Speeches

Mr. President, please. Dear colleagues, For the first time, the European Parliament produces a comprehensive report on cooperation between the European Union and the Council of Europe. Undoubtedly, it was time for Parliament to analyse and evaluate the very wide range of relations, and for several reasons, I would now like to highlight three: On the one hand, the EU considers the Council of Europe to be a source of reference for human rights throughout Europe. Think of the many conventions to which the EU is a party, either as a whole or through its Member States. On the other hand, the European Union is the Council of Europe's leading donor for programmes related to enlargement, the Eastern Partnership and the rule of law. Financial assistance has steadily increased and exceeded EUR 200 million in 2021. Thirdly, the fact that the Council of Europe summit will be held for the first time in nearly two decades in less than a month makes the report particularly timely. This report is a long-awaited feedback to the Council of Europe. The Parliamentary Assembly, the Committee of Ministers and the General Secretariat also praised the inclusion of the report on the agenda. I have met the bodies and leaders of the Council of Europe several times in recent months, thanking them for their openness and partnership. The Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe has repeatedly asked the European Parliament for closer cooperation, insight into each other's work and discussion on issues on both sides. The report therefore proposes the establishment of an interparliamentary delegation between the EP and the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe in the areas of shared activities. Just as Parliament has organised cooperation with remote groups of countries, it is high time for a more organised form of cooperation with the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe next door. In particular, I would add that this is where the Council of Europe plenary will meet in the coming months, due to reconstruction works. The report concludes that the institutional relationship between the European Union and the Council of Europe should be better normalised and that more high-level relations are needed. The strategic partnership should be extended to give new impetus to the promotion and protection of democracy, the rule of law and human rights, including minority rights, through bilateral cooperation. In view of the changed global and European challenges and the significant transformation of both institutions, the report calls on the parties to review the 2007 Memorandum of Understanding. Analyse which areas of cooperation have been successful and where the relationship should be strengthened, extended and transformed into the main legal instrument for inter-institutional cooperation. Minority protection is an area of cooperation that has so far not been sufficiently exploited and is of particular importance to the European Parliament. The Council of Europe has established a Europe-wide legal framework through the Framework Convention for Minorities and the Language Charter. These came into force 25 years ago, but unfortunately there are still EU Member States that do not apply them. The credibility of the European Union in the accession process will be strengthened by including the standards of the Framework Convention for the Protection of National Minorities in the monitoring of the rule of law and fundamental rights in the EU. Therefore, the report recognises the role of the Venice Commission in the functioning of democratic institutions and respect for fundamental rights, the functioning of judicial systems, the conduct of elections and referenda. I would like to thank my fellow Members who have submitted a shadow report for their support and for their valuable contribution in terms of content. The report on cooperation between the European Union and the Council of Europe was adopted by an overwhelming majority in the Committee on Constitutional Affairs. I trust that tomorrow's plenary vote will confirm the report on a unique and extremely important partnership on the Council of Europe!

Madam President, dear Commissioner Jourová, I would like to thank the rapporteur, Damian Boeselager, for the very good cooperation in preparing Parliament’s position. Available data makes it evident that the participation rate in elections among the mobile European citizens is much lower than that of the nationals in a Member State. There are many factors influencing the decision to vote or not, and certainly the registration process is the most significant. We need to close this representation gap in which the views of citizens making use of the freedom of movement are less reflected than those of other EU citizens. Mobile European citizens need to know about their right to vote and the steps they need to take for the registration in the electoral roll. I am glad that the report of the Parliament has improved the language on the possibility of immediate registration as a voter or candidate at a time of requesting a residence permit, has made it clear for voters that they have the choice of expressing their political preference in either the home state or the country of residence, and it has strengthened the references to information provision on the prohibition of double voting. And, in this regard, it is regretful that not all Member States have ratified the Council’s decision of 2018 amending the 76 electoral rule, which requires effective, proportionate and dissuasive penalties in Member States in the event of double voting. In its absence, strengthening the information provision through this Directive is most useful.

