Speeches

Mr President, the European Union has finally understood that the countries of Central Asia deserve our full attention. Uzbekistan, it is true, is a key country for Europe. Its economic dynamism, determined fight against radicalism and constructive contacts with Afghanistan make it a key country in the region. As the report notes, it is therefore urgent to continue deepening and intensifying our relations with Tashkent. However, this should be done as a reasonable actor. Those who advocate investment in the region to challenge China or Russia act arrogantly and blindly. Central Asia is an exemplary area for the emergence of a multipolar world where the sovereignty and integrity of Uzbek institutions must be fully respected. In this respect, I regret it again, about a third of the articles of the resolution consist of giving lessons in democracy to a country whose independence dates back to 1991. We will therefore abstain on this report, which sounds a bit like a missed opportunity. Uzbekistan’s progress is recognised by all serious observers in the region and deserves to be better encouraged.

Madam President, trust in the European institutions is in free fall. The ‘Qatargate’ case and this Parliament’s refusal to establish a specific committee of inquiry into this scandal has devastated the European Parliament’s reputation around the world. By discussing this week a fourth resolution in four years on Egypt, the European Parliament will raise suspicions. How can we understand the relentlessness of some against Egypt and President Sisi? How can we understand their collaboration with the Morsi government and their hatred of Egyptian power since 2014? How can we understand this new attempt to interfere in judicial proceedings, the appeal of which will take place in five days’ time? All chancelleries conclude that pro-Muslim Brotherhood networks within the European institutions are still at work. These networks have matched European Parliament resolutions on human rights and the interests of the Islamist Brotherhood for at least 10 years. Scandals that the majority refused to investigate. Who is behind the revolting influence of the Muslim Brotherhood in the European Parliament? It is time to restore our credit and make all the light.

Madam President, there is only one real instrument against economic coercion: power. A powerful France or Europe would not need to think about this tool already largely covered by the WTO. Take the American example. When Washington imposes the world's worst economic coercion with the extraterritoriality of American law, we let it happen. When Washington puts European industries at risk with its Inflation Reduction Act, French economy minister Bruno Lemaire will beg Washington to grant crumbs to European companies. It is therefore quite obvious that we will never use this tool against our main competitor and yet ally, the United States. Under the guise of trade defence, you are working towards the total uniformity of our foreign policies. Tomorrow, we could have a France drawn into trade disputes on the basis of geopolitical provocations from other members. When I hear more that Macron's friends and Republicans are questioning the unanimity rule on foreign policy issues, you will allow me to tremble at seeing my country dragged into economic wars by the ideological follies of Brussels and I would like to reaffirm our irrevocable attachment to this unanimity rule on foreign policy issues. We will vote in favour of this text, but with questions still unresolved and in the hope that this text will not go beyond its purpose.

Mr President, the people of Europe do not want Turkey in the European Union, nor do they want visa liberalisation for Turkish citizens. We were the first to announce years ago that Turkey could never, ever, be a member of the European Union. Turkey is the heir of a great civilization, but of a civilization different from the European genius. Identity matters, politics matters too. We are now facing a strengthened President Erdogan. Reinforced first in the wake of the events of 2016, strengthened after defeating the candidate of all the oppositions supported by the West last May, and now strengthened by our ideological policy towards the conflict in Ukraine, from which he takes advantage to consolidate his international influence. Many did not understand that Erdogan was a true Head of State. Ankara always puts its interests ahead of those of others, always real geopolitics before smoky statements. It is because he is our least permeable neighbour to Brussels’ fanciful projects that he is also the one who sees his role growing in the world. We are, in fact, doing nothing to counter Ankara’s plans for power. On the contrary, we feed his ambitions by our failures. When Turkey threatens the Greek islands and occupies Cyprus, the EU looks elsewhere. When Turkey occupies Syria, we say nothing. When Turkey opposes our interests in the Balkans or in Africa, we are silent. You cry over the omnipotence of a man who feeds on two things: our resignations and our blindness.

