What Michael spoke about.

Mr President, once upon a time there was an Autonomous Republic of Crimea in Ukraine. In 1991, during the independence referendum, also a majority of inhabitants of Crimea voted in favour of Ukrainian independence. Crimean Tatars could feel at home as much as Ukrainian and Russian speakers. Russian was an official language in Crimea. The Crimean Tatars had their majlis, their legal representation. This changed all dramatically with the illegal occupation and subsequent annexation by Russia of the Crimean Peninsula. Ever since, the rule of law, basic human rights, international conventions, and also the legitimate representation of the Crimean Tatars has been disregarded. For the Tatars, the situation seems more and more, and resembles more and more, the situation that they had after, first, German occupation of Crimea and, then, retaking by Stalin and the deportation that happened thereafter from Crimea. This situation is unbearable, but what is more important is to shed a light also on the fate of individuals who are persecuted because they demand their legitimate rights. We have picked three persons in the title of this urgency, namely Iryna Danylovych, Tofik Abdulhaziiev and Amet Suleymanov, and we have added another 13 persons who, because of their political activities, because they belong to this minority, they are persecuted. It is important that their names are on record, so that the aggressor and the oppressor knows that we know about them, and we demand the immediate and unconditional release, and condemn the Russian action that is ongoing within the big war against Ukraine, starting in 2014, in Crimea.

Madam President, colleagues, normally, one cannot change history because what happened just happened. And still it is typical for all kinds of dictatorships and autocratic rule – not only Russia – to instrumentalise a selective or distorted presentation of the past to justify today's aggressions. I stand here as a German and I feel free to accuse today's Russia of what it is: an utterly Stalinist and, yes, fascist dictatorship. But that is possible only because we have told the truth about the darkest part of our national history, partly being committed on today's territory of Ukraine. Nothing to relativise, never again to be repeated by Germany, and never again to be accepted by anyone, against anyone. Putin's July 2021 essay about the historic unity of Russians and Ukrainians deprives Ukrainians of their identity, pretending it was about one people, one empire, one language, one church. It was the attempt to thereby justify the 'Heim ins Reich', the 'back to the Empire' policy. As democracies, we must have the strength to counter that. As democrats, we must call a spade a spade. We must expose those who are in the service of the dictator because they suffer from a 'Führer‑withdrawal syndrome', from a 'Führer‑Entzugserscheinung', and have learned nothing from history.

Mr President, dear Vice-President and High Representative! First of all from my side, also on behalf of the EPP, all the best for the new function! They will also have our support on the big issues, where we have a broad consensus here. I think we have a situation here where we can really be relieved, together with the Syrians, that the end of one of the most brutal regimes the world has seen has been achieved. It is also a strategic defeat for Russia and Iran: This specific terrorist axis in Syria, where we have seen that the Russian air force has bombed the cities there in recent years, as a prelude and test for what followed later in Ukraine. I agree with what you have presented as tasks now. It is also good that today, for example, the President of the Commission is in Ankara to meet with one of the Major players agree in the region – with Turkey – on how to move forward in cooperation now. I expect Turkey not to respond to this new development with bombs. I believe that the Syrian Kurds do not intend to work as a retreat for the PKK, but they have organised themselves very well there, and we should acknowledge this and also enable the Syrian Kurds to make their contribution to stabilisation there. Now the time is over, there is much more to say.

I'd like to tell you this: Russia has waged a war of aggression against Ukraine in violation of international law and this objective – I don’t know if it was the Ukrainians, you obviously know better, I don’t know, but even if it was them – has, in my view, been a legitimate objective in order to draw on Russia’s ability to create money from these revenues. I think that's very clear. The aggressor – do not reverse the offender/victim here. But that's part of the AfD policy, and you probably get paid for it.

Madam President, colleagues, honourable President Niinistö, thank you very much for this excellent report. The need to enhance Europe's civilian and military defence, preparedness and readiness is obvious. And he rightly described the facts: Putin sees the West as weak. And his logical conclusion is we must change this perception. This requires several things. First, as he formulated, the trust of citizens that the political institutions, meaning our democracies, are worth to be protected. Second, it requires political leadership in our respective countries to tell the citizens the truth and the full scale of the threats that we are exposed to, and there are many that have been enumerated in the report and it is not only about a full-scale war. Third, it requires action – coordinated action – and, again, I quote 'Strengthening Europe's defence is an urgent and monumental task'. We try to address it with supportive legislation here in the Parliament, but we also need to learn from countries like Finland, to compare notes and assess what is best practice, how we can raise resilience and get civilian and military preparedness and readiness from theory into practice. Putin won't wait if we allow him to win in Ukraine. Supporting Ukraine now is the best way to give us the time to prepare our civilian and military structures, not to be considered too weak by the aggressor, and thereby deter him from any further reaching sinister thoughts.

