What David spoke about.

Madam President, ladies and gentlemen, The barbaric war of aggression against Ukraine, as several previous speakers have already emphasised, marks a turning point. The certainties of the last three decades since 1990 have finally lost their validity, the world of power competition is back. As Europeans, we must learn again to fight for our values, to name and enforce our interests in the world. In order to secure our freedom, security and supply in the long term, Europe needs a reality check. Yes, we urgently need a fundamental reorientation of our foreign, security and defence policy. It is precisely this common foreign, security and defence policy that needs to be made more effective. The European Parliament, with large majorities, has been making concrete proposals for years, most recently during the plenary debate and plenary session here in Strasbourg, where the two reports were adopted. Let us now finally take concrete steps towards a European Defence Union, closely aligned with our neighbours, closely aligned with our NATO partners, and fast and committed.

Mr President, the Russian military aggression and invasion against Ukraine is illegal. It is unprovoked. It is unjustified. This is indeed a crucial and historical moment, the moment of truth, as Commission President Ursula von der Leyen pointed out. Too many times in the past, the international community has been blind in front of unfolding tragedies. Today, we as a European Parliament are sending a strong and a united message to the Kremlin that we stand with Ukraine in full solidarity. As Chair of the Foreign Affairs Committee, I would like to thank the colleagues from the different political groups who drafted and negotiated this resolution, and I call on colleagues to vote in favour. I fully underline the very good arguments we have heard today. I want to add one point. Let us also strongly condemn the involvement of Belarus in this aggression against Ukraine. It was during last week’s inter-parliamentary conference on the CFSP and CSDP in Paris that Sviatlana Tsikhanouskaya made it very clear that the assault on Ukraine wouldn’t have been possible if dictator Lukashenko wouldn’t have provided Russia with the land and the infrastructure. The Lukashenko regime has assisted and enabled this Russian aggression. For this reason, the EU should apply further appropriate sanctions also on Belarus. Dear colleagues, the world will hold Russia and Belarus accountable for their actions.

Mr President, as many colleagues from different political groups have underlined this morning, the current escalating tensions and the threat of unprecedented military aggression by the Russian Federation against Ukraine are indeed not only targeting Ukraine but also threatening the rules-based international order and threatening Europe as a whole. And this is why we must stand together in this crucial moment. As the European Parliament, we will not waver in our support of Ukraine’s independence, sovereignty and territorial integrity within its internationally-recognised borders. Ukraine has a sovereign right to choose its international alliances freely. The Russian Federation must cease its military threat against Ukraine and immediately, as well as fully, withdraw its forces and military equipment from the border of Ukraine. Any further military aggression against Ukraine would have massive and unprecedented consequences and severe costs in response, including restrictive measures coordinated with our international partners. It is on the Kremlin to de-escalate and to engage constructively through established mechanisms. The double track of diplomatic engagement and deterrence remains key to solving the current situation. A final remark: following Monday’s vote to apply an urgent procedure, we are now, this noon, set to give the green light to an emergency EUR 1.2 billion loan to Ukraine to cover its external financing needs in 2022. This demonstrates our solidarity and support for Ukraine and the Ukrainian people.

Madam President, it’s up to me to conclude this debate now. I would like to thank all colleagues for this open and constructive debate, which lasted more than two hours. I believe it is a strong signal that most of the colleagues I listened to in this House act in concert towards a stronger common foreign and security policy. The challenges of the 21st century call for more, not less, EU action on the global scene. These challenges call for more, not less, multilateral governance and rules-based international cooperation. We just heard the High Representative conclude our debate. I believe that also we should make our EU common foreign and security policy more efficient, more coherent, more flexible and at the same time, democratic, accountable and transparent. Achieving leadership as the European Union in international affairs in the end requires a strong will and decisive steps in 2022, such as the EU Strategic Compass. I sincerely hope that this will have significant added value for our common foreign and security policy and solidarity among Member States. Once again, thank you so much, also on behalf of Nathalie Loiseau, for this interesting debate. And now we can move on to the next point of order.

Mr President, recent international developments and challenges, such as the Russian military threat against Ukraine, the Taliban takeover in Afghanistan or the geopolitical consequences of the COVID—19 pandemic, have once again reminded us that the European security environment is today more volatile and more complex than ever since the end of the Cold War. At the same time, not a single EU Member State can respond effectively to today’s global challenges on its own. Therefore, as the European Union, we need to achieve the strategic goal of developing our global leadership role. There are five takeaways from my report. First, the EU needs to take the lead in promoting global partnerships and a strong multilateral system. We should promote alliances of democracies worldwide and pool our resources to counter malign interferences by authoritarian states. We need to develop our partnerships in the areas of conflict prevention and conflict resolution, and should build alliances based on our Green Deal. Second, we need to improve the way the European Union takes decisions in the field of the common foreign and security policy (CFSP). Unanimity hampers the EU’s ability to act. I would like to encourage EU Member States to switch to qualified majority, at least in some areas of the CFSP. It is also necessary to strengthen the existing EU toolbox, for example, by better combining all assets we have as the EU on the international scene. Third, we need to ensure our strategic sovereignty in fundamental areas, including by reducing our dependencies in key technological areas, critical infrastructures and supply chains. It is also about establishing a European Defence Union. The new Strategic Compass, which hopefully, High Representative, will be adopted at the end of March, should guide the way forward. Fourth, we need to develop coherent regional EU strategies for our relations with different parts of the world. In this respect, I welcome the High Representative / Vice-President’s endeavours to propose clear frameworks with well-defined ambitions and objectives for our relations with different partners in the world, such as the new indo-pacific strategy and the announced joint communication on a partnership with the Gulf. Fifth, democracy is at the heart of our foreign and security policy. Therefore, we need to strengthen the democratic oversight, scrutiny and accountability, as well as the parliamentary dimension, of the common foreign and security policy. I look forward to today’s debate and I would like to thank the shadow rapporteurs – and also the team of the High Representative – for the really good, constructive and fruitful cooperation during the last weeks while working on this report.

