Speeches

Madam President, ladies and gentlemen, The criminal character of the Russian regime is expressed in many ways when we look at all that is happening in the context of the war of aggression against Ukraine in violation of international law. I now omit all the aspects that concern the Russians themselves, i.e. the totalitarian dictatorship inwards and the merciless heating up of their own soldiers on the front. This is not the issue here, but it also shows the character of the regime. It is not surprising, because even after more than four years on the battlefield there are only minimal gains in terrain, that then hatred and anger of the regime outside of what the international law of war provides, not only against combatants, but the civilian population. Crimes on the ground – from Mariupol to Jahidne, from Butsha to Isyum – and from the air daily and massively, with the aim of terrorising the population and crushing the will to resist. Cultural goods – proof of Ukrainian identity – are also targeted. Great-Russian master humanity thus also shows its fundamentally deeply fascist character and its genocidal intentions. It is important that all these crimes against people, property and cultural assets are registered and evidence of a subsequent conviction of those responsible is secured. The Special Tribunal for the Crime of Aggression is important here, as is the Register of Damages, which was already established in 2023, and now most recently the Compensation Commission, which is to be established in the margins of the 135th meeting of the Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe in Chisinau on 14 May. Let us use all these instruments against the aggressor. Slava Ukrajini!

Madam President, ladies and gentlemen. As has so often been the case recently, this European Council, which was supposed to focus primarily on improving competitiveness, has been caught up in reality. If an American president is what he is, if goals, methods and arguments are changed on various foreign policy issues, such as the daily shirt, then this must not be a reason for us to follow suit everywhere or to try to discover there a logic or even a strategy that in reality does not exist at all. The war with Iran is not our war. Neither do we participate nor were we consulted, and if so, we would certainly have discouraged it. Not only is this not a NATO case, but we see not only at our gas stations that the consequences of this war directly affect us. Our solidarity is with the Iranian people, who have been suffering for decades under the mullahs regime, but to whom we can honestly currently give no hope that this regime will be eliminated by this air war from the outside. I am also thinking of the citizens of the Gulf States who have been targeted by the Iranian regime through no fault of their own, but also of the people of Israel who are being shelled, even if this shelling by Iran is not really surprising. Thank you, Commissioner, for addressing the situation in Gaza. For the sake of completeness, you would also have the unacceptable actions of radical settlers in the West Bank can address. This is not a contribution to the peace process. And I thank you, however, for the clarity, the renewed clarity in the matter of Ukraine. The Five Groups-Ukraine Coalition in this House is rock solid.

What we have seen was a tit-for-tat reaction on what had been said from Hungary earlier. I wouldn't have personally said it in this way and it is also not a requirement for membership. But you know what happens in Hungary as we speak – especially with regard to the seizing of this money transporter, which was legally on the way from Austria through Hungary to Ukraine and not the other way around – that is the unacceptable situation. A situation where your prime minister apparently is afraid to lose the elections finally.

Mr President, Commissioner, colleagues, just to the previous speaker, if the Ukrainians think that the president does not fulfil his purposes, in Ukraine, you can change your president, contrary to Russia. That's the reality. It is in our strategic interest, if not to say geopolitical interest, to enlarge the area of peace, stability, prosperity, rule of law and democracy in Europe. So, credible will to enlarge is required from existing Member States. Sometimes 20 years of negotiations do not indicate such credibility. On the other hand, will and concrete efforts by candidate countries to work on this goal is also required. Countries, as the Commissioner rightly said, who would undermine us from within have no space in the European Union. With regard to the fulfilment of the political criteria, there cannot be flexibility – they must be fulfilled. But for the economic criteria, such as access to the single market, we have already practised transitional periods, which would enable us to take a country in without having the full effects, either on the existing Member States or on the new Member State. So I think there is flexibility possible for the enlargement process.