Madam President, Dear colleagues! America has chosen. We take note of the outcome. The country remains an indispensable partner for us Europeans, especially in the areas of security and defence and in countering the spread of authoritarian rule. And we must, of course, continue to intensify economic relations with this most important trading partner. In dialogue with colleagues in both houses of Congress and in the administration, it remains our task to make it clear that maintaining and expanding these relations is also in the American interest. We should also maintain contacts with the federal states, especially where European investments have been made or where exports to Europe benefit locally. In this way, we Europeans can make it clear that we are attractive partners and not only in need of help, as was the case with the withdrawal from Afghanistan. Let's offer something: Substantially increased own defense budgets. Or we offer to abolish import duties on each other, for example on cars, and not to raise them. And if we buy more liquefied natural gas from the US instead of relabelled liquefied natural gas from Russia in the future, that is in the American, European and Ukrainian interests.

Madam President, colleagues and comrades, tongzhi in the gallery and online, there are two issues that need to be addressed with this debate. One is the call on the PRC to stop their repeated military exercises around Taiwan and the military build-up and the increasingly assertive and aggressive behaviour in the South China Sea, not only towards Taiwan, to end the threat of any violent unilateral change of the status quo across the Taiwan Strait. And there is no reunification possible because, according to my knowledge, Taiwan was never part of the PRC since it was established in 1949. Perhaps you should seek ways to become attractive for the Taiwanese who live in a democracy and dislike a prospect of being treated like the Hongkongers. So you should release the Uyghurs from the so-called reeducation camps, end the cultural repression of the Tibetans, end the incarceration of Falun Gong practitioners, end the prosecution of the underground churches, abide by the international agreement with the UK on 50 years of internal democracy for Hong Kong, stop harassing your neighbours by ignoring the provisions of the UN Convention of the Law of the Sea and, that is the other aspect of this resolution, allow meaningful participation of Taiwanese international organisations who formally do not require statehood to have an observer status. This is in line with our One China policy, that is what G7 has demanded on 23 September 2024, and the 2758 General Assembly resolution does not refer to Taiwan's status other than member state. Indeed, it cannot be a member state, but between full member and nothing, a lot of meaningful participation must be possible.

Mr President, colleagues, I'm not anticipating at this stage a verdict on the qualities of the upcoming elections. For that, we have an OSCE long-term mission who are doing a professional job. I simply expect the competent authorities to apply the existing laws for elections in a proper, fair and professional way. The Georgians will, indeed, decide on their own which path they would like to proceed, and it is my impression thus far that they have embraced this path to the European Union, because that is the perspective that has something for every citizen, in every country. There is not a single country that is worse off today than it was before they entered the European Union. And they also do not need the American engagement or interference in order to be motivated to go the European path. We, as Europeans, accept the path and the decision that a free people takes for their future. That is the difference to Russia, which does not accept that. And in so far, I am confident that through this process that is now ongoing, the people will make a very clear decision and tell the world and all who would like to listen what Georgia's path is. All the best for this election, Sakartvelo.

Mr President, ladies and gentlemen! First of all, I would like to apologise for this embarrassing contribution by the previous speaker, who has learned nothing from history – obviously. We are confident that the Moldovan authorities will properly conduct the presidential elections and the referendum on EU integration. As was to be expected, we have been witnessing multifold ways and means initiated by Russia to influence and manipulate the electorate. We know how Russia works: As they have nothing positive, attractive or even fascinating to offer from their side, they work with fake news, intimidation and cash payments to bribe voters to vote for pro-Russian presidential candidates. A special focus is given from their side on the EU integration referendum. They have no arguments against in substance because they know that the people in all countries that have ever acceded to the European Union are better off thereafter than before. Their outrageous insinuation is that a 'yes' to EU integration means to be dragged into the war against Ukraine – by the way, a very similar insinuation to what happens in Georgia from those who want to prevent the continuation of the European path over there. Let us therefore counter the lies and allegations with the truth, with facts and figures, and also positive emotion. Welcome citizens of Moldova to the European Union.

