Speeches

Dear Chair, a few words as rapporteur for the political strategy towards Latin America where the Global Gateway plays, of course, a very important role. In the resolution we adopted on Latin America last year, we highlighted some things that have now been repeated again in this resolution. First, the need for greater parliamentary scrutiny. I think that's the key. Secondly, partnerships with countries where we invest funds from the Global Gateway, where we need more added value and better coordination with these countries and with local communities. This distinguishes us from the extractive, if you will, exploitation model of the Chinese approach, not only in Latin America, but I will now refer primarily to that part of the world. I think this is an excellent report. Congratulations to the reporters Ridel and Bentel. I think that the emphasis on greater operationalism in the execution and implementation of the Global Gateway is a key thing that we need to emphasise today. However, it is these elements that will allow us not to replace, not to marginalise, but to improve and be more effective in using the Global Gateway, which is one of the key geopolitical instruments we have at our disposal today.

Honourable Chairman, predictability is the key word both in this debate and, of course, in the vote that we will have a little later. Even the biggest critics of this agreement believe that by confirming this agreement, predictability will, of course, be greater. What would happen if we didn't pass a vote like this on this deal? Of course, there is a lot of folklore. We have heard a lot of criticism from the left, not just about the deal, but about the Trump administration in general. But that part of the left that needs to be held accountable because they're either in power or part of the majority in this house, they're going to vote for it. There's a lot of praise from the far right for Trump, but he's going to vote against it. Of course, those in power will abstain, and their governments in the Council voted in favour. Why? Because we need predictability in this time of turbulence, and that's why we need to support this deal.

35 years ago, in March of '91, the first victim of the Homeland War - Josip Jović - fell. Here, in the highest house of European democracy, we pay tribute to him and to all the Croatian defenders who have laid down their lives for their homeland. Bloody Easter was not an isolated incident. It was the beginning of the Greater Serbian aggression against Croatia. Aggressions that were carefully planned, and preparations began first with the manipulation of history, and then with a false narrative about the fascism of Croatia. This aggression was supposed to dehumanize the first victim in order to later justify this attempt to destroy the very identity of the Croatian people. The aggression was defeated on the battlefield, but the aggressor narrative did not disappear. He's been quiet, but now he's heard louder again and some want him to be heard even here in the European Parliament. It's not an accident. This is carefully designed and well funded, but we tell them: we did not fall asleep on watch. We will fight against such powerful propaganda, to which we are bound by the memory of...

Dear Chairman, I must react to the statement made in this debate that the supply of oil to Hungary and Slovakia is at risk. That's not true. It is true that the Russian oil pipeline Družba is not working, due to the Russian aggression against Ukraine, but it is not true that the supply in Hungary and Slovakia is at risk because they have an alternative and they are already using this alternative, which is the Adriatic pipeline. Today, the seventh tanker has arrived from when Družba is not working to Omišalj, i.e. to the terminal in the northern Adriatic. This oil is also being shipped to Hungary and Slovakia. Therefore, it is not stated that their oil supply is at risk, but there is an alternative, and this alternative is the Adriatic Pipeline.

Dear colleague, half of the energy that we consume in Europe is for heating and cooling, and the Commission is about to publish a strategy on heating and cooling, and within that, an action plan for geothermal energy – the first action plan. What are your expectations? What do you expect from these strategic documents?

Dear Chairman, we really need to look at relations with Canada in the context of changed geopolitical circumstances, because indeed, the international order that America actually created and maintained, is now changing it itself. And so we need to deepen our relations with Canada, not to be directed against the US, but to take into account all these changes, and we have common values and interests with Canada. We have, of course, Canada as an Arctic country, here we have common interests, common interests in the field of security and defence, and that is why it is good for Canada to be in the Safe program. And of course, we have trade interests. CETA, a trade agreement with Canada, has shown that trade has increased by 63% since it became applicable. In fact, the indicators show that all European Union countries, including France, have benefited from this agreement. Therefore, those who have not yet ratified it, this time I invite them to do so.

Dear Chairman, this is one good document, I will support it, although I do not agree with all the items. Namely, I think too much attention is given to the introduction of qualified majority voting, which in my opinion will not solve the problems of enlargement because decisions will remain in the hands of the Member States. The key question, however, is one another, and that is how to devise a more ambitious policy of gradual integration, because let's be honest, a good part of the candidates, perhaps most of them will not finish the negotiations in this parliamentary term, and we cannot leave them in some void. For a long time now, we have heard from the Western Balkans from different countries that it is not so important for them to have a Commissioner now or the right to vote, but rather to have access to the single market and Schengen. And that's an idea you don't need a priori reject, but I don't think it should replace the enlargement approach and that gradual integration must be merit-based and of course, enlargement is a geopolitical instrument of the Union and therefore every candidate must be required to have a full geopolitical alignment with the European Union.

