Speeches

Mr President, ladies and gentlemen, the rejection by the plenary of the report on the work of the European Ombudsman in 2024 is yet another example of how the European radical left wants to cover up the abuses of the European Commission and hide the biggest acts of corruption. I voted in favour of this report because the European Ombudsman has contributed enormously in recent years, including in 2024, to increasing transparency at European level and exposing abuses by the European Commission. It was the mandate of the European Ombudsman, Emily O'Reilly, who revealed the abuse of Ursula von der Leyen's refusal to make available the SMS she exchanged with Albert Bourla, CEO of Pfizer, or her refusal to publish contracts for the purchase of the alleged COVID vaccines. The current ombudsman recently opened an investigation against Ursula von der Leyen for how she again negotiated the Mercosur agreement via SMS, the messages no longer being saved. Shockingly, left-wing extremist groups, while claiming to be big advocates of transparency and accountability for European officials, voted against the report. I congratulate the current Ombudsman on her work and wish her to follow the example of the previous one, not to be intimidated, but to investigate the abuses of the European Commission.

Mr President, dear colleagues, the kind of speeches that I witnessed today here in this plenary – I don't think they're helping Georgia at all, but rather the contrary. In 2008, when Georgia was attacked by Russia, not only this plenary, but many other parliaments across the globe submitted and sent many resolutions, and nothing else. At the end of the day, at that time, it was the Georgian people who paid the price of that country's decision to follow a western path. Now, since 2019, since I was a Member of this plenary, every time when we discussed about Georgia, we just criticised Georgia. We criticised Georgia because the Georgian people elected a certain government. We criticised Georgia because it decided one way or another. But let me ask you something: where were you in 2008 when Georgia was attacked by Russia? What did you and all of us did since 2008 to actually help Georgia, beyond just submitting statements? You're claiming that people in Georgia are now arrested: that might be true, but if we are not engaging with the Government, how do you think we are going to be able to help those people? So I'm calling not to ban and not to stop the discussion with them, but to re-engage with them in order to solve all the potential problems.

Madam President, dear colleagues, decades of European appeasement towards Russia – from 1992 war in Moldova to Georgia in 2008 and Ukraine in 2014 – encouraged Putin to launch the full‑scale invasion of Ukraine in 2022, the largest war in Europe since the Second World War. To remain free, we must take our defence seriously. First, strategic defence flagship projects like the drone initiative, the Eastern Flank Watch and the air and space shields are long‑overdue necessities. Europe must close capability gaps that have exposed our continent and ensure our eastern borders are protected. Second, we must dramatically improve military mobility. This means investing in modern roads, rail, bridges and ports and dual‑use infrastructure that strengthen our economies and security. Third, war today extends beyond the battlefield. Russia wages constant cognitive attacks on Europe through disinformation, propaganda and reflexive control, shaping public opinion, influencing elections and advancing policies that ultimately serve Russian interests. The radical proposal of the European Green Deal, which increased European dependence on Russian gas, is such an example.

Mr President, I voted against the report on the creation of a new EU strategy against poverty, because the text promotes solutions inspired by the Marxist-Leninist economic logic, which in the countries where they were applied, such as the former communist countries, did not bring prosperity, but more poverty and misery. Under the pretext of combating poverty, the document advances the idea of expanding the role of the state in the redistribution of wealth, based on the Marxist premise that some are prosperous because they have taken from others. However, the economic reality shows the opposite: Wealth and wealth are created in free societies through work, investment, innovation and entrepreneurship. History shows that systems based primarily on redistribution have not produced widespread prosperity. Poverty does not disappear by simply shifting resources, but by creating the conditions in which people can produce, work, invest and progress. The European project was based on an economic model that brought peace through prosperity, not copying the communist model in the USSR, but creating a space where capital, goods and people moved freely. Reducing poverty in Europe requires more economic freedom, less bureaucracy, fair taxes and policies that support work and private initiative. The state must be a facilitator of prosperity for all, not an administrator of the redistribution of the wealth of others.