(Start of speech off mic) ... to be one of the key phrases expressed by Ukrainians during last Friday's and Saturday's Yalta European Strategy conference, the 20th of its kind, held for obvious reasons in Kyiv and not in Yalta. While the European Parliament has always expressed with impressive majorities its unwavering support for the country and the people of Ukraine in their existential resistance against the imperialist and Stalinist Russian attack, many of our governments still announce more than they deliver. As we are in a systemic confrontation with the aggressor, who not only wants to win by deleting Ukraine from the map of Europe, but also wants to destroy our European project, which is, as a concept, a threat to his dictatorship, we need to show our resolve to do whatever it takes for Ukraine to win. When Ukraine wins, we win. When Ukraine loses, we lose. On some of our governments, including my own, I call: stop being afraid of Putin and his threats. When we appease, he escalates. When we stand strong politically and enable Ukraine militarily to stand and push back, we get the country in a position to negotiate a solution that is in line with international law. So lift all restrictions on the use of weapons on Russian soil. I am grateful to the Dutch Government, who have done so with respect to the F-16. We will not be able to deliver so many Patriots and IRIS-T air defence systems to have comprehensive coverage of Ukraine and Russia's attempts to destroy the infrastructure. It is obvious it is far more militarily economic to hit the launch sites instead of trying to get the air defence done. So that is my call on the governments: stand strong, lift the restrictions. Slava Ukraini!

Madam President, ladies and gentlemen! As the Ukraine rapporteur in the last parliamentary term and also as the co-rapporteur for the 50 billion Ukraine Facility, it is very important for me to say one thing at the outset: We must carry this broad consensus of political parties into this new legislature, this broad consensus of support for Ukraine. Because it is in our own interest that this country wins in the end, that this country can drive the aggressors out of the country in the end. We can decide here what we are doing in the civilian sector – that was 50 billion euros. We have drafted many political resolutions with over 90 percent support. We can imagine many beautiful things for Ukraine on the way to the European Union, but it is very important: If the country is not put in a position to push back Russia's military forces, then everything is nothing. That is why the call remains: Let us do everything we can to help this country militarily, so that this aggression, which is also directed against us, cannot succeed.

Mr President, ladies and gentlemen. I was really horrified when I learned that there is an intention in The Gambia to lift the ban on female genital mutilation here. I think we should do everything we can to the government there and, of course, also call on the Commission and our External Action Service to intervene here. We have existing conventions to eliminate all forms of discrimination against women, a convention on the rights of the child and a convention against torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment. This genital mutilation is indeed something that does not belong in the 21st century and cannot be pronounced by any government as something progressive or in the interests of women. Take that intention back. This is our call to the Government of The Gambia.

Mr President, colleagues, to end the debate, I have a suggestion to make. As I learned from Zhala, from his daughter, that apparently, President Aliyev is on Friday in Berlin meeting the Chancellor Scholz. Perhaps those who took the floor here, that we all send an email to the Chancellor’s office asking him, or asking his aides, to include in his speaking notes the reference to our case here, to Dr Ibadoghlu, and asking the Chancellor to raise the issue and allow him to travel home. So that is my suggestion, where perhaps it has an impact and might lead to an immediate result.

Mr President, ladies and gentlemen. The mullahs regime has launched a new level of escalation in the Middle East with the direct attack on Israel. This should be an occasion, but not the sole reason, to finally raise other strings against a regime that is repressive, internally against its own population, externally against Israel, but also a threat to other neighbours in the region. At the latest since the regime has been actively engaged in Russia’s war of aggression against Ukraine – by supplying the Shahed drones and other weapons – it should have been clear that dialogue with this regime was no longer possible, not even a vague hope that the nuclear agreement could still be implemented. I had that hope for a while. Iran has become part of the Russian-North Korean terrorist alliance against Ukraine and, of course, against Israel. Therefore, the Pasdaran must now be on the EU terror list, economic sanctions must now be fully coordinated in consultation with the US, and we support politically and materially the democracy movement in Iran. Women, life and freedom – this must be the future for the people of Iran, which we should also wholeheartedly support.