The European Union imported more than 300 billion euros in gas and oil before this price increase due to the Gulf War. Of course, the solution is not to lift sanctions on Russia now and further deepen dependence on fossil fuels, but to reduce such dependence. Nuclear power, small modular reactors can really be part of this solution. But not just that. The Commission also committed to adopt a heating and cooling strategy in May and, as part of that, a geothermal action plan. Why is that important? Because it's a renewable energy source, we have the technology to do it, it's constant energy, and besides, this way we can cut down on really utilities, and let's not forget that half of the energy we're consuming in Europe right now goes to heating and cooling.

Dear Chair, if the price of square meters has increased by 55% in the last ten years, this is because demand is still much higher than supply and therefore solutions must come from the supply side. Therefore, adopt measures that will encourage more housing units in the market, that those that are on short-term lease today, but also encourage the construction of new housing units. And for this it is necessary, indeed, as the rapporteur said, to simplify bureaucracy - simplification. But we also have to deal with the cost of construction. Of course, there is also a related energy price, so the Commissioner is on track when he works, for example, on the promise made by the Commission to create a new geothermal action plan. I was recently in the Croatian town of Vinkovci. And they would switch the heat they currently have on gas to geothermal energy, so they calculated that they could halve the cost of directing. So I welcome this initiative from the Commission, but I encourage them to do so.

Dear Chairman, Commissioner, in today's Iran, systematic repression is part of state policy. Peaceful protesters were killed, thousands of them. Activists, journalists, members of ethnic and religious minorities are exposed to violence, degrading detention conditions and arbitrary arrests, which are increasingly used as a means of so-called hostage diplomacy towards European citizens. It is not only a violation of international law, it is also a betrayal of Iran's own civilizational heritage, as this tragedy takes place on the ground of a civilization that more than 2,500 years ago produced the Kirov cylinder, one of the first historical principles of government based on justice and human dignity. Europe must therefore stand firmly with the Iranian people in their fight for freedom and dignity, and therefore support this resolution, which calls for additional sanctions and measures against the regime, which oppresses its own people and poses a threat to the entire region.

Mr President, the situation in Uganda is not only a problem for Bobi Wine – of course, it is for him and his family. It's not only a problem for Uganda, for the country. We've seen that last year in Tanzania. We unfortunately are seeing that in other parts of Africa. But this is also a failure for us. It's a failure of our development cooperation policy. Because I will remind you that in the UN SDGs, the 16th SDG is about good governance. And this is exactly what is lacking, for example, in Uganda. Then we are thinking, why is it the case that for every euro that we are sending in our development cooperation, there are ten times more euros that are evaporating in corruption in these countries? This is because there is no accountability, because the opposition is treated in that way, because we have presidents that are in the seventh mandate without any checks and balances. This is a failure also of our development cooperation policy.

Dear Chair, as we have heard in this debate, the argument is very clear why the European Parliament should not be circumvented. I would only add that both Albania and Montenegro are candidates, the most advanced candidates for membership in the European Union, and we ask them to respect the rule of law, to respect the role of Parliament, not to bypass their parliaments, and then we should set such an example in the European Union in respecting our fundamental treaties and in having this high house not only a right, but also a duty to give our consent to the accession of Albania and Montenegro to the Hague Convention.

Mr President, Madam Commissioner, the international community has welcomed the political agreement and the ceasefire agreement reached between the Syrian Government and the SDF from March 2025 and January this year. Yet, it is crucial that the significant steps towards de-escalation are carried out in a way that will finally bring peace and protection to all citizens and, of course, to all ethnic and religious communities in the country. In this regard, the Institute for the Documentation of Human Rights Violations Against Religious Minorities in the Levant has recently published – on 3 February 2026 – a report documenting and denouncing the fact that Alawite, Druze, Kurdish, Yazidi and Christian communities in Syria face targeted killings, abductions, forced displacement and other forms of religious persecution. What can the European Union do in this situation? Well, I will suggest at least two things. Firstly, in addition to all the efforts that the Commissioner for the Mediterranean is making, the Commission should also finally appoint a special representative for religious freedom. This is something that was promised a year ago. It is time to deliver on it. Secondly, to promote a federal constitutional framework in Syria, granting local and minority self-governance. The EU should support the right of all citizens in the country to have an inclusive political system that will guarantee peace and stability.