Madam President, colleagues, this is a day of collective mourning, outrage and resolve. We commemorate all Ukrainian victims of this senseless war: the soldiers defending their country, the aid and relief workers, and railway staff who kept the country running. We mourn tens of thousands of civilians who were killed, abducted, raped by the aggressor's soldateska and the millions of refugees inside and outside Ukraine who fled Russian occupation. We think of the Ukrainian prisoners of war – some families are sitting in the gallery. Welcome. All this is the sole political responsibility of the ruthless dictator in the Kremlin, who started the second fascist attack following the Nazi occupation from 1941 to 1944. Our outrage is not only about Putin, but also his admirers, sycophants and war profiteers inside the EU, such as Orbán and Fico. Your disgraceful attitude will go down in European history books, labelling you as Quislings even without occupation. The Ukrainians are the first to want to end this war immediately. Yet Putin doesn't feel under military pressure – the only argument that would bring him to serious negotiations. Trump's attitude is regrettable. Exerting pressure on the victim rather than the aggressor emboldens Putin. We Europeans need to strengthen Ukraine's civil resilience and defence capabilities. We need to deliver more air defence systems and deep strike capabilities to paralyse Russia's weapons production and strategic transport infrastructure. We need to prevent these oil tankers, with flags mostly from small island states, from passing unhindered through the Danish straits, as the Copenhagen Convention of 1857 only provides free passage for ships of the signatory states. Our security guarantees for Ukraine must be crystal clear, entering into force immediately after the end of the state of war, fully encompassing the substance of Article 42(7) of the EU Treaty. That must go hand in hand with a credible process of integrating the country into the European Union. Ukrainians, you are not alone. The traitors are with Moscow. We are with you. Slava Ukraini!

Madam President, ladies and gentlemen. Russia is the aggressor, Russia must pay for its crimes. Russia has a lot of money, even in Europe. We would have liked to have secured a reparation loan with the frozen Russian state funds. (Applause) Since this was not possible, 90 billion were raised on the capital market. Above all, Ukraine needs two things: The means to be able to defend itself – 60 billion is earmarked for this – and the means to keep the state running, while continuing the reforms that will advance the country on its way to the European Union. I welcome the Commission's statement; I think it will also be presented, we already have it in writing. This allows us to vote in favour of the proposal for a regulation without amendments. As a rapporteur for Ukraine, I also welcome this very much. Slava Ukrajini!

Mr President, Commissioner, colleagues, we discuss this forgotten war: Sudan's unbearable humanitarian catastrophe – hunger, displacement, despair. I welcome, I acknowledge, that we, as the European Union, are doing what we are always best at: that is delivering humanitarian aid. It is the least that we can do and what the people expect from us. And it is good to hear the figures and all our efforts. And I also welcome that we are, as the European Union, co-hosting this Sudan conference in April. It is a due effort that needs to be undertaken. But the Sudanese people are trapped in a conflict that would collapse without foreign weapons, financing and political sponsorship. This is not a war fought only by Sudan's own factions. It is a proxy struggle in which regional and global actors compete for influence, resources and strategic corridors, and they do so with Sudanese lives. Behind every air strike and every massacre stand supply chains of arms, cash and political cover that cross borders and continents. The Rapid Support Forces are armed and funded through networks linked to the United Arab Emirates, while remnants of the Wagner network continue to exploit Sudan's gold and navigate ties with both sides. The Sudanese Armed Forces rely on drones and material from Iran and receive military and logistical support from Egypt, Türkiye and Saudi Arabia. So let us be clear: this war endures because outsiders feed it. If we truly care about Sudan's people, our call must be for accountability, not only for the generals, but also for those states that sustain their fight. So let's use this conference that is planned, and get all the relevant people on board and come to a solution.

Madam President, colleagues, as I'm the Ukraine rapporteur, you can imagine that under normal circumstances, I am always in favour of discussing Russia's war of aggression and the situation in Ukraine. In these special circumstances, I ask you in this case not to vote in favour, and that is for three reasons. One formal reason is, I mean, these attacks have been ongoing for weeks, so it is nothing that has emerged since the Conference of Presidents' sitting last Thursday. It could have been introduced then, in time. That is the formal thing. On the substance itself, I think we have the most important issue in an urgent procedure about the Ukraine Support Loan package this week. That is the clearest signal of support to Ukraine – EUR 90 billion – that we can give. That is, I think, the key issue. And the third point is: in two weeks' time, as the President has already said, we have the special session where we will not only have a resolution, but in extenso can debate these issues as well. And I think that is the reason why I would say, please, let's not overdo it and not have it as a point today.

Mr President! Colleagues! High Representative! Of course, the current challenges that affect us require common answers if we want to be relevant. We know enough about the appeal. And yet many of our citizens in Europe and many of us MEPs have the impression that our executive should speak more clearly and act more concretely as a result. I think that's possible because we 27 actually have common interests on these important issues. On Ukraine: Does any member state believe that it can gain advantages for itself through an appeasement attitude towards Putin and can also contribute to a faster end to the war? No, only joint increased pressure on Putin would impress him. To the United States: Does anyone have the impression that our previous stance on meeting Trump – on tariffs, Ukraine, defence – has paid off, friendly tone, conciliatory on the matter? Unfortunately, I don't think so. And so many of our citizens expect us to make it clear through our actions that we cannot accept action against Greenland and Denmark in violation of international law, and certainly not that punitive tariffs are threatened in response to this attitude. And just as we as Parliament have reacted and postponed the implementation of the customs agreements with the US, we expect the European Council to also have the courage to take decisions that impress Trump. And if not him, then the markets and all those in the US who know that the United States also needs allies and friends.

