Speeches

Madam President, ladies and gentlemen, as colleagues have already mentioned, the recent release of a number of political prisoners in Belarus indeed offers a glimmer of hope amid a dark reality. Yet over a thousand remain unjustly imprisoned still. Belarus remains a battleground for truth. Journalists and dissenters face brutal repression, but their courage shines as a beacon for change. I recall the words of Sviatlana Tsikhanouskaya in this House. She said, 'the EU from Lisbon to Minsk is a nightmare for Putin, but for us it is a reality we strive to live in'. Not despite, but precisely because of, the recent releases, we must stand firm, strengthening sanctions and supporting those who risk everything for freedom. Dictatorships thrive when alternatives seem absent. The European Union is that alternative, empowering the democratic forces of Belarus to keep the dream of democracy and the rule of law alive. The future of Belarus belongs to its brave citizens and not to the dictator in Minsk.

Madam President, Madam High Representative / Vice-President, dear colleagues, I can only underline what so many colleagues from all the different groups have already argued this evening: the extent and the quality of any engagement with the United States should be decided in Nuuk. Greenland is a self-governing part of the Kingdom of Denmark. Greenland is sovereign and Greenland will decide its own future. The European Union will always stand for sovereignty, territorial integrity and the rules-based world order. The Arctic is indeed changing. Strategic interests are indeed rising, but our values must remain firm. That's what I wanted to say as a North German neighbour of Denmark.

Madam President, dear Commissioner, dear colleagues, as previous speakers have already mentioned, the upcoming EU‑UK summit marks a pivotal moment to recalibrate our partnership. Ever since the Windsor Framework, agreed in March 2023, we have seen greater political stability in our relations. The much anticipated EU Security and Defence Pact could be a real milestone. Enhanced cooperation in military mobility, joint research and development, and cyber resilience – this is all urgently needed. The EU and the UK should rise to the occasion and ensure an agreement that also fosters deeper cooperation on intelligence sharing, sanctions coordination as well as foreign information manipulation and interference. Yet, a mature partnership should go beyond security and defence. The Commission has put substantial proposals on the table on everything from energy to youth mobility. We should deepen cooperation in further key sectors: energy interconnectivity and offshore renewables in the North Sea, financial services through regulatory equivalence, and a pragmatic sustainable fisheries arrangement for the time after 2026. As for the Trade and Cooperation Agreement, the TCA is due for review next year. Long‑term stability in our relations is more important than ever. Commissioner Šefčovič, we look forward to discussing the outcome of this summit with you in the Foreign Affairs Committee.

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

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

Madam President, dear Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen, I can echo a lot of things that have been said already in this debate, but not a single word of my previous speaker. After numerous wake-up calls we have discussed here, Europe's moment of truth has finally arrived. We're not starting from scratch. In March 2022, the 27 heads of state or government adopted the Strategic Compass. A year later, the Commission published the European Defence Industrial Strategy, and we also adopted ASAP and EDIRPA and agreed on the capability development priorities. All these initiatives are slowly but surely pushing Member States to step outside their national corridors in pursuit of a genuine European Defence Union. But now we really have to make a great leap. Therefore, dear Commissioner Kubilius, the white paper must build on these achievements, and propose regulatory and programmatic initiatives at European level, rather than confining itself to a description of threats and shared needs. You, dear Commissioner, and the HR/VP have a chance to significantly steer this debate. I look forward to discussing the white paper thoroughly at committee level.

Madam President, Madam Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen, two weeks ago, I had the privilege of leading the three-day AFET mission to Chișinău. It was indeed a timely visit, just a few days after the provisional trilogue agreement on the Moldova Reform and Growth Facility, which previous speakers have already explained. In Chișinău my impression was – and I felt – a profound sense of optimism surrounding the transformative potential of a EUR 1.9 billion facility, because it offers much more than just financial assistance: it brings hope for a brighter future. The facility will significantly improve the country's infrastructure. Thanks to our support as a European Union, Moldova can finally reduce its dependence on Russia. But this brings me to a critical point. With more and more malign interference and an intentionally orchestrated energy crisis, the Kremlin is trying to destabilise Moldova's democracy and foster discontent ahead of the upcoming parliamentary elections in autumn. Moldova embodies Europe's core values, showing unwavering solidarity with Ukrainian refugees, demonstrating remarkable resilience in the face of Russia's blackmail, and displaying immense courage in aligning the country's future with a united Europe. President Maia Sandu has done tremendously in addressing the impact of the war on Moldova's doorstep, while bringing the country closer to the European Union. Our message to the people of Moldova is and remains: we hear you, we see you, and we will stand by you.