Mr President, there is an urgent need to finalise our migration partnership with Tunisia. Finally, let's stop procrastinating. Let’s stop letting the European agenda be dictated either by dubious NGOs complicit in the smugglers or by those who scuttled Tunisia by supporting the Muslim Brotherhood. President Saïed’s efforts to rebuild, together with his international partners, a stable and reliable Tunisia that resists migratory waves from all over Africa must be encouraged. The Memorandum of Understanding signed on 16 July can be the cornerstone of a strengthened partnership. It would include modestly EUR 105 million, without the condition of obtaining the IMF loan. Yes, we absolutely must move forward on this issue and respect the voice of the Tunisian people, who refuse to be the waiting room for all illegal migration from Africa. But our partnership must go beyond that and cover all aspects of our relationship with Tunisia, including helping the country in its fight to clean up its public finances and recover its economy. Between the growing chaos of the Southern Sahel, lawlessness and Islamism in a large part of Libya, we must indeed rely on Tunisia, a reliable Tunisia that would finally become a real partner for the European Union.

Mr President, since its independence in 1991, Kyrgyzstan has made great strides in economic and civil rights matters. This country was even cited as an example throughout Central Asia. And I remember when I was in the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe, we even signed a partnership for democracy. So let us not neglect the importance of these efforts for a young democracy emerging from communism. What, if I understood this resolution correctly, is being criticised in Kyrgyzstan? Mainly, he is accused of shutting down a media outlet that was propaganda during an armed conflict, without malice, just as the European Union did with Russia Today. Better yet, Bishkek has just agreed to lift this ban after the media outlet agreed to remove the offending video. This is shown by the documents that most of us received from the embassy a few hours ago. We are therefore in a situation where the Kyrgyz sovereign state preceded the convictions of the European Parliament by simply following the rules of its rule of law. Further evidence that it might be necessary to build a little relationship rather than jump at the slightest opportunity, when an NGO is defending a cause. That resolution, in my view, if that is its sole purpose, no longer has any purpose. It should therefore be withdrawn, as it is clear that this medium is once again free to broadcast.

Madam President, nothing new is a little bit, Ms Loiseau, I am sorry, which comes to mind when I read your report. Our Parliament condemns Russia every week. And yet, this report fantasises about Moscow’s supposed influence in this Parliament, when, as you know better than I do, this Parliament is fanatically hostile to it. On the other hand, when our Parliament’s conclusions on the Middle East and Africa systematically align with Qatar, your answer is simple: words, not sanctions. There's nothing wrong with this report. It is the European left that is caught in the bag for its links with an Islamist petromonarchy. And yet, in this report, you are attacking the parties of the European right. The European institutions are failing in the face of foreign interference. And yet, in this report, you propose to strengthen the Commission's prerogatives in diplomatic matters. The President of the European Commission refuses to make public her exchanges with Pfizer. And yet, this report wants to track down parliamentary assistants and agents of Parliament to see if they would not read Dostoevsky too often or if they would never eat Chinese. In short, this report is in the exact continuity of what our Parliament was under Qatari control. Strong with the weak, weak with the strong.

Madam President, the civil war ravaging Sudan is a humanitarian catastrophe that can only arouse our emotion. None of the resolutions voted on Sudan in this European Parliament have had any impact, because we focus on ideological desires, rather than on the common interest of the Sudanese people, their neighbourhood and the European Union. This common interest is stability and security. We urgently need to help Sudan's neighbouring countries hosting refugees. Chad and the Central African Republic need our full support to assist refugees in distress and prevent illegal immigration. Egypt is calling for a massive increase in European aid to help it cope with the flow of Sudanese fleeing the war. According to the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees, nearly 200 000 nationals have already joined the Sudanese refugee community in Egypt. The horror of Sudanese children must stop. If the EU is to make a real contribution, it must work with all actors in the conflict and all Sudan’s neighbours, including Chad, the Central African Republic and Egypt. There is no alternative to the Sudanese humanitarian and migration crisis. If we want to avoid a new wave of migration in Europe, it is also in our interest.

I wasn’t in your committee. Sorry. But I think the problem for the European Union is just the weak. Because we are strong with the weak people and weak with the strong State. You have a new example. We accuse Poland, Hungary, Morocco, but excuse me, what did we do in the past with United States when they listened in on he people of Europe? Nothing.