Madam President, colleagues, Russia's brutal war of aggression takes place in Ukraine, but the ultimate target is our way of life. Deterring Russia from further aggression beyond Ukraine and protecting our citizens requires us to take a more common, a more European approach to defence. And the current US Administration, unfortunately, gives more and more the impression that they are – mentally at least – departing from the NATO framework, so the need is even more urgent. The EU's first comprehensive defence industry programme, upon which we will vote today, marks an important first step in that direction. It will provide powerful tools for strengthening our defence industry, establish a framework for deeper cooperation of EU Member States for developing and maintaining joint capabilities, and improve our security of supply and strategic autonomy. It will also reinforce our cooperation with Ukraine, further supporting the country, but also allowing us to benefit from the hard lessons Ukraine had to learn in its brave, relentless fight for freedom. However, EDIP's success will ultimately depend on Member States making full use of its potential, as well as on closing the gap between EDIP's high ambition and its very limited budget of EUR 1.5 billion. Achieving defence readiness by 2030 requires joint and bold steps now – not in 2028. Instead of national approaches driven by industrial policy considerations, we need a coordinated, strategic and sufficiently funded European approach, enabling our armed forces to act effectively together and making the most of European taxpayers' money. Now is not the time to think 'Well, on the national level, now there is so much money available, let's look inward.' No – the opposite is necessary. Let us make use of the potential that we have here. Let's join forces. Let's make use of economies of scale and more interoperability to get the things right that we need to do now.

Madam President, you have said it all. I think it is obvious that we need to position ourselves given this American proposal, or the original one and the amended one. We have had, as Parliament, a broad majority in a consistent policy of supporting Ukraine. That has to go on and I think that is why we need to have not only the debate, but a resolution in this regard.

Mr President, what has been said thus far by the Council and the Commission, I fully subscribe to. The large majority of this Parliament fully subscribes to it. It is indeed about a just and durable peace for Ukraine, as the title says, and nothing will be decided about Ukraine without Ukraine. But while Putin has always had the same maximalist positions, which are all unacceptable and infamous, even when it comes to the alleged need for 'denazification' that he always talks about, I think the Nazis here in the House support him. It cannot be about the denazification of Ukraine, with a Jewish President at the top. The other unfortunate thing is that on the American side we see an almost daily shift of positioning. That requires, finally, that we really also get our acts together when it comes to the peace project – not only the ongoing programmes, but there is talk about an alleged 12-point plan that is being worked on with Ukraine that is right and good – so we find a way forward to strengthen Ukraine's position for the time when it comes. Well, the American positioning changed so quickly that even our title with a reference to Budapest is outdated. On the substance, it's right that there is no such thing. It was, as such, already an unfriendly act, be it initiated from the Russians or the Americans, to hold it in Budapest. They should have done it in in Türkiye, in Istanbul, where we have had previous rounds of such talks. But the real point is, in my mind, that we need to make it very clear that if the ceasefire is the first point where apparently the United States President is now back to this position, ceasefire first and then negotiations, it must be something that Ukraine can live with. And that means that we will never accept any legal transfer of Ukrainian territory to Russia. De facto, something can temporarily be accepted, but never in a position that we would legally agree to it.

Mr President, ladies and gentlemen, Commissioner! I hope that we will use this EU-AU Summit – that we will use it to take stock, to take stock, and that we will once again make our extensive offers to the African friends and partners in our neighbourhood. You mentioned, Commissioner, where we are leaders in contacts with Africa compared to other continents. We need to build on that and make it better where it is needed. Of course, we know where the problems are. Sudan has been mentioned. We have countries like Tanzania, where the opposition leader is in prison, or in Côte d'Ivoire he is not allowed to vote. These are things that we cannot like either, but we as Europeans should make a reasonable, comprehensive offer, because we are not alone. We need to offer our way of helping Africa develop, how we want to help Africa play a stronger economic and political role on the world stage. We are not alone – Russia is there, China is there. But I'm confident. If we do it right, the vast majority of Africans will also recognize that we are the better partners in the long run. Let's make the best of it, too.