Madam President, dear Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen, the American retreat from international institutions and agreements was in many ways a move to be expected from President Trump. These reckless decisions have far‑reaching risks and repercussions. Specifically, I want to shine a spotlight on just one of the most devastating impacts, which hasn't been mentioned yet this evening: the suspension of US humanitarian aid and its dire consequences for global demining efforts. At this very moment, 58 countries are contaminated by landmines, 28 are grappling with the traces of cluster munitions. These devices cripple and kill, particularly in active conflict zones like Ukraine. Just yesterday, we heard the speaker of the Verkhovna Rada outline the dire needs of his country. In 2023, the United States contributed nearly USD 310 million to mine action, making up 39 % of global support. Without American funding, life‑saving demining operations are grinding to a halt. In return, the delivery of humanitarian aid is obstructed, economic development hindered and post-conflict reconstruction delayed. While the European Union cannot fill the gap left by the US alone, let us take a leading role. Every EU Member State is a party to the Anti-Personnel Mine Ban Convention. We have already pledged millions of euros for mine clearance, but we need to ensure this commitment is reflected also in the next multiannual financial framework.

Madam President, Madam Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen, dear colleagues, geography dictates that developments in the Middle East are always of key interest to the European Union. Yet things are as they are. Our influence in the region is at a low. A fragmented patchwork of strategies has failed to account for the political realities of the region, and internal divisions amongst our Member States have hindered meaningful impact. Amid claims of double standards, a shifting balance of power and an unpredictable US administration, you, dear Commissioner, together with the High Representative, will have to find common ground amongst our 27 Member States on issues where certainly no easy answers exist. Our strategy must indeed prioritise the two‑state solution for a sovereign Israel and the Palestinian Territories, based on the 1967 borders and with Jerusalem as the shared capital. This is, in the end, the only sustainable path to peace. We should therefore resist the temptation to address only the immediate crisis in Gaza but attend to all obstacles that prevent the realisation of the two‑state solution. An effective Middle East strategy must treat the mullah regime in Iran for what it is: a mastermind of instability and terror. The fall of the Assad regime in Syria was a strategic blow to Iran, one that didn't go unnoticed with Hezbollah either. After two years of political stalemate, the new government in Lebanon offers hope for much‑needed recovery. Let us use the leverage, this momentum, to break Iran's so‑called axis of resistance. And finally, while we admittedly have limited influence in the Middle East, we can constructively engage countries that do: Türkiye, the Gulf States, Egypt and Jordan. The High Representative has indicated that the new Middle East strategy might take longer than originally planned. Indeed, let us not act in haste. This strategy must be prepared carefully. But, dear Commissioner, I would ask you to also consult the European Parliament, because here there is a wealth of expertise, and I believe it would be highly beneficial to consult us before finalising the new strategy.

Mr President, dear Commissioner Kubilius, ladies and gentlemen, as a number of speakers previously have already pointed out, it is actually for the seventh time that Belarus is staging the ritual of electing Mr Lukashenka as President, in a climate of fear and repression against free media, civil society and genuine opposition. Over 1 300 political prisoners – including nearly all of Lukashenka's former rivals – remain imprisoned for challenging the fraudulent 2020 elections. Opposition has been eradicated and Belarusians abroad have been robbed of their voting rights. And still, hope is not lost. Belarusian democratic forces, led by Sviatlana Tsikhanouskaya, continue their tireless fight for freedom. I recall her words in this House: 'the EU, from Lisbon to Minsk, is a nightmare for Putin, but for us it's a reality we strive to live in'. The European Union needs to act as a multiplier of these efforts. On the one hand, we will financially and politically support the democratic forces. On the other hand, we will put Lukashenka and his henchmen under even stricter sanctions by mirroring those adopted against Russia.