Mr President, the people of Europe can no longer stand the proliferation of intrusions into private life. In societies where more and more freedom is promised, concrete freedoms are too often flouted. The list of states using Pegasus software is uplifting, and the report describes well the fact that more than 75 states have purchased this type of computer program. Do you remember the revelations of a Danish newspaper on 30 May 2021 about the US NSA’s wiretapping of Europe’s top leaders? Angela Merkel and German socialist opposition figures were being spied on by the US from Denmark. Has the EU taken any steps to protect the leaders of our Member States from US espionage? Never. Has the EU worked on a mechanism to protect its economic interests from US predation? Never. But why would it have done in 2021 what it did not do after Edward Snowden’s shattering revelations in 2013? I remind you that, in 2013, Snowden unveiled the fact that Washington was spying on more than 35 international leaders on the planet. A practice recently confirmed by former French Prime Minister François Fillon, who testified before a committee of inquiry in the National Assembly: “I was listened to with President Nicolas Sarkozy for five years by the US NSA.” The European Union will always prefer to attack Hungary, Poland or Morocco rather than challenge the United States. In a Parliament that has managed never to address the issue of US interference in its special committee on the subject, I admit that I am no longer surprised. Yes, Member States need to invest in better regulating private actors that offer ever more efficient services to control. However, there will always be somewhere in the business world to provide this kind of services. I regret that the solutions envisaged aim to further strengthen the European Commission's power of control over the Member States. It is time for states to invest directly in protecting their own national security. (The speaker agreed to reply to a blue card intervention)

Mr President, Commissioner, I understood that tomorrow there would be a conference on refugees. However, if I may, like my colleagues, I have been to Lebanon many times. What the Lebanese want is not to help them keep the refugees, but to help them return the refugees. You said earlier that the European Union is helping refugees and also local and regional authorities. Frankly, don’t you think that the first priority for the villages in Lebanon that sometimes have to do a two-level school – in the morning for the Lebanese, in the afternoon for the Syrians – because, at the moment, they have too many refugees, would be to accompany the return of the refugees to their country? So far, let’s be clear: the European Union refuses to consider this as a political choice. We don't want to negotiate with the Syrian regime, we don't want to recognize it. I will, but, excuse me, my dear comrades, he won the war, whether we like it or not. So what are we going to do? Are we going to make Lebanon pay for this for fifty years? Are we going to tell him: Do you keep your refugees on your territory? A year ago, I was making the comparison with the French population. Imagine that in France there are 22 million refugees, since today the refugee population is the same as in Lebanon. So yes, there is the problem of corruption, it is obvious. Yes, there is the government problem. I also think that the interference should perhaps be stopped a little. This has been said by a number of my colleagues. There have been many promises, sometimes threats, such as those made by President Macron when he came. But at the moment, there is still nothing. What the Lebanese are waiting for is for them to be accompanied today in this difficult period and, in the long term, for refugees to be allowed to return, so that the Lebanese can finally be masters at home.

Mr President, on Tuesday, 6 June, the Kakhovka dam exploded. On the same day, the usual commentators in this Parliament immediately accused Russia of being responsible for this tragedy, which, of course, I personally, like you, condemn. To believe that this Parliament has finally learned nothing from its runaway after the sabotage of Nord Stream, some of which immediately accused Russia. Now, what do we now read in the Washington PostFor example? The CIA was reportedly informed that such an operation was being prepared by Ukrainian forces as early as June 2022. Finally, what do the famous investigations that our different countries have launched intend to find? What are we going to do with the threats of the time against those responsible for this attack on the European Union? Nothing at all. Indeed, as your text says, you are the good soldiers of a hypothetical Euro-Atlantic community. However, there is no Euro-Atlantic community, neither for the Member States of the European Union nor for Ukraine. The United States and NATO tolerate the activities of our Parliament, as long as it remains aligned with Washington’s objectives. If, tomorrow, Brussels led a peace initiative in Ukraine, contrary to American interests, Washington would break this initiative within a minute. Yes, let us find the paths of our independence at European level and try to find a solution for peace.

Madam President, what will this report be used for? Mainly to further control the media landscape in Europe. In Article 33, you want to control the experts involved in the so-called traditional media. In Article 35, you want a European Media Committee that we have no doubt would spread the ideology of the European Commission. The Ministry of Truth is not far away. You want more and more control over the internet, and in particular the Twitter platform, whose commitment to freedom of expression makes the Commission hairless. You continue to spread the idea that Russia wanted to influence the upcoming European elections, without learning of the manipulations committed by the US Democrats, whose accusations have once again been swept away by two different reports from the US Department of Justice. These reports clearly state that there is no evidence of Russian interference in the US presidential campaign. When you read this report, in the end, you have a right to be worried. Those who do not share your views are either manipulated, plotted, or agents. They may simply have a different opinion. Will they retain this right for a long time to come?