Madam President, ladies and gentlemen, Commissioner, the Presidency of the Council! From the point of view of the Committee on Foreign Affairs, we must point out that the international situation is becoming increasingly complex and is characterised by geopolitical tensions, strategic competition and global challenges. The EU is increasingly called for in the immediate European neighbourhood. However, the cuts in global external aid from the United States and other countries provide an opportunity to play a stronger role globally as the EU. In particular, we need to improve the financing of the policy for the Eastern and Southern Neighbourhood, given the proximity and geostrategic importance of these regions for the security of the EU itself. Our efforts to support the Republic of Moldova should receive a specific budget line. They should increase the transparency of the budget and improve parliamentary scrutiny. Overall, we need 110 million euro more for Heading 6 of the budget – Neighbourhood and the World – than the Council has set for these challenges.

Madam President, ladies and gentlemen, As we haven't seen in the last few days, Russia's activities extend beyond Ukraine. The idea that Vladimir Putin could direct his aggression towards countries of the European Union if he won his war is not a far-fetched theoretical possibility. This is an existential risk for Europe. Fortunately, there is another unique way to help Ukraine, in addition to the many support measures that have been implemented so far. And that is to use Moscow's assets against Russia itself by using them for a reparation loan to Kyiv. My call to the Member States is clear: Even if you're not sitting here now, you're doing the right thing. Do it fast. Ukraine needs further support, and the reparation loan provides a safe and solid way to finance it. This loan is practically an advance on the Kremlin's obligation under international law to make reparations payments. If Russia refuses to do so, it will not get the money back. And if they were actually willing, then the money would be offset against the reparations to be paid. There is therefore no risk of liability for us.

Madam President, ladies and gentlemen. Thank you, Commissioner, for the overview of all that we as the EU can and will do. It all fits into the 20-point plan. Of these 20 points, the release of the hostages has actually taken place so far, which we are pleased about with those affected, their families and all of Israel. As agreed, Palestinian prisoners have also been released, and Israel has withdrawn to the agreed line. Now what? In addition to our own possibilities, we must make it clear to the US that it is not done with large appearances in the Knesset and Sharm el-Sheikh. Are there any ideas on how Hamas can actually be disarmed? Is a Security Council resolution being prepared to deploy the necessary international stabilization forces? Is unhindered access ensured for all humanitarian organisations, the United Nations and the Red Cross? I expect our executive to stay in touch with the U.S. on all these issues and ensure that there are answers to these questions.

Mr President, colleagues, on the second anniversary of Hamas's terrorist attack on Israel, we strongly support the ongoing efforts to put an end to this war, to liberate the remaining hostages, to finally end the grip of Hamas on Gaza for all future time to come and to stop the suffering of the innocent civilian population in the Gaza Strip. We need immediate access for all available humanitarian assistance by all those organisations that have proven that they can deliver on the ground. Disarming Hamas, dismantling its structures will secure that humanitarian aid will reach those in need. But our EU role must go beyond providing humanitarian assistance. We must, on the one hand, be prepared to agree to participate in an international administration that organises security and reconstruction in Gaza. I cannot suggest to Israel to continue its military presence inside Gaza, but suggesting that also requires a robust international presence and mandate, including us. In parallel, we need to push for an inclusive peace process that ultimately leads to a two‑state solution, a secure state of Israel and a viable Palestinian state. On the way, Israel must stop its settlement policy in the West Bank, and I hope that also in this regard Donald Trump and the European Council will find proper arguments to convince the Israeli Government that this is also in the long‑term interests of Israel. I also wish the Palestinian population to get the chance to elect a legitimate leadership, after the last elections dating from 2005 and 2006. Together, they can find a solution, hopefully.

Madam President, I rise on the basis of Rule 194 of the Rules of Procedure. During yesterday's vote, a widespread human error and irritation in the voting procedure caused a mistake which leads to the international irritation and questions for clarification addressed to our House by other parliaments and diplomatic missions. An amendment originally tabled by The Left Group was adopted, accusing the European Union of pursuing a militaristic policy towards Ukraine. This is now paragraph 2 of the adopted Ukraine text. I speak on behalf of the 70 % majority having adopted the Ukraine report yesterday, coming mainly from the political groups of EPP, S&D, ECR, Renew and the Greens, and I declare the language of paragraph 2 does not represent the position of the European Parliament as expressed in all other paragraphs of the Ukraine report. We have not changed our position on Ukraine. We stand with Ukraine and we will continue to do so. The incoming corrections of the votes from the Members of our political groups will clearly show there is no majority support of paragraph 2 in this House. The Ukraine report should, in future, be considered as having been adopted without paragraph 2.

Mr President, colleagues, Commissioner, I was the head of the EP election observation delegation last year for the presidential election and the referendum, and what we saw of malign influence from Russia and the proxies was already incredible. The President here today illustrated what had happened last time, and we need to be aware of what will happen next time on the 28th, when we have the next election. That is why it is so important to support all ways, means and measures that the Moldovans can take to get their own voters in a position where they can make an informed vote, and not one where we find that they are informed through the social media in a way that they are irritated and confused about what the European Union is actually all about. That is our task, and I think we will be able to fulfil it.