Madam President, colleagues, Commissioner, if I had five minutes speaking time, we would indeed repeat one by one your speech because I fully subscribed to what you have said and you have said it all. Indeed, there are obligations that the Georgian Government has undertaken and which they are blatantly violating by introducing this law. Well, actually, my impression is if it is about foreign agents, the only foreign agents that are involved in this is those in the ruling party, who copy Russian laws and are promoting the way Russia rules at home, and perhaps even on behalf of that. And if I look at the Prime Minister, Kobakhidze, some time ago, they were still with the S&D group and were there complimented out for right reasons. But, in the meanwhile, he will be going to Budapest to a very right-wing conference and appear there as a speaker together with Mr Wilders and others. So I really wonder where this country is heading and where this ruling party is heading. We support the will of the people. We are in full solidarity with those protesters with Georgian and European flags, and apart from that, we once again also demand the release of Mr Saakashvili and also to see to it that we can get hold of Mr Ivanishvili and sanction him because he is the one in the background who is actually guiding the agenda there.

Mr De Graaff, you are the last person to speak of Christian values. Herr Präsident, liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Ich komme aus einem Land, das zwei Diktaturen erlebt hat. Mit der ersten haben wir fast ganz Europa und Nordafrika mit Krieg überzogen. Die zweite Diktatur beschränkte sich im Wesentlichen auf die Unterdrückung der eigenen Insassen. Und obwohl fast jedes Volk in Europa unter einer eigenen oder fremden Diktatur oder gar zwei Diktaturen gelitten hat, sieht das verbrecherische Putin-Regime es offenbar als erfolgsversprechend an, unsere freien Gesellschaften nicht nur vor den Wahlen zu manipulieren. Das schieht zum einen über soziale Medien. Ich cann seit einem Monat z. B. auf Facebook einen sehr deutlichen Anstieg von Aktivitäten feststellen, die offensichtlich einen russischen oder europäischen Rechtsaußenhintergrund haben. Zum Others propose wir fest – und das ist der politische Skandal –, dass es offenbar in diesem Haus und sicher auch in mehreren Mitgliedstaaten Politiker gibt, die trotz der Erfahrungen mit zwei Diktaturen bestimmte autocratische Neigungen haben und die Putin irgendwie als ihren geistigen Mentor ansehen. Es ist fast egal, ob jemand Geld, Reisen oder Sachleistungen für politisches Wohlverhalten im Sinne Russlands bekommt oder ob es schlicht Führer-Entzugserscheinungen sind – possibly in English ‘Führer-deprivation syndrome’ –, das Verhalten was motiviert. Unsere Aufgabe muss es signalin, innerhalb der Institutionen Spione aufzudecken, sich hier im Haus mit den entsprechenden Kollegen auseinanderzusetzen – aber am wichtigsten ist aus meiner Sicht, dass wir auf alle politischeen Ebenen, in alle Ländern und in der Öffentlichkeit die Resilienz unserer Gesellschaften stärken, damit sie auf diese Art der Manipulation nicht mehr reinfallen. That is the Aufgabe of the Democratic Party and of the Civil Society. Lasst uns da sister ammenarbeiten, damit Putin's Absichten niece von Erfolg krrönt sind.