Madam President, the European Union is not a friend of the Serbian people. The list of demands on Belgrade is endless, while Brussels constantly supports Kosovo's demands. The European institutions have supported the amputation of Serbia's historic cradle, Kosovo. Since then, Brussels has multiplied its failures when it claims to reach a final agreement between Belgrade and Pristina. It may be pretending to make people forget its support for NATO, which overwhelmed Belgrade with bombs. Recently, local elections in Kosovo Serb municipalities registered a turnout of just 3 per cent of voters. Almost no Serbs wanted to take part in this vote. It is a new camouflet for the European Union and its friends in Pristina. At the same time, the European Union is putting pressure on Serbia to transform its political and social life. Brussels would like to cut Belgrade off from its historic friendship with Russia, notably by now dictating its foreign policy. We have no interest in building a European perspective in the Balkans if it is based on the Atlanticism that Brussels wants to impose on Serbia. When he speaks to the French, Emmanuel Macron tells them, hand on heart, there will be no enlargement. In Brussels, however, its elected representatives announce a Europe of 35 or 40 and support all the resolutions that demand the immediate integration of the candidate countries. This morning, they applauded Chancellor Scholz, calling for a rapid enlargement to the six Balkan countries. Definitely, the European federalists lie as much to their peoples as to the Serbian people, whether in Brussels or in Paris.

Madam President, the war in Sudan has been going on for a long time. Our Parliament had not anticipated anything and was content to pass on what more or less neutral NGOs were saying about Khartoum. Only one thing is certain: everything must be done as soon as possible to renew the ceasefires and use them to build lasting peace. Peace will necessarily require the integration of all armed forces into the power transition mechanism. If Sudan were to ignite for a long time, the crisis could largely destabilize its neighbourhood. The Central African Republic is moving away from its historical friends like France. Chad could be disrupted while the European Union does not support President Déby. Moreover, there is an urgent need for the European Union to release the EUR 10 million promised to Chad through the peace facility plan. Eritrea and Ethiopia also remain major providers of migrants who could use chaos to join smuggling networks. Faced with this imminent danger, it is urgent to strengthen our partnership with Egypt, the only State able to help us prevent a new migratory surge that is already hosting millions of Sudanese refugees.

Mr President, a few days ago, former French Prime Minister François Fillon reminded a parliamentary committee of inquiry that the US intelligence services, like Nicolas Sarkozy, listened to him for five years. I quote his words as Prime Minister: “Foreign interference, yes, I have encountered. Most of the time they came from a friendly and allied country called the United States.” There have been many cases of NSA spying on European soil, and there is every reason to believe that they continue. At the same time, former French Socialist Minister Arnaud Montebourg also listed in the Assembly, before a committee of inquiry, the staggering number of French strategic companies under US control. In our democracies, American capital has its relays, its consulting firms and its mercenaries in mergers and acquisitions. It is time for our Parliament to finally face American interference, which is the main threat to our independence. It is time for the anti-interference commission to look at the real threats, not the imaginary ones.

Mr President, "Iraqi soldiers snatched the babies from the incubators and let them die on the cold ground". This testimony of a nurse in October 1990 moved the whole world. There was no longer any doubt. The war against Iraq was a moral duty. A few months later, we will discover that these incubators were as imaginary as weapons of mass destruction. Because crimes against children in times of war are absolute horror. This is something no one can accept. And of course I am thinking of all those families, regardless of the country, who are desperately looking for their children. "Deportation of children". The choice of words is not innocent. ‘Deportation of children’: We immediately think of the deportations organized by the Nazi regime. But if one simply said "evacuation", perhaps it would be much less shocking. But in wartime propaganda, the choice of words is something of capital importance. Because the first duty of a soldier finding a child in a combat zone is to evacuate it to protect it. Yes, we must encourage the return of these children. And the Russians started repatriating them when the families are clearly identified. If we want them to return quickly today, let’s organise a peace conference, that’s the best way.

