooperate in many areas, but we should do more and we should increase our financial institutions’ assistance for all of the necessary reforms. Lastly, given the changed security context following the Russian invasion of Ukraine and the pro—European geopolitical orientation, Moldovan efforts should be acknowledged politically too. Supporting a swift assessment of Moldova’s readiness and applications for EU membership would be an essential step in the right direction. We support that.

Mr President, Mr Commissioner, given the highly worrying security situation after the Russian aggression on Ukraine, it’s very much timely to discuss the state of cooperation between the European Union and Moldova. Security incidents in the Transnistria region and mandatory military mobilisations clearly show how fragile the security situation in this area is. It’s worth praising the reaction of Moldovan leaders which properly contributed to the de—escalation of the already challenging situation. Russia has an abiding interest in destabilising Moldova and the Kremlin has now chosen the means of external interference in Moldova through propaganda, military presence, energy blackmail and direct interference in political processes. It is important today to oppose these actions and see how we can best support Moldova. Following the signing of the Stabilisation and Association Agreement with Moldova in 2016, the European Union has continued to support Moldova, and we recognise the results already achieved. When it comes to the application for EU membership, we welcome it and call for compliance with the established procedure. We also call on the Commission to assess Moldova’s readiness and application for EU membership and ensure that its opinion is delivered swiftly to the Council. At the same time, political actors in Moldova should contribute to meeting the European aspirations of the people of Moldova, seeking to establish consensus on the most essential and urgent structural reforms. Finally, I would like to emphasise the exemplary solidarity of Moldova and the Moldovan people towards the refugees from Ukraine. Moldova has shown its support for Ukraine and its commitment to European values. We now need to increase our support for Moldova in this challenging situation. The EU stands by Ukraine. The EU should also stand by Moldova.