Speeches

Madam President, a year ago, our Parliament passed a resolution calling for support for Congolese displaced persons in the Kivu region. In that resolution, we encouraged Rwanda not to support the M23 rebels and called for the command of this bloodthirsty terrorist group to be placed under sanctions. Since then, the M23 has continued its crimes and its situation is still tense in Kivu. While 200,000 people are already displaced from Goma, violent fighting still took place on 7 November. When will we finally force the Rwanda of Kagame to renounce the destabilization of the Democratic Republic of the Congo politically, militarily and economically? While the presidential election will take place in December in Kinshasa and we are today discussing the European Union’s action to preserve the democratic process, we must help the Congolese people to stop Kigali’s interference. We must support the initiatives of the Heads of State of Southern Africa, in particular Angola, and finally clearly denounce the plundering of the wealth of the Democratic Republic of Congo.

Madam President, no one has waited for the European Commission to draw inspiration from Athenian democracy. If European culture has shined, it is because it was an example for the whole world, which freely drew on this priceless heritage. However, the text of that resolution proposes that this perspective be completely reversed. Our Parliament pretends to believe that it could inspire the world to follow its recommendations, even though we are a counter-example of democracy. We still can't get Ms von der Leyen's text messages with Pfizer, we're not really credible in teaching the world about transparency. Worse, the European institutions do not even hide the fact that they support some candidates against others, as we have seen even recently in Poland or Moldova. Not to mention the complete absence of our democratic demand when it corresponds to the calculations of the European Union. Have we heard the Commission, for example, protest when Mr Zelensky has just announced that he is suspending the elections in Ukraine? Have we seen the beginning of a reaction by the European Commission against the extraterritoriality of US law, which is the worst democratic interference in our century? It is ‘double standards’ that is the rule of this Parliament. We support trade agreements with Vietnam, but we sanction Cambodia. We hate Tunisia, but we forgive everything in Qatar. And I remind you that yesterday’s Muslim Brotherhood Egypt supported Hamas, while today your favours continue to attack President Sisi’s government. The best way for us to support the integrity of democratic life in the world would be to return to two simple principles: respect for sovereignty and the refusal to interfere in the internal affairs of other states.

Mr President, do you remember the first few months after the outbreak of the war in Ukraine? Macron government ministers and members of the European Commission told us that Russia would be brought to its knees through the sanctions tool. You promised to send Russia back to the Stone Age, but it is actually the ravages of inflation that are now martyring our families, as well as the explosion in the cost of energy. The European Union is therefore preparing a twelfth package of sanctions against Russia, while 1 800 people are already subject to such measures. Even Mr Borrell had to admit in March 2023 that the European Union was reaching its limits in this area. By clinging fanatically, all the way, to these sanctions, we have multiplied our resentments in Africa, Asia and even South America. And you are now talking about fighting those who would circumvent sanctions? But, as Mr Kubilius has just pointed out, we buy about 2 billion energy products from Russia every month. And I am not talking about our nuclear industry, which depends on it, like that of the United States. In short, in this crisis, the European Union will have succeeded in only one thing: To extend the list of our enemies by disturbing our last friends.

Madam President, Islamist barbarism has struck again in France: Mohammed Mogouchkov killed Dominique Bernard, a professor of letters in Arras, and wounded three other people. This Chechen Islamist, disguised as a political refugee, planted his knife in what fanaticism hates: culture, knowledge, in short, school. This act is a bloody reminder of the assassination of Samuel Paty by Abdouallakh Anzorov in October 2020. In both cases, these Chechens had absolutely nothing to do on the national territory and pressure from NGOs and the ECHR, such as the European Parliament resolutions on the situation in Chechnya, are not innocent in this situation. Today, being an opponent in Chechnya is the ideal passport to blackmail asylum on European soil. That this Parliament does not like Russia or Mr Kadyrov is one thing; that he uses this hatred to support the importation of Islamist terrorists into France is unacceptable, even criminal. Who remembers that the majority of these opponents dreamed of establishing an Islamist caliphate in Chechnya? Their place today is in the prisons of Grozny, not in the streets of my country.