Madam President, colleagues, this oral question relates to a budget support measure to Tunisia amounting to EUR 150 million. What is at the heart of the oral question, as I read it, is not Tunisia as such or relations with that country. This oral question addresses a far more principled issue: the relation between the Commission and this House in its role as budgetary authority. It therefore relates primarily to the procedural flaws in drafting and adopting the implementing decision by the Commission. During the drafting phase of the implementing act, not even informal contacts took place between the Commission and Parliament, as stipulated in paragraph 12 of the agreement between Parliament and Commission on comitology procedures. Furthermore, the Commission adopted the draft implementing decision in an urgent procedure after it learned that we were about to initiate an objection. That could even be interpreted as trying to bypass and thereby undermine this House’s authority. Additionally, the special measure seems legally questionable with regard to provisions in the NDICI-Global Europe Regulation, as well as the Financial Regulation on Conditionality. That should not be taken lightly by this House, as it ultimately is about the ability of Parliament to exercise its right of scrutiny that requires proper, timely and sound information by the Commission to Parliament. So we ask whether the Commission can explain why it was necessary to use an urgent written procedure for this special measure last December, given that the budget support of EUR 150 million was announced as early as 11 June 2023, and that an urgent procedure restricts the exercise of Parliament’s powers of scrutiny. Given that a significant deterioration in fundamental rights constitutes grounds for suspending, reducing or cancelling budget support to partner countries, and given the significant deterioration of such rights in Tunisia since July 2021, can the Commission clarify how it has deemed that Tunisia currently meets the requirements? Given that budget support is subject to the provisions of Article 27(4) of the NDICI-Global Europe Regulation, can the Commission clarify in a written form the definition of conditionality for the said budget support, provide further written details on the procedure and the criteria for assessing whether the conditions are met, as well as on the baseline applied for the assessment of the current state of fundamental rights in Tunisia? Can the Commission clarify why it chose to disburse the budget support in a single tranche, thus not permitting a gradual disbursement based on concrete milestones or steps achieved, as foreseen in Article 236(2) of the Financial Regulation, nor the suspension of further disbursement should a clear erosion of fundamental rights be observed? Lastly, what formal guarantees has the Commission received from the Tunisian authorities since September 2023 that ensure that Parliament will be allowed to visit EU-funded projects in Tunisia and thus exercise its right of oversight and scrutiny in accordance with Article 14 of the Treaty on European Union.

Madam President, colleagues, on Ukraine I said yesterday what needs to be said. I welcome that there is movement to enlarge the scope of the activities of the European Investment Bank to defence that will hopefully also end the hesitance of private banks to engage in defence-related activities. I welcome the announcement of the Commission President that she intends to install a Defence Union Commissioner in the new Commission, and I would like to see it as an ambitious approach. As a Commissioner, this ‘DUC’ should be assigned all defence-related EU actions within the remit of the European Commission, and in particular on defence research, the support for the industrial base, military mobility, the procurement and transfer directives, resilience, defence and training. All Commission actions should be encompassed in a single Multiannual Defence in Union Instrument, which the DUC oversees. The DUC should be assigned by the Council the role of the EU’s Special Representative for the Defence Union. In that role, he should in particular oversee the EDA and PESCO, military staff, military committee, military missions and operations and should be responsible for the relationship with NATO and should be assigned the responsibility to inform the European Council about the readiness of the EU to move to a common defence.

Madam President, ladies and gentlemen, I would like to remind you once again why we are also spending the €50 billion on Ukraine: because Ukraine is part of Europe, because Ukraine defends itself and us, because the Ukraine spirit will also strengthen the EU. He knows what values we are defending. It strengthens our resilience, fosters not only Ukrainian but also European creativity and dynamism, opens up access to new resources and, overall, creates new opportunities for European commonality. But let's not forget: Ukraine also pays the highest price – dead, injured and traumatised soldiers and civilians, destruction of infrastructure and private assets and the environment. We need to help – not ‘for as long as it takes“, but “:whatever it takes“. With the Facility – and this is a particular concern for many – we want to strengthen local self-government and SMEs with specific funding shares. Our European experience shows: They thrive particularly well in freedom. Freedom is guaranteed by democracy and the rule of law. A democracy needs representatives, representatives of the people at all levels and unlimited free media. Parliamentarians must be allowed to travel, exchange ideas, inform us, bring Ukrainian concerns to the people of Western Europe. I therefore criticise the undemocratic travel bans on members of the Rada. It reminds me of past times. But with the Facility, we are strengthening not only SMEs and local self-government, but also civil society and the mechanisms for reviewing the use of funds. The citizens of the EU expect this from us and the Ukrainians from their own government. That is why I am convinced: Our financial aid is well spent. They will strengthen Ukraine and we will also benefit from this in the EU. I hope we find ways and means to confiscate the frozen Russian funds in the end. Russia must pay for its crimes. Okkupanty, domo! Slava Ukrajini!