Madam President, dear Commissioner Kyriakides, minorities have been frequently subjected to restrictions and even suppression. This was true in the past and it is still true today. The UN declaration has lost nothing of its relevance. Minorities are often instrumentalised in the most violent internal conflicts. In extreme cases, they were subject to some of the worst atrocities ever committed, instead of being treated as equals and partners for peace and stability. Given the occasion of the 30th anniversary, the European Parliament should have adopted the resolution supporting the UN engagement and action, and I am sorry that it did not do so. On Monday, probably driven by unfounded fears and outdated reflexes from national politics, the S&D, Renew and ID Groups voted overwhelmingly against the EPP proposal for the adoption of a resolution in Parliament. What is the cynical message they sent? They have turned their back on the Rohingya, subject to unimaginable cruelty and expulsion in Myanmar. They have betrayed the Yazidis and the Kurds, our partners in the fight against ISIS. They have abandoned the Uyghurs and the Kurds, the Tibetans locked in labour camps in China. Violence against minorities in Ethiopia, South Sudan, Syria and Yemen was of no relevance either. But the message was disappointingly clear for the minorities in the EU as well, including the Roma – 40 million Europeans in total. It sends them the message: your rights are not worth the effort. Respect for the rights of minorities in the EU and beyond was and still is a matter of utmost importance and urgency. It is also about the credibility of our Parliament’s external action. I hope next time this House will be up for the task.

Madam President, I would like to thank all my colleagues for their valuable opinion and the good cooperation, to the shadow rapporteurs – you expressed very important proposals, you also expressed the political criticism. Well, our Petitions Committee is a political body, and we give the chance to all the citizens, all the petitioners, no matter from which ideology they come from, to have their say, to be able to address the Committee, to hear possible remedies and the internal decision—making process in our Committee. I think it is done in a democratic manner. Despite, of course, all the improvements that the petitions process went through, the overall number of petitions remains modest in relation to the total population of the EU. And this brings us to the conclusion that more efforts are needed to be done to step up the increase of the citizens’ awareness. And also, Commissioner, you touched on the matter of informing the citizens about pilot projects, about infringement procedures, about legislative proposals, because these are all linked to the petitions process. Petitions also make a valuable contribution to the work of other parliamentary committees, which give opinions or receive petitions for information. In 2021, 82 petitions were sent to other committees for opinion, and 548 for information. That’s a very important amount of inter—committee cooperation. In the end, I would also like to thank the Secretariat of the Committee, the advisors and my Office for their preparatory work on this file.

Madam President, Commissioner Hahn, dear colleagues, I am pleased to present you the report about the outcome of the Committee on Petitions’ deliberations in 2021. It is the concluding part of this traditional exercise in which our committee provides a comprehensive overview of the work carried out in the previous year. The Committee on Petitions, and I quote from the report, ‘is best able to show citizens what the European Union does for them and what solutions it can provide at European, national or local level’. I would emphasise that our committee should be considered as a bridge between Europeans and the EU institutions. Petitions enable citizens to contribute to the legislative work and to make the institutions accountable. In 2021, the European Parliament received 1392 petitions, which represent a decrease by 11.5% compared to 2020, but an increase by 2.5% compared to the petitions registered in 2019. Last year there were considerable differences in the number of petitions submitted to the committee, with most of the petitions concerning Spain with 17%, followed by Germany with 9.7%, then Italy, Greece, Romania, Poland and France. Slovenia and Estonia remain the countries least concerned. More than 78% of the petitions were submitted via Parliament’s Petitions Web Portal, confirming that it has become by far the most used channel for citizens to submit petitions. The number of users supporting one or more petitions was more than 200 000; that means four times more than in 2020. The Committee on Petitions had 12 meetings, at which 159 petitions were discussed, with over 100 petitioners present remotely at that time. Under difficult circumstances, I must say that our committee swiftly adapted to the new way of working and played a key role in ensuring Parliament’s prompt response to citizens’ concerns. Our committee organised one fact—finding visit and five public hearings, partly jointly with other parliamentary committees. The Committee on Petitions adopted several reports, opinions and forwarded short motions for resolution to the plenary. Petitions were submitted in 22 of the official languages of the European Union. German and English remain the most used languages. As regards the nationality, petitions submitted by German citizens represent the highest number. There was a considerable rise in the number of petitions submitted by Italian and Greek nationals. Now on the subject of the petitions: a large number of those were related to the public health emergency triggered by the outbreak and spread of COVID-19; fundamental rights, health and environment were the most important topic of the petitions. As an example, we dealt also petitions concerning the coexistence with large carnivores, notably wolves and brown bears in Europe. I have to underline that several petitions related to the rights of national minorities, especially in the areas of right to education in their mother tongue, linguistic or cultural rights, but also their right to property as outlined in petitions concerning land confiscation and restitution cases. The efficient work of the Committee on Petitions relies on the cooperation of the Commission and other institutions. The Commission is our strongest partner in examining petitions. We count on the Commission also in the broader follow up in these topics which have been raised by the petitioners. Member States are also invited to take part in the discussions. Petitions very often concern one or more Member States, or they include a cross—border element. Petitions are useful means to draw the attention of the EU institutions and the Member States to matters that affect and concern citizens, that they can also contribute to the EU current debates. When citizens choose to address their concerns and complaints directly to their elected EU representatives, they place significant trust in the Parliament, and we must continue to do our utmost, also in the Petitions Committee, to validate this trust.