Madam President, everything is good to demand money from the Member States: This is how we could summarise the new strategy of the European Commission. This is once again his project, through the Strategic Technologies for Europe Platform. What does this text promise us? That, in return for an additional EUR 13 billion in contributions from the EU budget, the Commission claims – claims – to succeed in raising almost EUR 160 billion for innovation and competitiveness. In the hollow, the European Commission is mostly trying to pretend to do something about the €400 billion in public subsidies from the EU.Inflation Reduction Act American. Forgive me, but everything is ridiculous and insufficient in this plan: it does not reach either the financial amounts or the strategic scope of the US plan. In a nutshell, what was supposed to be our industrial replica is in fact only a pitiful admission of weakness. An admission of weakness that will eventually exasperate net contributor countries, such as France, which are required to finance European Commission plans if they want to hope for something in return. European strategic sovereignty will not be born in the offices of the Commission, but through entrepreneurship. Less standards, more freedom in state subsidies: This is what our strategic sectors need! In a few months, the future Safran Group plant will have to be built. When we listen to the managers of this plant, we understand that, instead of building it in the Lyon region, it is now possible for them to build it in the United States or Canada. I think that this famous STEP plan will not change anything and I think it is above all a big concern for our European industry.

Mr President, €70 billion including military aid: This is the amount you are claiming today for Ukraine between 2024 and 2027. This is in addition to the EUR 77 billion that has already been financed by the European Union and the Member States since 2022. You have even said, Commissioner, more than 80 billion. And I am not even talking about the 400 billion mentioned for the future reconstruction of Ukraine. Such sums are a blow to our compatriots, crushed by inflation and rising interest rates. But these are, we give them, and – as you know – without compensation and without sufficient security, as highlighted in the report of the Court of Auditors of the European Union of 5 October. The same Court of Auditors, which indicates that the purchasing power of the EU budget could fall by almost 10% in 2023 due to inflation, and that continued EU financial assistance to Ukraine will weaken future EU budgets. These are, we give them to a political class involved in multiple corruption cases, including at the highest level, with the president. It is peace that the peoples of Europe dream of funding in Ukraine. Nothing more, nothing less.

Mr President, the European Parliament has decided to tackle Egypt for the fourth time in four years. As I have already denounced, this anti-Egyptian obsession is a mistake for our institution and raises legitimate suspicions about the influence of the Muslim Brotherhood at the heart of European bodies. But this time you add indecency to inconsistency by organising this vote two days before the appeal hearing. The very nature of our discussion is aberrant. The European Parliament gives an opinion on an ongoing procedure concerning a dispute between two politicians and a refusal to pay a ridiculous bail. I ask you the question: What's the point? How does our work add value to the Egyptians by imposing a contemptuous look on their judicial institution? Egypt is a pillar of the Middle East and Africa, a major global player. President Sisi has embarked on a historic policy of modernizing his country. It is facing an economic and inflationary crisis largely due to sanctions imposed by the West on Russia. The EU would therefore have every interest in stepping up its partnership with Egypt, working together with Cairo to combat migratory pressure. We should hear the call of the Minister of Foreign Affairs, Mr Choukri, for the UN General Assembly, I quote, to increase the volume of financial assistance to Egypt to meet the additional burdens resulting from the growing influx of migrants into the country and to improve Egypt’s reception capacity in order to significantly reduce the flow of irregular immigration through the country. This is a policy that would serve the dignity of people while respecting Egyptian sovereignty. This is what we could propose rather than signing resolutions that ignore the launch of a national human rights strategy in 2021, the national dialogue launched in 2022 and the release of thousands of prisoners by the Presidential Forgiveness Committee. Yes, Europe must stand with Egypt’s modernisation efforts rather than with those who want to bring back the Muslim Brotherhood.

Mrs Vedrenne, we are very clear. When we talk about global warming and saving on pollution, we do not start by signing an agreement with New Zealand to import agricultural products into the European Union. You're French like me. You know very well that the agriculture of our countries can provide them. So for me, this agreement is certainly the most aberrant. As regards the agreement with Mercosur, you will probably vote for it, perhaps you will hide it during the next European election, but in any case, at least from the beginning, we say that this agreement is harmful for Europe, useless for France. And so our coherence is very simple, first of all by favouring short circuits and, secondly, by using the potential of the 27 European partners and importing or making economic agreements only for what is essential. Do you really believe that the agreement with New Zealand that you are going to approve was indispensable? French farmers don't think so. You'll explain it to them in a few months.

Madam President, the European Union is never stingy with paradoxes. It claims to develop short supply chains and signs free trade agreements with New Zealand. You are trying to convince us that it would be urgent for European nations to sign or push forward free trade agreements rejected by people like Mercosur. States have never needed the European Union to develop their strategic autonomy. Worse, when it comes to France, the more we sink into the ideology of the European Commission and the more our influence in the world shrinks. We do not need new trade agreements, except in a few very specific sectors. What European nations need is a return to geopolitical realism to serve their commercial interests. Let's get out of the obsession with costly and counterproductive political sanctions, to take a simple example by ceasing to impose absurd sanctions on potash, which cause an explosion of catastrophic fertilizer prices for our farmers and devastating for Africa. This is what the people expect of us. A little realism and a little economic patriotism. (The speaker agreed to answer a "blue card" question)

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.