Mr President, dear colleagues, the European Union delivers on its promises on Ukraine. The EUR 50 billion Ukraine Facility is a clear marker for that. And when I was in Kyiv over the weekend, like many colleagues and other dignitaries from Europe and the world, amongst the tense discussions that we had on deliveries of arms, this was a positive highlight when you mention, yes, we are delivering, although with the two months delay because of the Hungarian veto in December. Now we have enabled the Commission also to pay out the first EUR 4.5 billion, probably at the beginning of March, and thank you for that. The objective thereof is, of course, during the war, to give the larger part for budget support for Ukraine in order to keep the state running and the functions going. But it is one process. It is budget support, but it is not only preparation, but also about reconstruction ongoing. It’s about future investments and to deliver the expertise that we need for the process that will automatically be part also of the pre-accession process because we cannot separate it artificially. And for that we have, as a Parliament particularly, insisted that in this process, where a European Ukraine is created for the time after the war, that the Verkhovna Rada – our colleagues – will have a bigger say in the process, how the means are used, that other levels of administration on the region and the local level, that they would have a say and an impact on the reconstruction of the country. That it is a principle that we would build back better for future Ukraine and that that all happens in a transparent process because we are aware that the bad guys that in the past were corrupt and, fortunately, because of the transparency that is already there, corruption cases come out in Ukraine, also during the war, which is a positive development. And insofar, I am confident that with the measures that we as a Parliament have particularly put focus on, this whole process, the Ukraine plan that will be implemented by the Ukrainian government, will contribute to this better Ukraine for the time thereafter. Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Wir können uns die Diskussion über die 50 Milliarden Euro aber sparen, wenn wir nicht endlich auch erkennen, dass wir die Bremse lösen müssen und die Ukraine mit dem an Waffen beliefern, was sie jetzt am dringlichsten braucht. Und das geschieht nicht. In Kyjiw war von einem „slow yes“ die Rede bei den Lieferungen, die sie über die Jahre bekommen haben. Die Prioritäten, das ist Munition, das ist Luftabwehr, und das sind die weitreichenden Raketen, um die Versorgungswege des Aggressors zu unterbrechen. In diesem Zusammenhang ist jede Debatte, die in die richtige Richtung führt, richtig und wichtig. Wir müssen endlich dafür sorgen, dass in der Europäischen Union produzierte Waffen nicht an Drittstaaten geliefert werden, sondern umgeleitet werden in die Ukraine. Wir müssen dafür sorgen, dass die 5 Milliarden Euro, die für dieses Jahr für die Friedensfazilität vorgesehen sind – wo Herr Borrell sich darum bemüht –, dass diese 5 Milliarden Euro auch für Ankäufe auf dem globalen Markt genutzt werden, damit schnell geliefert werden kann. Der tschechische Präsident hatte sich in dieser Richtung auch in München schon geäußert. Das sind alles Voraussetzungen dafür, dass die anderen Dinge geschehen können. Wenn sich dann der deutsche Bundeskanzler hinstellt und behauptet, er würde deutsche Soldaten nicht in die Ukraine schicken, weil Taurus installiert werden müsste durch Soldaten, dann ist das objektiv falsch und eine Schande, wenn man sich das anschaut, denn kein Taurus ist bisher von deutschen Soldaten im Ausland installiert worden. Da kommt die Firma aus Schrobenhausen mit ihren zivilen Mitarbeitern und tut das. Deswegen sollten falsche deutsche Debatten nicht auf der europäischen Ebene für Irritationen sorgen. Slawa Ukrajini!

Mr President, colleagues, shanovni Ukraintsi. Ten years of war, two years of full—scale war waged by a war criminal in the Kremlin. The Ukrainian nation stands united and refuses to be subjugated back into the servitude of a Russian gulag. The EU also stands united behind Ukraine, and we are not alone, if we look at the Rammstein format of almost 50 states that help in multifaceted ways. I am proud, as standing rapporteur for Ukraine and as a co-rapporteur for the Ukraine Facility, that we concluded the Trilogue on the Ukraine Facility yesterday evening as part of the revised Multiannual Financial Framework. However, we can forget about all these good things that we have foreseen if Ukraine is unable to defend itself and push back the aggressor towards its own borders. We need to support Ukraine in this regard, not only as long as it takes, but with whatever it takes. That is why I support the suggestion of the Estonian Prime Minister that said that every EU Member State should provide 0.025 % of its GDP for weapons deliveries to the country. Le président Macron a parlé à plusieurs reprises du soutien de la France jusqu’à la victoire. Très bien. Mais il faut des livraisons d’armes françaises au niveau, par exemple, de ce que fournit l’Allemagne. Aber gegenüber dem zögerlichen und falsch beratenen deutschen Kanzler wiederhole ich in guter Gesellschaft mit führenden Vertretern der Ampelkoalition und der CDU/CSU-Opposition im Bundestag die Forderung: Liefern Sie Taurus jetzt! Es gibt dafür eine Mehrheit im Bundestag. Deutschland ist keine Ein-Mann-Demokratie. Haben Sie keine Angst vor Ihren Parteilinken, sondern vor einem Sieg Putins! Stehen wir gemeinsam und dauerhaft geschlossen gegen das Reich des Bösen, das auch unsere Art zu leben bedroht! Slawa Ukrajini!