Mr President, Madam Vice-President, ladies and gentlemen. With NATO's Baltic Sea summit in Helsinki earlier last week, the issue of the Russian shadow fleet has arrived at the highest political level, and that was also overdue. Because with a really terrible flood of marauding oil tankers, whose ownership is unclear and whose risks are also underinsured, Russia is deliberately circumventing international sanctions. According to a recent announcement by the German Press Agency, 12 billion euros are pumped into the Russian war coffers every month. The Shadow Fleet has become one of the most important financial lifelines for Russia in its war of aggression against Ukraine in violation of international law. Therefore, EU ministers should quickly consider what measures international maritime law allows to tackle the shadow fleet and hold Russia responsible for its aggression in Ukraine.

Madam President, dear Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen, dear colleagues, as we have heard today during this debate, the United States is and remains our most important NATO ally and our biggest trading partner. This means, if we want or not, we need to proactively explore common interests with the new Trump administration, even when our priorities don't always align. And indeed, we witnessed yesterday that our positions differ on important issues, sadly. We need to prepare responses. The European Union should anticipate US foreign policy shifts and their potential challenges, preparing our responses more in advance. We need to rally partners. We are not alone here in Europe in our concerns about the next four years. We must rally our like‑minded partners to minimise disruptions and adopt a coordinated approach. And finally, we need to deliver on key goals. If there is any time for us as the European Union to act swiftly, it is now. And unity is key. Remaining transatlantic and becoming more European will be the way forward.

Mr President, thank you for giving me the floor. Madam High Representative / Vice-President, great to see you here sitting in the plenary. As we have heard this morning, the reaction to the fall of Bashar al-Assad has been relief, also at yesterday's Foreign Affairs Council, and rightly so. This dictator and his regime are responsible for the deaths of hundreds of thousands of people, far more than ISIS and all other so-called rebels combined. And indeed, the fall of Mr Assad represents a significant loss for Iran. Assad Syria was, alongside Hezbollah, a key component of Iran's so-called axis of resistance. Through Assad, it was the Mullah regime that was able to project its power across the Middle East. And the same far-reaching consequences apply for Mr Putin. Beyond the blow to this 'axis of terror', as my colleague Michael Gahler just named it, let us not underestimate the enormous new challenges the transition carries within Syria. The rebels are led by the jihadist militia HTS, which is an extremist group that has its origins in the Islamic State and was allied with al-Qaeda. Mr al-Jolani is now confronted with the enormous task of bringing peace to Syria in an inclusive process that respects the voices of all religious and ethnic minorities, whether it be Alawites, Christians, Druze, Shiites or Kurds. Relief and concern are not a contradiction, but rather the foundation for a reasonable policy towards the realities and uncertainties of the entire region. There is also room for hope. The European Union should not allow a vacuum in Syria. Let us engage and try to stabilise the country and constructively reach out to other powers which have sway in the country. Madam Kallas, I am glad to see you are already working exactly to this end.

Mr President, thank you for giving me the floor, Vice‑President, dear Margaritis Schinas, ladies and gentlemen. Last December, the European Council decided to grant the status of EU candidate country to Georgia on the understanding that necessary reforms will follow. The historic decision was an enormous opportunity for the Georgian Government. Unfortunately, recent developments in Georgia have raised serious concerns about the direction of the country and the intentions of the government in Tbilisi. The tense and polarised pre‑election environment and the numerous reported irregularities reinforce the increasingly authoritarian agenda pushed by the ruling Georgian Dream party. The Georgians have continuously demonstrated that they want a democratic Georgia with a European perspective. The Georgians do not want to be part of Mr Putin's orbit. All reported irregularities connected to the election must be investigated and addressed without due delay. They are a betrayal of the legitimate European aspirations of the Georgian people.