Mr President, at the heart of any lasting peace in Syria lies the protection of its ethnic and religious minorities. Syria is not a monocultural state – it is a civilisation shaped over centuries by coexistence and plurality of multiple communities. Alawites, Druze, Kurdish, Yazidi, Assyrian, Armenian and ancient Christian communities continue to endure targeted killings, abduction, forced displacement, religious persecution and the systemic destruction of their sacred sites. After decades of authoritarian rule and 14 years of devastating civil war, Syria remains fractured by power vacuums that extremist actors have been quick to exploit. The ceasefire established in late January offers a moment of cautious hope, but it remains fragile and incomplete. Protecting minorities is therefore not only a moral obligation, it is a security imperative for Syria. Syria's future must recognise a fundamental truth of its history. Its unity and power stands in diversity, not in uniformity. No community should ever be sacrificed for a false vision of unity.

Mr President, the European Union must look at faith diplomacy as a strategic instrument to conduct diplomacy, project power and influence, as well as advance power and conflict resolution. The EU is a community shaped by 2000 years of moral reflection, human dignity and responsibility towards one another, deeply rooted in Judeo-Christian values. Our Judeo-Christian heritage has profoundly influenced the values on which the European Union stands: respect for human persons, solidarity, reconciliation over revenge, and peace grounded in justice. In a fractured world, faith diplomacy allows the European Union to lead with both principle and empathy. Religion remains a powerful force in shaping identities, inspiring hope and mobilising communities for the common good. Faith diplomacy strengthens peace where politicians and politics alone cannot. It opens doors in a moment of mistrust, gives voice to conscience in times of conflict, and builds bridges where fear has erected walls. To embrace faith diplomacy is not to look backwards, but to draw wisdom from our roots. By honouring its Judeo-Christian values while remaining open and inclusive, the European Union can offer the world not just power, but purpose.

Madam President, I voted in favour of the motion of censure against Ursula von der Leyen for her non-transparent and irresponsible handling of the EU‐Mercosur Agreement. Its negotiation and signature raised serious substantive and procedural issues and the European Parliament was bypassed in this negotiation. Firstly, the agreement opens up the European market for agricultural and food products from countries with much lower standards than the European Union, which creates real health risks for European consumers. It is aberrant to ban substances in European agriculture because they are not healthy for people, but to allow free access to agricultural products from countries where those substances are allowed. Secondly, this agreement creates a deeply loyal competition for European farmers. While Mercosur producers operate with more lenient rules, European farmers are burdened by excessive bureaucracy and huge policy costs. Green Deal. To impose harsh standards at home, but to import cheaper products from far more permissive countries is simply unfair and hypocritical. While trade benefits such as access for the European automotive industry also exist in the agreement, public health and food security must take precedence.

Mr President, dear colleagues, the European Parliament's report on drones and new systems of warfare rightfully points out that unmanned systems have fundamentally changed modern combat. Drones are now decisive force multipliers, providing reconnaissance, precision strikes, logistics and electronic warfare, as demonstrated everyday in Ukraine. Europe must lead in this critical field. Therefore, first, we must invest strategically in drone technology and build strong industrial and operational capacities within the European Union. This includes reducing dependence on external suppliers for key components, as well as removing unnecessary bureaucracy that slows innovation, procurement, production and deployment. Second, we must deepen our cooperation with Ukraine. Ukrainian engineers, manufacturers and operators have gained unmatched experience in developing, deploying and scaling drone systems under real combat conditions. Third, drones must be fully integrated in our defence structures alongside effective counter-drone systems. To achieve this, we must prioritise funding, streamline production and scale production. Europe must build not only the best drones, but also be able to produce them quickly and in large numbers to ensure our security and deter any aggressor.

Madam President, fundamental human rights are not a recent philosophical invention or a product of political majorities. Human rights have their source in the Judeo-Christian heritage of Europe, which affirms that every human being has an intrinsic dignity, because he is created in the image and likeness of God. From this revealed faith came later philosophical and legal notions such as equality before the law, freedom of conscience and respect for the person, values that were the basis of European civilization. The report rightly recognises that human rights and democracy are under increasing pressure globally, authoritarian regimes continue to suppress freedom of expression, persecute religious communities and undermine democratic institutions. These realities call for a strong and united response from the European Union. I abstained, however, because, even though the report was improved by amendments, they mix the defence of fundamental rights with pseudo rights, such as gender ideology, which do not derive from the universal tradition of human rights, but from neo-Marxist political activism. To be strong again, Europe needs to rediscover its own roots and stop relativising fundamental rights.