Mr President, the elections on 7 November in Nicaragua violated all international democratic standards for credible, inclusive, fair and transparent elections. They were a sad climax of Nicaragua’s continuous authoritarian development as they complete the conversion of this country into an autocratic regime. As the European Parliament, we reject the legitimacy of the results of these fake elections and, therefore, we reject the democratic legitimacy of any institutional authorities emerged from this rigged vote. The systematic crackdown of opposition leaders, journalists and civil society actors, as well as the psychological and physical abuse of the Nicaraguan people, are appalling and represent a clear breach of human rights, democracy and the rule of law. High Representative / Vice-President, indeed we need to consider all instruments at our disposal to take additional measures against the Ortega regime. I call on the Nicaraguan authorities to end repression, to uphold and respect human rights, and to allow the Nicaraguan people to exercise their civil and political rights. I call on the Nicaraguan authorities to hold elections in accordance with international parameters which comply with international standards and the Inter-American Democratic Charter to realise the democratic aspirations of the people of this country. And I call on the Nicaraguan authorities to allow international as well as civil society organisations to access the country without restrictions. For the European Union has consistently called for free and fair transparent elections, for the respect for human rights, democracy and the rule of law, and for the immediate and unconditional release of arbitrarily detained political prisoners. Mr Ortega, return the sovereignty of Nicaragua to the Nicaraguan people, who are its rightful owners.

Mr President, the European perspective of our partners in the Western Balkans is in our mutual interest and remains our strategic choice. With the visit of Commission President Ursula von der Leyen last month and the EU Western Balkans Summit two weeks ago in Brdo, the European Union has once again demonstrated its strong political commitment to the Western Balkan countries and the entire accession process. Having a closer look at the Brdo declaration, I would see five important positive messages to our partners. Firstly, it is reconfirmed the European perspective of the region and our commitment to enlargement. Secondly, the EU has provided EUR 3.3 billion for emergency support and for supporting the recovery. In addition, the EU together with the Member States, has delivered almost three million doses of vaccines already. Thirdly, the heads of state have called for a swift implementation of the economic and investment plan and the new IPA III regulation. Fourthly, other very practical measures were agreed to associate the region more closely to us in the European Union, such as to lower roaming charges. And fifthly, the European Union reaffirmed its support to strengthen regional cooperation. Recent concerning events have shown how deep the divisions run and how much work is still needed to build good and sustainable neighbourly relations. Allow me to thank Commissioner Várhelyi for presenting the enlargement package yesterday at an extraordinary meeting of the Committee on Foreign Affairs. During our discussion, we welcomed the restated commitment of the Western Balkans partners to the primacy of democracy, fundamental rights and values. EU support must continue to be linked to tangible progress on the rule of law and socio—economic reforms, as well as to the adherence of our European values, rules and standards. A final point: as we enter a critical juncture for the future of the EU and its enlargement, the EU and the Member States must clear the hurdles precluding us from switching gears in the accession process for countries that show a strong commitment to reforms.

Madam President, two weeks ago, as Anna Fotyga mentioned, the delegation of our Foreign Affairs Committee visited Denmark, Greenland and Iceland to discuss international cooperation and challenges in the Arctic. Anna Fotyga, Željana Zovko, Urmas Paet and Andreas Schieder will probably agree; our visit demonstrated that the unique complexity of the challenges on the ground requires more engagement and solutions based on the knowledge and the will of the people living in the Arctic. Furthermore, there is an urgent need for constructive international cooperation to counter emerging threats to stability in the entire High North. For this reason, I welcome the adoption of our timely report. Let me thank Anna Fotyga for her good work and I do hope, Commissioner Breton, that the Commission and the High Representative / Vice—President will soon present an ambitious new joint communication which takes our main messages into account. These are: to respond ambitiously to climate change and safeguarding the Arctic environment, to promote sustainable development and to strengthen international cooperation in order to address all the geopolitical challenges in the High North. The Foreign Affairs Committee will keep the Arctic high on its agenda. Yes, indeed, there should be more EU in the Arctic and more Arctic in the EU.