Madam President, dear Vice President / High Representative, dear colleagues, for decades, the transatlantic alliance has been the cornerstone of European security, and that means also of European freedom. The United States is a rock-solid NATO ally. The United States is by far our most important international trading partner. That is why it is in our key interest to develop further the transatlantic bond between the United States of America and Canada on the one hand, and the Europeans on the other side of the Atlantic. Europe is equally vital for America, as the Americans cannot face the global challenges alone. I would like to echo what our President, Roberta Metsola, said after the elections: 'Our mentality is no longer "America elects and Europe reacts", but "Europe acts"'. And indeed, the European Union ought to proactively explore common interests with the next US administration, even though our priorities might often not always align. And, as the Vice-President / High Representative said, we need action on ensuring our own defence and security in Europe. We need action on growing our economies and ensuring our competitiveness. It's action that speaks, not words. This is what we need to do, considering the huge challenges ahead of us. Let us remain transatlantic and in future become more European. This will be the right way forward.

Mr President, Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen! Europe is ubiquitous in the Republic of Moldova. Anyone who travels in the country feels: Throughout the country, roads are decorated with EU stars, at bus stops, as flags in small towns or even on signs on rehabilitated trunk roads. There is even a stamp with the outline of the country in our European colors. Visitors to Moldova may even have the impression that the country is already a member of the EU. The official launch of the accession talks this June, just two years after the application, was an important, not just symbolic, act. President Maia Sandu can also see it as her historic success. In a few days now, on October 20, Moldova is facing a directional decision: Citizens decide whether the pro-European course will continue or whether the country will fall into a grey area – a grey area where Russia threatens to expand its influence on politics and society and where necessary reforms become empty words again. We all know that President Maia Sandu and her government are openly targeted by the Kremlin. Colleagues have rightly insisted on the massive Russian activities in this debate. So there is a lot at stake. We must and will continue to provide the Republic of Moldova with all the politically and financially necessary support. This week, the President of the Commission will travel to Chişinău and her message will be once again: Moldova's future lies in a united Europe.

Mr President, Mr High Representative, ladies and gentlemen! Two weeks ago, the mullahs broke all taboos. Israel is under acute threat. A new era has begun in the Middle East. Iran has finally stepped out of the shadow of its proxies. The only democracy in the region is struggling for its existence, and the danger of regional war is palpable. Worse things could only be prevented because Israel has excellent air defenses and because Israel has been supported by partners such as the US, the UK, Jordan and our Member State France. I believe that all this requires a consistent European response. The EU must finally find a policy on Iran that treats the regime in Tehran as what it is: He is a mastermind of terror in the Middle East. If not now, when? Mr Borrell, we were briefed on the situation in the Committee on Foreign Affairs on Thursday morning and I would like to summarise the discussion as follows: Many colleagues, including myself, have welcomed the fact that there will be further sanctions against Iran. They need to be implemented quickly. But many colleagues from very different factions have also expressed their regret that the Islamic Revolutionary Guards are still not on the terrorist list of the European Union. Here we must act urgently.

Madam President, I would like to raise to move oral amendments to two amendments, number 44 by the S&D and number 58 by the EPP, tabled to paragraph 77 of the annual CFSP report. Both oral amendments are factual updates taking stock of the fact that the Hungarian Parliament has now also ratified Sweden’s NATO membership. First, on Amendment 44, tabled by the S&D, it would say, ‘welcomes, in this regard, Türkiye’s and Hungary’s long-delayed decision to finally approve Sweden’s accession to NATO and urges the Turkish national authorities to cooperate closely with the EU’s Sanctions Envoy’. The second one, on Amendment 58, tabled by the EPP, it would say, ‘welcomes the decision of the Grand National Assembly of Türkiye and the Parliament of Hungary to ratify Sweden’s application to join NATO’.