Madam President, A preliminary remark: I think it is a disgrace if, after two failed German dictatorships, there are still people in the house who want a third dictatorship. Shame on you! We could note the usual coalition of the willing of five political groups and additional individual members that send a clear message: Ukraine's future is in the EU. On the way, we are supportive of the reform process and as Putin does not want peace, not even a ceasefire, we agree to demand from our governments to strengthen Ukraine's ability to defend itself. Everyone must deliver what they can provide. For the German part, to fulfil their task, we should start training Ukrainians on the Taurus missile and deliver it as soon as possible to make a difference, hitting production sites of weapons, launch sites of missiles and important logistical infrastructure that transport the lethal weapons and soldiers to the frontline. Contrary to certain claims, no German soldiers are needed to install it all. And there is one aspect that has not been addressed, and I think that is one of the motivations why the Ukrainians continue to fight and we should support them: It is about the Ukrainians, millions of them, who live in the Russian occupation zone. Their daily fate is incredible: Torture, arrests, no rule of law at all. I think that is the population that is at risk especially, and that is why this motivation is so strong to regain these occupied territories. It's about the people and not about the territory that is in the focus, and I think we have all reason to support Ukraine in these efforts as well. And in so far, I thank you once again, dear greetings from these five groups and additional members, for this solidarity that we have offered over the years. I am confident that we will succeed with our efforts. Thank you very much. Once again, Slava Ukraini!

Madam President, ladies and gentlemen, dear High Representative, Commissioner for Enlargement! We have a related debate today, and I would first of all like to thank the High Representative for her clear statements regarding the recent Russian terrorist attacks. Putin wants nothing less than to force Russia's final victory over Ukraine. The illegitimate, unjustified and unprovoked war of aggression has not only brought death and destruction to a sovereign country, it is also an attack on the fundamental values of peace, freedom and democracy in Europe. This war must be ended, but peace does not come from words alone. Russia has shown in recent months with dubious proposals and dishonest negotiations that it wants to continue its war. Therefore, we emphasize: An unconditional ceasefire is a prerequisite for any serious peace negotiations! As long as this is not the case, we must step up our military, material and financial support to Ukraine so that the country can uphold its right to self-defense. Ukrainians defend not only their territory, but also their European path. Never before has it been so clear to all citizens and political actors why they are under attack – namely because they want to successfully complete this European path to the rule of law and democracy. The alternative is obvious: Either you become part of free Europe or you are forced back into the Soviet gulag. We support Ukraine in its reform process, which is detailed in the annex to the Ukraine Facility on a quarterly basis. We also have a lever here, because the payments are tied to the fulfilment of these quarterly homework, and if they are not fulfilled, the payments are also reduced. On this path of reform, there can also be regressions or missteps. But it should also be emphasized that the maturity of society is now so advanced that such missteps can also be corrected by the pressure of society. I was impressed by the reaction of civil society to the attempt to put the National Anti-Corruption Bureau of Ukraine, NABU, and the Special Prosecutor's Office SAPO for Anti-Corruption under the control of the Prosecutor General. Many took to the streets despite the war, and we also saw it as an attempt to get independent investigators under the control of the government. The original state has been restored – that is good. We also see considerable progress, often with the help and perseverance of the international community. Ukraine must continue to use its reform momentum: strengthening its democratic institutions, aligning with the EU's common foreign and security policy, fighting corruption and maladministration in the judiciary. These steps are not only crucial for EU accession, they are also a foundation for the confidence of one's own people in the state and the legal system. That is why we also call for political diversity, independent judiciary and transparent procedures to be protected and strengthened. We call for an end to untimely and politically motivated judicial proceedings and sanctions against representatives of the opposition, for the preservation of parliamentary pluralism and for the promotion of constructive dialogue between political groups in the Verkhovna Rada; also remove all restrictions on mandate-related and political travel abroad for members of the Verkhovna Rada. The European Council took the historic decision to open accession negotiations in December 2023. The first Intergovernmental Conference took place in June 2024. Now it is time to move forward decisively – without blockages or pretexts. We call on all Member States to act constructively and pave Ukraine's path towards EU membership. It is important to start cluster negotiations in a timely manner so that as much rapid progress as possible can be made with regard to the country's accession to the EU. Let's send a clear signal together! Ukraine is part of the European family and we will do everything we can to ensure that it takes its place in the European Union as soon as possible. With good reforms, Ukraine can achieve this goal faster. Slava Ukrajini!