Madam President, I abstained on the vote on the report on the implementation of the common foreign and security policy, because the European Union's foreign policy must be built on pragmatism and realism, strategic interests and clear objectives, not ideological or utopian activism. From projecting strength and bringing wealth, the European Union has become a moralizing voice that only gives lessons, but is no longer taken seriously. When European officials go to countries in Africa, the South Caucasus or Asia and ask governments to pass laws recognizing the aberration that a man can give birth, Europe is no longer taken seriously. This attitude does not strengthen Europe's influence, but weakens it, pushing some countries into the arms of Russia. Foreign policy must be a coherent continuation of domestic policy. Without unity, realism and strategic clarity, the European Union cannot act effectively on the international stage. In a context marked by Russia’s war of aggression against Ukraine, regional instability and tough geopolitical competition, Europe needs a mature and mutually beneficial foreign policy. Only then can the EU remain a credible actor in an increasingly dangerous and competitive world.

Madam President, dear colleagues, the notion of human rights is rooted in the Judeo-Christian belief that every human being is created in the image of God with inherent dignity and worth. While other cultures have recognised duties and hierarchies, the idea of equal, universal and inalienable individual rights grew from this Judeo-Christian moral foundation. Human rights, therefore, are not privileges granted by the state, nor can they be withdrawn at the impulse of those in power. When states forget this truth, rights are seen as privileges vulnerable to ideologies and abuse. This report rightly warns that human rights and democracies are under increased pressure worldwide. Authoritarian regimes deny freedom of conscience and religion, repress speech, persecute believers and devalue human life. Europe cannot respond to these challenges by weakening the moral foundation on which human rights were built, nor by denying biological realities – claiming, for example, that a man can give birth. We must defend human rights, not as a political intervention, but as a sacred obligation to uphold the dignity and worth of every human being.

Mr President, dear colleagues, Russia represents the greatest threat to Europe today, as the common security and defence policy report states in its first paragraph. Russia's illegal war of aggression against Ukraine is not an isolated or local conflict: it is Russia's deliberate attempt to undermine international law, redraw borders by force and weaken Europe – an effort that began in 2008 with the war against Georgia. Cyber-attacks, disinformation campaigns, sabotage of critical infrastructure across Europe and the instrumentalisation of religion demonstrate that Russia's hostile actions go far beyond the military battleground. Europe is no longer living in a time of peace by default. Deterrence, preparedness, and resilience must now guide our actions. This requires serious and sustained investment in defence – not to wage war, but to prevent it. We must strengthen our military capabilities, reinforce Europe's defence industry, improve cooperation among Member States, and ensure that Europe will act fast and tough when its security is at stake. Investing in defence is investing in peace, freedom and the protection of our citizens. Our security, sovereignty and future depend on how united, committed and strong we are.

Mr President, 40 years ago, on 8 May 1985, speaking in this plenary in Strasbourg, President Ronald Reagan reminded Europe and the United States that their partnership was not built merely on treaties or convenience, but on shared Judeo-Christian values, a common culture and history, and a deep commitment to life, liberty, prosperity and the pursuit of happiness. Those words remain profoundly relevant today. The relationship between the United States and the European Union is not only strategic, it is moral. It is rooted in shared beliefs that make the governments accountable to their people and place the dignity and freedom of the individual at the centre of public life. When the US and Europe work together, our economies flourish, our societies grow more secure and freedom prevails. In times of uncertainty, the wisest response is to learn not only from mistakes but from successes as well. NATO and the Strategic Partnership, the Transatlantic Partnership are proven successes that need renewing today. I therefore call on the European and American leaders to rediscover the words spoken by President Reagan in this plenary forty years ago.