Madam President, ladies and gentlemen, ladies and gentlemen, ladies and gentlemen, I would like to thank you all for this open and constructive debate. This morning it was not only a question of security and defence policy, but also of the European Parliament's annual report on the implementation of the common foreign and security policy and of Mr Sven Mikser's report on the implementation of the common security and defence policy. I listened very carefully to the two hours and found that there is a broad consensus in this House among the political groups that we need to further strengthen our common foreign and security policy, that we need to further strengthen our common security and defence policy, with the exception of representatives from the far left and the far right. Since this report is the last of its kind that we will adopt during this parliamentary term, it could also - and I would like to do so - be accompanied by Mr Mikser's report as guideline serve the next Commission, the President of the Commission and also the next High Representative and Vice-President of the Commission. One thing is clear in any case: We are witnessing a geopolitical epoch break. That is why it is all the more important – probably more important than ever – that the European Union finally learn global political capacity, as Jean-Claude Juncker once called it. As the European Union, we must finally live up to our external and security role in this world. I would like to thank once again all those present in the Chamber who contributed to this debate, the shadow rapporteurs and the team of the High Representative and Vice-President of the Commission, and in particular the Vice-President of the Commission, Maroš Šefčovič, who was here in the Chamber for the entire two hours today. Otherwise, I would like to fully underline what Commission President Ursula von der Leyen said today on security and defence policy. We must finally take concrete steps.

Mr President, Madam President, Minister, ladies and gentlemen, since we adopted our previous report on the implementation of the common foreign and security policy on 18 January last year, the world has changed significantly. While Mr Putin is relentless in his war of aggression against Ukraine, the horror terrorist attacks launched by Hamas against Israel on 7 October have set the Middle East on fire. In our external action, we need to adapt to these new circumstances. For too long, the European Union has been too cautious; we have not proactively defined and defended our interests in the world. This needs to change. I would like to fully underline what our Commission President, Ursula von der Leyen, has said this morning in this plenary and it was actually our Commission President, Ursula von der Leyen, who recognised this already back in 2019 when she spoke of a geopolitical Commission and a European Union that needs to understand the language of power. Listening carefully to all the contributions this morning, one thing is obvious: one logical conclusion can only be a strong defence portfolio. But what actually does that mean concretely? Yes, I would like to see a Commissioner for Security and Defence in the next European Commission. She, or perhaps he, should coordinate all EU and Member States defence initiatives and ensure that we are stronger by acting together. Yes, I would want to see EU Member States procure their defence products jointly to improve the interoperability of our armed forces and to reduce the costs for taxpayers. The EU defence industry reinforcement act, EDIRPA, was an important starting point, but it is far from enough. Yes, we must help the European defence industry to increase its production capacity to ensure that our armed forces are fully equipped. We must provide Ukraine with whatever it takes to win this war as long as it takes. Also, in that regard, we made a first step with the act in support of ammunition production. But we urgently, colleagues, need to go further with a future European defence investment programme and by establishing a well-funded Ukraine assistance fund under the European Peace Facility. Ultimately, it is about further establishing a single market for defence. The long-term goal, dear colleagues, is, of course, to develop a true European Defence Union, a fully-fledged European Defence Union. All our activities need to be closely coordinated with NATO, with our transatlantic partners, the Americans, the Canadians, the British. Let us remain transatlantic and at the same time become more European. That is the way forward. And I would once again like to address our Commission President, because since 2019, dear Ursula von der Leyen, you have taken the right approach. You are strengthening Europe’s global footprint and supporting the principles that inspired our own creation, development and enlargement. Since we have discussed my own report extensively in AFET, I will not refer to my own report. I would just like to thank all colleagues involved, especially the shadow rapporteurs, the involved staff members and also the team of the High Representative / Vice-President for the constructive and fruitful cooperation. Since this will be the final report on the implementation of our common foreign and security policy in this legislature, hopefully the next Commission and the next High Representative are invited to use this year’s CFSP report as a guide for their priorities.

Mr President, in a globalised world, trans—regional infrastructure projects have become an integral part of international relations, and we all know billions and billions of euros are lacking annually to meet the United Nations Development Goals. Indeed, it was Commission President Ursula von der Leyen who recognised the signs of the time and launched the prestige project Global Gateway in December 2021. With that, the European Union has started to fill the global infrastructure financing gap with targeted offers. I would like to thank Commissioner Johansson for presenting and naming a number of flagship projects all around the globe, which are examples that Global Gateway is starting to deliver. However, we all know there is plenty of competition. By the end of last year, 146 countries, including 17 EU Member States, had signed memorandums of understanding with China to become part of the Belt and Road Initiative. Not only do projects of the Belt and Road often come paired with allegations of corruption or environmental damage, they can also lead participating countries into a debt spiral. This is starting to cause serious mistrust in Africa, in Latin America and in Asia. The European Union must not squander this opportunity. The inaugural Gateway Forum on 25 and 26 of October 2023 in Brussels gave our partners a clearer idea of how this initiative functions and how they can participate in it. To match the political commitment, we now need to mobilise the firepower of the private sector. Public funds alone will not be able to generate the levels of investment needed. It will take time, patience and sustained political will to develop the Global Gateway into a successful global brand, but it is well worth it.