– Madam President, dear colleagues. As China is a one—party dictatorship, it is not a surprise that in order to stay in power, such structures need to repress multifold groups in their respective societies. When it comes to China, we have on many occasions discussed the fate of the Uyghurs, of Tibet and of the citizens of Hong Kong. Today we once again focus on the fate of those who practice Falun Gong. It’s a practice that doesn’t harm anyone, that is not a danger to the state, but apparently the Party considers it – or has been considering it since 1999 – a threat to their ideology. The case we are focusing on is Mr Ding Yuande, who has been arrested and was in December sentenced to more than three years’ imprisonment. The only charge is that he practises Falun Gong. We are of the opinion that all those, not only Falun Gong practitioners, but the other groupings that I have named who are persecuted and repressed, need to be released unconditionally and allowed to practice their faith or to practice their culture, as it is also enshrined in the Chinese Constitution. We demand that the Member States publicly condemn these practices and that we should apply the EU global human rights sanctions regime and also national human rights sanctions regimes against all the perpetrators, as well as entities that have contributed to the persecution of Falun Gong practitioners in China. We stress that EU measures should include visa refusal, freezing of assets, expulsion from EU territories and criminal prosecution, including on the basis of extraterritorial jurisdiction or the initiation of international criminal charges. That is what we owe to the citizens who are innocent and who need to be released.

Mr President, ladies and gentlemen. We had a resolution here in October with a broad consensus. That was good, and I hope that once again we can decide something with a broad consensus here. Some things haven't changed since October. Hamas continues to shoot at Israel, and Israel continues to respond. And because Hamas is still shooting and the hostages have not yet been released, we are also in this terrible humanitarian situation of the people of Gaza. Yes, Israel, too, must abide by international humanitarian law, and we call on the government to be very precise there and to make sure that civilians are not affected in this way by the fighting. I think we have every reason to insist, given the supply situation, that we have regular humanitarian breaks. It is important that the United Nations, that all those who deliver the aid, can get there, including to the north of Gaza. That is why I also appeal to the Israeli government not only to open Kerem Shalom, but also to open the border crossings directly to supply in the north. And then Israel can also concretely control what goes in there, and be sure that no weapons are transported there. So, the hostages and the people there must be at the center of our concerns. But we must also think about the future, and that should perhaps determine the debate as soon as Hamas hopefully lays down its weapons soon.

Mr President! I am, among other things, the co-rapporteur for the 50 billion Ukraine Facility. Colleagues, we can save ourselves the debates on their implementation if we do not enable Ukraine to adequately defend itself in our interest. The fascist aggressor Russia must be traced back to its borders. It is scandalous that we have still not increased our armaments capacity to the extent that we oppose the Russian-North Korean-Iranian-Chinese Armaments Union. It is not enough to verbally support Ukraine, for as long as it takes, but we must finally adopt the Draghi wording on the rescue of the euro: Support Ukraine, whatever it takes. At that time, we could not afford to lose the euro. Today we cannot afford to lose Ukraine. We need to deliver more. In concrete terms, this means for the Member States, you finally place the long-term orders with the industry, then capacity is increased and employees are hired, and from now on you deliver what is possible. Talk to third countries that agreed deliveries to states that are not currently at war are somewhat waiting, so that, for example, the actual 155 millimeter shell production can now be completely delivered to Ukraine. I expect the German chancellor to stop personally blocking the delivery of Taurus missiles here. Germany is not a one-man democracy. From his coalition and with the opposition, there is a majority in the Bundestag for a delivery. Almost all experts are in favour. Don't be afraid of your party's leftists, but of Putin's victory. Those who support Putin by failing to do so are sinning against German and European history. Slava Ukrajini. Wse dlja peremohy.