Mr President, obviously Emmanuel Macron caused great emotion among supporters of a total submission of the European Union to Atlanticism on the occasion of his recent visit to China in April 2023. By reaffirming France’s traditional position – a position that has been constant since 1964 – on single China and by asserting that an ally is not a vassal, he simply took over France’s position from General de Gaulle. This has obviously angered many Member States and all those who want to embark Europe on a crusade against Beijing. This reaction is once again a blatant illustration that the European Union cannot become an independent geopolitical actor. Peoples, nations with such different histories and interests cannot produce a unique response to the challenges of the world, and we must, at times, accept this diversity. France, free thanks to its nuclear weapon and its seat on the Security Council, must keep a different voice in the international concert. This is the paradox, moreover, of Emmanuel Macron in international politics, who solemnly likes to take up Gaullist accents in his speeches to quickly forget them and to cede everything in practice to supranational institutions such as the European institutions. This is the paradox of the European Union, which would like to be a geopolitical player, but which is concerned as soon as France takes a position that diverges from that of the United States. France and the European Union have every interest in ensuring their independence, both from the United States and from China. The US Inflation Reduction Act is a head-on attack on our jobs and businesses, and for now we are very quiet. The extraterritoriality of US law is much worse than Chinese soft power. The US semiconductor strategy is also dangerous for European strategic autonomy. Yes, the European Union must come out of its naivety, both vis-à-vis China and vis-à-vis the United States.

Mr President, on 26 September 2022, the energy supply – and therefore the competitiveness of European industries – was under attack by a foreign power, which sabotaged the Nord Stream pipelines. Josep Borrell said: “A deliberate disruption of Europe’s energy infrastructure is totally unacceptable and will be met with a strong response.” Such a hostile attack on the economic security and independence of the peoples of Europe must not go unnoticed. Joe Biden had announced that there would be no Nord Stream in case of war in Ukraine. The US journalist Seymour Hersh, Pulitzer Prize winner, has clearly accused the US in his investigation of this sabotage, because the attack on Nord Stream is actually sabotage, sabotage of the European energy market in times of conflict. In short, it is an act of war. Our Parliament must urgently launch a committee of inquiry into this hostile act and cannot back down from the breaking of the truth, even if it is inconvenient. Our so-called best ally may actually be our worst competitor.

Mr President, Madam, the promise of 2011 has brought this country to the brink of chaos, to the brink of chaos where Ennahda and the Islamist movements have dragged it. President Kaïs Saïed has simply been wrong in recent days to say that, to reside in Tunisia, you have to have documents and be in compliance with Tunisian law. That doesn't make him a racist at all. It is now a question of returning to the arrest of Mr. Boutar, director of a Tunisian radio station charged with money laundering. The European Parliament is therefore able to determine whether or not he is guilty a few weeks after his arrest. I admire all those who have this faculty. To believe that the European Parliament would benefit from almost divine lights, allowing it to know which judicial decision is well-founded and which is not. It should therefore not be surprising if Tunisia disgusts our interference like Morocco and Egypt before it. It is to be believed that Parliament wants to organise our definitive break with all the Mediterranean powers. So yes, I say it, we must rather today accompany Tunisia on the road to its recovery. When we see the economic situation in which Ennahda left this country, it is above all the priority.

Madam President, defending human rights, yes. Use this cause to build a new class of citizens, no. This is how I could summarize our position on a text that instrumentalizes good feelings to promote a questionable policy. You even push the provocation to congratulate the work of the DROI committee while the latter is splashed by the qatargate, which reveals almost a decade of alignment with this work at the level of Qatar's interests. All too often, in the texts of the European Parliament, we see the same ambiguity. Is it the defense of human rights that really concerns you or the deployment of an ideological agenda? Let's take an example. You propose in your text more and more sanctions against countries that do not correspond to your policy. Sanctions regimes are often the cause of the worst possible human rights abuses. Famine, the impossibility of healing. In Syria, for example, sanctions by the international community have driven 90 per cent of the population below the poverty line, for example, while the war has been over for several years. Human rights do not grow in ruins or cemeteries. On the contrary, your text passes extremely quickly on the fundamental rights of human beings: feeding, housing, caring. What interests you is to support the defenders of gender theory, those who propose a woke culture, to grant visas to any category claiming that it is discriminated against, to constantly create new rights to defend. Not all minority political demands are necessarily good to defend and, above all, it is not always desirable for the European Union to associate itself with them.