Mr President, late in the evening yesterday – actually just before midnight – we concluded the Trilogue on the Ukraine Facility. We can now provide Ukraine with predictable financing throughout 2024 and beyond. This is good news, and I would like to thank all colleagues – one of the co-rapporteurs Michael Gahler is present – engaged in these procedures. With a total of EUR 50 billion, to be complemented – dear Council and Commission representatives – by the proceeds of frozen Russian assets, the Ukraine Facility gives us maximum flexibility with regard to the annual distribution of loans, grants and guarantees. This agreement is a vital step in our support of Ukraine against the Russian aggressor. Despite seeming to be relentless, Russia is failing on multiple objectives. I can only underline what Commission President Ursula von der Leyen said in remarkably clear words. This war for Russia is primarily a military failure. Russia’s failure is also economic. Finally, Russia’s failure is also diplomatic. Ukraine can prevail, but we must continue to empower their resistance, especially now that Russia is stepping up its attacks on civilian infrastructure, trying to demoralise the brave Ukrainian people. In the EU, we must not lose sight of this sense of urgency.

Mr President, dear colleagues, transatlantic cooperation has been tried and tested over time, but our bond has proven itself time and again, most recently in the response to the Russian war of aggression against Ukraine. Here we have shown remarkable unity, not least by coordinating our military support within the Ukraine Defence Contact Group. The United States of America is and will be our most important partner and ally as the European Union. People are at the bedrock of this relationship. Bilateral trade and investment supports millions of jobs in Europe and the United States, respectively, and we are each other’s strongest geo-economic base. But indeed, we need to and can do more in order to maximise the added value of transatlantic relations by exploiting the opportunities for cooperation presented by the EU-US security and defence dialogue. I am convinced that on both sides of the Atlantic there is genuine interest to cement the foundations of a relationship so that we can meet the challenges of the years and decades to come. Let me thank the rapporteur and the shadows for presenting this very good report.

Madam President, ladies and gentlemen, dear colleagues, this free trade agreement negotiated over the course of four years and signed on 9 July indeed marks a significant milestone in our bilateral relations. It reinforces New Zealand Aotearoa as a valued trade and investment partner and it strengthens the European Union’s presence in the Indo-Pacific. All in all, as many colleagues have mentioned, this agreement removes trade barriers for companies on both sides, particularly when it comes to tariffs, public procurement and the protection of intellectual property. This promises legal certainty and, hence, ultimately incentives, investment and trade. Yet this agreement is not merely a trade and investment deal. It is a testament to shared values and mutual trust between two like-minded partners. Just like us, New Zealand adheres to the Paris Climate Agreement, New Zealand is committed to sustainable development and New Zealand is dedicated to core labour standards. In a world facing increasing protectionism, New Zealand and the European Union have together set a positive example and laid an important foundation for fair, rules-based and sustainable trade. I am glad that all our Member States have understood just how important New Zealand Aotearoa is in this process, and I trust that we will pave the way for the agreement to come into force in the first half of next year.

Mr President, as we have heard tonight, President Maia Sandu and her pro-European government are operating in constant crisis mode. And yet, they have succeeded in introducing key legislative initiatives tailored to the nine conditions set by the European Commission. These are tremendous efforts. Soon, the Commission’s upcoming enlargement package will testify to these reforms. It is now up to us in the European Union to live up to our own commitments at a political level. We need to introduce further permanent means of diplomatic engagement, sectoral cooperation and financial assistance. And we need to strengthen the new European Union partnership mission in Moldova. Moldova’s entry into the European Single Market would boost exports, attract investments and foster integration with the European Union. And colleagues, both parties would benefit from starting EU accession negotiations. The citizens of Moldova deserve the perspective of joining our European Union. Mulţumesc.