Madam President, ladies and gentlemen, what has happened in Honduras and why are we debating this resolution today in the European Parliament? Because there was, obviously, a new attempt in a government in Latin America to ignore the will of the citizens that was expressed in the vote. There was an attempt to retain power, even though the popular vote went in another direction to what was the government's political sign. It is a similar situation - not identical, but similar - to what Nicolás Maduro did in 2024, when he did not want to recognize that the Venezuelan people said "no" to him and changed and wanted González Urrutia to be the president. That was worse, because he stole the election and declared himself victorious. Here it was not so much, but yes, with this decision of January 10 of President Castro, it was tried not to allow the transition seeking a recount, although the electoral mission of both the European Union and the Organization of American States (OAS) validated the result and concluded that the electoral process had been in accordance with international standards. And in addition, that decree that President Xiomara Castro had signed had no legal basis, because if anyone was competent to make such a decision it was the National Electoral Council. What was done? Intimidate the members of the National Electoral Council and, in addition, attack the opposition, even with a physical attack suffered by deputy Gladis López. For what? To avoid peaceful transition. What is there to support now? Obviously, take care of the vote, that this peaceful and democratic transition takes place, a transfer of command and respect the will of the citizens of Honduras.

Dear Chairman, today we are talking about an independent Europe, which requires a European Defence Union and strengthening our economy. Both require access to critical raw materials, and we cannot do so unless we support the Mercosur agreement, which we will decide in a matter of minutes. Of course, we also need to reduce Europe’s dependence on foreign trade and strengthen our internal market. We have Letta's report, we need to implement it faster. And finally, energy policy, in the past mandate, was defined exclusively by climate objectives. This is no longer sustainable in today's world. Environmental concerns must of course be at the heart of our energy policy, but geopolitical goals, strengthening our economy, strengthening our competitiveness and achieving our geostrategic autonomy must be at the heart.

Madam President, 15 years ago, over 50 % of the population in the world were living in democracies. Today, that is less than 30 %. So obviously Fukuyama was wrong when he thought about the end of history and that democracies will finally win over autocracies. However, in many critical areas that we have mentioned today, I would like to use this opportunity to mention also a success story. I was the chief observer in Bolivia for the elections there. After 20 years of one hegemonic party – the Movement for Socialism – we were organising, we were supporting, we were trying to be with our Bolivian friends to support them in a democratic transition. And there were a lot of fears that they would not succeed. However, we supported the electoral commission to be independent, to be professional, and they managed to do that. And the most important thing: the citizens of Bolivia, when they saw us with their European cap, they saluted us because they saw in the European Union a guarantee that the democratic process will be respected. So there is a lot of bad news, but we also need to be aware of our success stories.

Mr President, well, as the rapporteur has rightly said, the European Union has always supported a rules-based order. The problem is that that order is disappearing, if it has not disappeared already. So we need to adapt and act quickly. I see here three points. First, to speed up our investment in defence if we want to get some sort of strategic autonomy. Second, we have a very important vote tomorrow on Mercosur. I think we cannot afford not to support the deal with Mercosur if we want to be a geopolitical actor. All the talk about global Europe or Europe as a geopolitical actor would be just wishful thinking without that deal. Third, enlargement. I think we need to move forward with enlargement, but we also need to put the alignment of candidate countries with the European CFSP at the heart of the accession negotiations. This is extremely important if we want to have a successful enlargement and if we want to adapt to this new world.

Madam President, Madam Vice-President, first of all, no Democrat should regret the fall of Nicolas Maduro. His dictatorship caused millions of emigrants, hundreds of political prisoners, corruption, drug trafficking and an appalling impoverishment of the Venezuelan people. Secondly, the abuses of power by a dictatorship – it is true – do not entitle a superpower not to respect international law, but international law cannot be an excuse for the systematic violation of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and for the international community to do nothing about it. The international community and, in particular, those governments and political forces that have collaborated closely with the Chavista dictatorship have failed the Venezuelan people, and are therefore the last to talk about international law. Thirdly, this Parliament recognized Edmundo González Urrutia as president-elect, although many did not want to vote on that occasion. That recognition allows us today to insist that both González Urrutia and María Corina Machado must participate in a transition to democracy in Venezuela. Talleyrand told Napoleon that you can do many things with bayonets, but you can't sit on them. The use of force can overthrow a dictator, but it is not enough to gain legitimacy. The legitimacy of the transition process can only be given by the inclusion of the democratic forces led by María Corina Machado.

Dear Chairman, this is not just Greenland, but a serious crisis in transatlantic relations and therefore it is not the time for panic moves, to throw ourselves into the hands of the Chinese, as some advocate, but for a clear and firm position. The position that we are open to cooperation with the United States on security issues, on common security, but we do not accept any blackmail. We will certainly know how to deal with these threats about customs. This has already been proven in the past and the European Union has the tools to deal with it. But for our message to be credible in the long run, we must clearly build European defence capabilities and thus reconfigure our transatlantic relations, our partnership with the US and beyond Trump.