Madam President, on Sunday, 18 December, we celebrate the World Minorities Rights Day. This date also marks the 30-year anniversary since the adoption of the Declaration on the Rights of Persons Belonging to National or Ethnic, Religious and Linguistic Minorities. It is the only UN international human rights instrument devoted to minority rights, and it is built on the core idea that the rights of minorities are vital to advancing political and social stability, and preventing conflicts. This September, at the anniversary high—level meeting organised in New York, UN Secretary—General António Guterres said that the world still falls far short in actions supporting minorities. Parliament should also echo his call. We welcome the debate planned for Thursday morning on the topic. On behalf of the EPP Group, I propose that in a manner consistent with our action on previous UN declarations, we also adopt a resolution. Commitment to fundamental values and to a principled foreign policy stance will demand the strong voice of the Parliament on this matter, and I hope all the political groups would support this request.

Madam President, Commissioner Breton, by declaring the European Year of Youth, the Commission and the entire European Union made a strong commitment towards young people. I believe this commitment, but also the responsibility of the Union. I checked the European Year of Youth portal for my constituency. It lists nearly 2 000 events in Romania, but they are not dedicated initiatives and have little to do with the objectives set out by the Commission for the dedicated year. I learned from youth organisations that these activities would have taken place in any case and that they are part of Erasmus+, third—country or other public—entity funded projects. Imagine that Romania had an allocation of EUR 183 000 for the whole European Year project. The Commission paid just some days ago the first EUR 80 000. Because of this late payment there has actually been no possibility to spend even EUR 1 for the European Year in Romania, when the closing European event is around the corner. This is bad implementation of an otherwise well—intended policy. Additionally, I learned that for many youth organisations, this year was particularly difficult as the financing through the Erasmus+ programme encountered delays and less organisations received administrative funds. Colleagues, the message of the youth for us is clear. For them, every year is the European Year of Youth. They should be continuously supported, promoted, asked for advice in youth matters and in European policies, and their organisations given opportunities to have long—term financial stability. We should not deceive them again.

Mr President, strangely enough, we never have a debate in this House about the dangers of the extreme left for our societies. I could tell you a lot about how extreme left communism devastated my country, Romania. In Sweden, the government was formed yesterday, while in Italy it has not even been formed yet. Nonetheless, the left in this house wants to put a quarantine stamp on a majority that emerged in free and democratic elections. Colleagues, we can certainly have ideological debates, but we cannot alter the vote of citizens. This would not be democracy anymore, but an ideological dictatorship. Perform better in the elections, not in making outcasts of the winners. The centre right was always careful in choosing its partners and, more importantly, in keeping its coalitions on a firmly European track. I am certain this will be the case in Italy and in Sweden this time around too. Today’s debate is not timely at all, but it gives us the opportunity to stay where we stay. We need the centre right and Christian Democrats. We state clearly that the left has no monopoly on what Europe is, on what Europeans can think about it, and on how Europe should look.