Mr President, Commissioner! Ladies and Gentlemen, ladies and gentlemen, Our rapporteur, Pascal Arimont, has just made the following point: Brexit has many negative social and economic consequences for people, businesses and public administrations. I very much welcome this €5 billion Brexit adjustment reserve because it is important for the regions of Europe that are particularly affected by the consequences of Brexit. The aim is to help companies adapt to new border, customs and control regimes. And above all, it is about helping sectors that are particularly dependent on trade with the United Kingdom. Many companies suffered large, sometimes unforeseen losses. Fisheries is the relatively most affected sector. This is, of course, a consequence of the reduced fishing rights in the English Channel, the North Sea and the North Atlantic. It is now also important for the fishing industry and for the locations of Cuxhaven and Bremerhaven in my northern German homeland that these financial resources arrive on site quickly and unbureaucratically.

Mr President, this is an important day for the EU’s external action and opens a new chapter in our enlargement policy. The modernised instrument for pre-accession assistance (IPA III) paves the way for improved governance, for coherence and for transparency of our external funding in this crucial period of our enlargement policy. Commissioner Várhely, I do hope that IPA III can improve our visibility as the European Union in the region and bring a tangible impact on the ground through enhanced conditionality. Allow me to thank and include all the involved staff, the negotiators of the Council, Commissioner Olivér Várhelyi and, of course, our co-rapporteurs, Željana Zovko and Tonino Picula, for their dedication and their tireless work, in particular during the occasionally rather challenging trilogues. Together, we have achieved a very good outcome. This is a remarkable achievement. Thank you so much.

Madam President, the recent developments in Afghanistan must be a wake—up call for us to reflect about our Common Foreign and Security Policy. It is clear that we have to go beyond just expressing our concerns. First, of course it is about providing immediate humanitarian assistance for all those people in need in Afghanistan in order to stabilise the whole region and to prevent a migration crisis. Second, we need to identify a coherent strategy and develop a united approach at EU level, together with our international partners, on how to deal with the de facto rulers in Kabul, the Taliban. Third, international cooperation with our allies and partners is necessary to ensure regional stability and global security. The risk of resurgence of radical Islamist forces in Afghanistan is real. As Europeans, I strongly believe we have to draw serious lessons learned for the nature and mandate of future military interventions. We need to strengthen our own defence cooperation and military capabilities, such as our intelligence and strategic airlift capacities. Doing this should always go hand—in—hand with close transatlantic cooperation. In this regard, I welcome the recent initiative of the High Representative and Vice—President.

Madam President, the European Parliament has been consistently calling for an EU-wide mechanism which would allow for imposing targeted sanctions against individuals and entities that are involved in grave human rights violations. Therefore, I welcome last year’s adoption of the EU global human rights sanctions regime, which some of us in this House prefer to call simply the EU Magnitsky Act. This regime should be part of a coherent and clearly defined strategy that considers the foreign policy objectives of the EU. It needs to reflect new challenges and threats to human rights violations such as corruption, abuse of state emergency powers or violence against human rights defenders. We as the European Parliament would like to see an efficient and consistent use of the sanctions regime, with decisions in the Council taken by the qualified majority vote. With this in mind, I would like to address the High Representative and the European Commission with the following questions. Number one: what are the experiences in implementing the EU global human rights sanctions regime? What is its place in the EU’s external policy toolbox and how does it relate to other EU sanctions frameworks? Number two: how are the uniformity of criteria and consistency ensured in the regime’s implementation, especially with regard to the listing and delisting of persons, entities and bodies? Number three: how does the European External Action Service plan to involve Parliament? Number four: will the European External Action Service (EEAS) set up an EU-level advisory committee and outline guidelines for the involvement of civil society organisations in proposing and providing evidence? Does the EEAS envisage a mechanism for protecting those organisations or individuals? Number five: would the Commission consider enlarging the scope of the regime, taking into account the United Kingdom’s new global anti-corruption sanctions regime? Number six: would the External Action Service and the Commission be ready to reintroduce the proposal to use qualified majority voting to impose sanctions? And finally, question number seven: what cooperation has been undertaken with like—minded countries? What will be done to ensure close cooperation and consistency with external judicial institutions and international supervisory and monitoring structures in implementing the regime?

Madam President, I would like to underline what so many colleagues have already said this afternoon, that we as the European Parliament should condemn in the strongest possible terms the ongoing systematic detention and arrest of opposition leaders, as well as the repression of journalists, students, indigenous people and human rights defenders in the great country of Nicaragua. The latest developments are yet another step away from achieving a peaceful and democratic solution to the political, economic and social crisis in that country. I call upon the Nicaraguan Government to make immediate changes to the electoral law in accordance with the international parameters demanded by the Organization of American States. I call upon the Nicaraguan Government to guarantee transparent, free and fair elections in accordance with international standards. And I call on the Nicaraguan Government to release, immediately and unconditionally, all arbitrarily detained political prisoners, among them the pre—presidential candidate and the opposition leaders. Dear Josep Borrell, the Council should quickly enlarge the list of sanctions against individuals and entities and include President Ortega, Vice—President Murillo and their inner circle.