Mr President, the earthquake that devastated entire regions in Syria and Turkey on 6 February 2023 left more than 50,000 people dead. The United Kingdom, the United States and the European Union have agreed to suspend part of their sanctions mechanism to facilitate the delivery of humanitarian aid to Syria, including Aleppo and Latakia governorates. These measures were necessary, but they are also an admission. Yes, the sanctions imposed on Syria have terrible effects on local populations, even if they have no effect on the political authorities. Hungry children, families who can't rebuild their homes, sick people who can't heal themselves: This is the most important consequence of the Western sanctions regime on Syria. Human rights are not born on a field of ruins or in cemeteries. Sanctions on the Syrian people will have to be renewed or not by 1 June 2023. It is urgent that we refuse their extension if we do not want to add a political drama to a natural disaster.

Madam President, there are two forms of ecology: one wants to preserve the planet to serve people, the other wants to put green ideology before human lives. In the European Parliament, since the Green Deal, we have been accumulating texts that completely ignore their impact on our societies. No one, of course, is opposed to the thermal renovation of buildings, whether private or public. But the text proposes uneven indicators between states to justify building classes. Worse, this text will impose on owners impossible deadlines to meet to bring their property into compliance. A real crisis in the French real estate market is looming. A crisis that will endanger many households whose loans will not be enough to meet the demands of Brussels. What is the point of imposing these force requirements, without worrying about the reality of our economic and artisanal landscape to actually put them in place? Does the resolution take into account the difficulties of our craftsmen in recruiting? No, no. Does the resolution take into account sufficient time for owners to have their work carried out? No, no. To avoid creating a real estate crisis in France, we will vote against this resolution.

Mr President, France and the European Union have regularly given in to Paul Kagame’s propaganda. It is therefore not surprising that he now feels that he is allowed to do so. He proved this by continuing to arm a militia that is terrorising the Kivu region: M23. Everyone is now convinced of Rwanda’s military interference in the affairs of the Democratic Republic of Congo. The European Union, France and other powers have demanded that Mr Kagame finally cease his hostile policies. Terror in front of the M23 group is causing massive population displacements: 5 million Congolese have already left the area for ten years. The M23, Rwanda’s armed wing, is therefore taking part in a further destabilisation in the Democratic Republic of Congo, a country that does not need additional difficulties. The United Nations has been present in the country for decades; However, the war in the eastern part of the Democratic Republic of the Congo has never ceased. The words of Pope Francis, who visited the country a few days ago, resonate particularly. He told us: “Remove your hands from the Democratic Republic of Congo, remove your hands from Africa, stop suffocating Africa, it is not a mine to be exploited or a land to be robbed!” It is well known that Rwanda is enriched, in particular, by the illegal trade in illegally exploited resources in the Democratic Republic of the Congo, and in particular in the Kivu region. Thus, we can clearly see that without strong international pressure on Rwanda, it will absolutely not cease to participate in the destabilisation of eastern Democratic Republic of Congo. While, session after session, we are indignant at foreign interference in Africa, it is time to question our mistakes, which are rushing African states into the arms of other powers.

Mr President, the parties linked to the Muslim Brotherhood and which have participated in the institutional and economic devastation of their nation have for years enjoyed the favour of our institution. It was believed here that the Arab Spring would bring peace and prosperity – in short, new democracies to the West. What were the results of this policy? In Egypt, we supported Islamism, together with Mohamed Morsi. In Libya, we have supported militias linked to Islamism and thrown the whole of West Africa into chaos for a decade. In Syria, our illusions and chimera have turned twelve years of civil war into a springboard for a rebellion quickly passed under the banner of Islamists. None of the countries where the EU and the US Democrats supported the Muslim Brotherhood lieutenants was spared chaos. Yet our foreign policy and human rights resolutions had a compass: Qatar's interests. While our Parliament still refuses an immediate committee of inquiry on its alignment with Doha, we therefore decide to return to the subject of Tunisia. President Kaïs Saïed’s efforts to restore state authority and combat Islamist abuses in part of Tunisia’s political arena should be welcomed. However, it is clear that it is facing a complex economic and political situation, which no one knows if it will succeed in resolving, and which the Tunisian people are now bearing the brunt of. Here we hear the worst accusations against President Saïed, as if it were up to the European Parliament to establish and remove the leaders of the Mashreq countries. However, it is up to the Tunisian people to decide their future, without suffering from interference and European institutions. Of course, nobody can rejoice at the extremely low turnout in the last parliamentary elections in Tunisia. It indicates, in my opinion, much more desperation than disavowal, and requires solutions rather than condemnations.