Mr President, the situation in Myanmar is getting worse by the day. The military regime is doing everything possible to prevent the press from reporting on the atrocities happening in the country. Compared to our last October’s debate on Myanmar, the total number of people killed and arrested has almost doubled. Journalism has become a very dangerous profession in Myanmar. Media outlets are shut down and reports indicate serious violations of human rights, including torture and other abuses. Ethnic and religious communities continue to the be subject of direct attacks by the army and the media, so women, men and children are forced to flee to seek refuge. We need a better and stronger international coordination on sanctions that directly targets the military junta, in order to avoid the loss of innocent lives, to be sure that sanctions do not provoke further suffering on the populations and workers. We must continue the support together with our regional partners of the National Unity government in Myanmar to ensure a transition to democracy and a tolerant society, and to make sure that everyone can enjoy their right of expression and belief without fear of persecution.

Mr President, ladies and gentlemen, we often speak of European solidarity. Some states are extremely supportive when it comes to third countries, but more reluctant when they have to give their consent to the completion of Romania's European path, i.e. joining the Schengen area. It's not fair. We have done our homework, the technical access criteria have been met for more than ten years. In recent months, the Romanian authorities have managed more than two million Ukrainian refugees. Romania showed full solidarity in the context of the war in Ukraine and demonstrated once again that it is ready to effectively control the external borders of the European Union. Delaying accession to the Schengen area costs companies, carriers money and is an unnecessary waste of time for citizens. Plus a cost to the environment due to the thousands of trucks that spend tens of hours in traffic. The message of the citizens of Romania and Bulgaria is unequivocal: we no longer accept to be considered as second-class European citizens. Here, the European Commission and Parliament reaffirm their strong support for accession, and the Council must follow this just approach without further delay and conditions.

Madam President, I'm sorry. I read in the draft: the rights of persons belonging to minorities, including Roma and Jews, and protection against hateful statements against minorities. Anyone who hears this statement clearly believes that the Orbán government is anti-minority, anti-Semitic and anti-Roma. There's one problem with that: it's not true. So much so that the reporter cannot substantiate his serious finding with facts, this topic was addressed exclusively to Roma. Of course, a single discriminatory measure is reprehensible, but show me a single EU Member State where Roma employment, social affairs, education and housing issues are fully resolved. They will not find one, but there will be no report condemning the other Member States. The truth is that Hungary provides one of the most favourable legal frameworks for minority issues in the EU. This is said by the 13 national minority self-government leaders with whom I have personally discussed this. To call Hungary's national minority policy anti-minority is simply a lie. The alleged anti-Jewishness does not stand up either. It is no coincidence that the report does not contain a single word on this. On the other hand, Israel's Chief Rabbi David Lau thanked the Hungarian government for its support in strengthening Jewish communities around the world. At the beginning of the summer, Chief Rabbi Mayer Tzvi Stambler, President of the Association of Jewish Communities in Ukraine, thanked Hungary for its help in welcoming Jewish refugees. I have only singled out one subject, honourable Members, from the report, but it is already clear from this that the text is severely biased and not factual.

Mr President, Vice-President, dear colleagues, the first question one could raise is whether there is a treaty-change opportunity. After all, there is a war in our neighbourhood, a severe recession is looming, energy prices are going through the roof… Why start a long and complicated political and legal procedure now instead of seeking fast and effective answers to the most pressing questions? Some say the Conference on the Future of Europe legitimises starting treaty change. But let’s be honest, we know the Conference was neither sufficiently representative in its choice of stakeholders nor sufficiently pluralistic in the way it adopted its decisions. Yet, colleagues, I say there is a treaty-change opportunity. The past decade has shown us that a stronger, faster and more united Europe is needed to answer challenges during economic crises, health crises, in areas like border protection, defence, climate change and energy security. We can certainly have a successful convention if we allow ourselves sufficient time to seek pragmatic consensus – if we avoid ideologically driven, dead-end debates and do not waste our energy discussing issues that are completely irrelevant for the majority of citizens, such as transnational lists, and if we do not pursue the nuclear option of forcing the will of the majority on all, at any cost, by abolishing the unanimity rule. We will need wisdom to respect the diversity of the Member States, having in mind a difficult ratification process in the end. It is not uniformity that makes us stronger, but our diversity in pursuing common goals.

Mr President, Madam Commissioner, dear colleagues, the precarious situation of Roma has been acknowledged in the EU and in the Member States. National strategies have been in place for over two decades now. But the hard truth is that little progress has been achieved. The majority of Europe’s Roma communities still live in poverty, often in favela-type settlements. This fact, honestly, is a shame for Europe. In Romania, eight out of ten Roma live in a house without running water and seven out of ten children drop out of school. Improving this situation requires three things: more humility, more empathy, and more well-coordinated work. We need more humility because we should not remain satisfied that we have a strategy. There is no quick fix to century-old prejudices, deprivation and segregation. We need more empathy. We must try to put ourselves in the shoes of a child living in a mud hut, going to school dirty, and being looked at badly by colleagues. What it means for a child when his parents cannot help him learn to read at home because they themselves cannot read. We cannot expect Roma people to come out of their condition on their own. We must understand that also a Roma child, like everyone else, is able to go to school if he’s fed, has clean clothes and is able to buy a bus ticket. Lastly, we need well-coordinated, hard work at all levels. The Member States cannot do this without the EU, but the EU cannot do it without the Member States. We must move beyond formal requirements. We must develop better coordinated, comprehensive and well-funded transfer policies that are, in turn, implemented on the ground by the local authorities.

Mr President, Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen, around 650 000 refugees have already arrived in Romania and almost 80 000 have remained. More than 43% are minors and 24,000 of them are of school age, many even without a parent. Beyond these figures, however, we are talking about families torn apart by this cruel and bloody war. It's hard to imagine the drama of every family leaving behind a lifetime and a father they're not sure they'll ever see again. Ensuring the integration of these children and young people into care and education must be a top priority for the Union and the Member States. The Romanian Government, together with local authorities and civil organizations, is making significant efforts for Ukrainian students who want to continue online school to have this opportunity, or to be integrated into Romanian schools. And due to the fact that a large Ukrainian community lives on the border with Ukraine, which benefits from education in its mother tongue, it has helped a significant number of refugee children to quickly integrate into these units. This is how important education in minority languages becomes, as is also called for in the resolution that we are going to vote on today. National authorities must be supported in overcoming the language barriers faced by these children. We need to contract interpretation, language courses and special programmes to recruit teachers speaking Ukrainian and other minority languages from Ukraine. This is something I also raised with the President of the European Parliament during my visit to the border with Ukraine. Let's not forget for a moment: The refugee children of today represent the future of Ukraine of tomorrow and we hope, together with them, that they will soon live in a country reborn from the ashes of today's bombings.

Dear Mr President, In Hungary, Prime Minister Viktor Orbán and the Fidesz-KDNP party alliance won a huge two-thirds victory in yesterday's elections. Hungarian communities living outside the borders of Hungary, including Hungarians living in Transylvania, contributed to this result. Hungarian citizens have chosen security and predictability, rejecting the unnatural party alliance, which is a platform built on hatred against Prime Minister Orbán and his politics, from the far right to the far left. Here in this House, undoubtedly, many expected a different outcome, but the fact is that in a democracy, the people choose. The Hungarian people voted, and democracy won. The current government will remain in Hungary for four years. The result of the democratic elections must not only be accepted here in the institutions of the European Union, but must also be taken into account. It is time to end the ideological war against the government of Hungary and start pragmatic cooperation on the current numerous European challenges. There's enough to do.

Madam President, I would like to thank Madam Ombudsman for her commitment to achieving the highest standards of good administration within the EU institutions. I am glad to see that the activities of the European Ombudsman gain more and more visibility. You updated and made the communication channels with the public more effective. I also applaud your engagement towards multilingualism, including Irish. It is of utmost importance that we reach citizens so that they know about their rights and about what we can do for them. As regards some proposals in the reports we are about to vote on, I am worried to see that several paragraphs aim to change the role of the Ombudsman office and maintain recommendations that do not fall under its competences as set out in the statutes. I believe that we must act based on democratic principles and rules and that we should not lay on the Ombudsman roles that are clearly played by other institutions, such as the Commission, the European Anti-Fraud Office (OLAF) and the European Public Prosecutor’s Office (EPPO). As regards transparency, I believe that improvements in this field are to be welcomed, for example, when minutes of the Council meetings are published. But we also have to acknowledge that we must leave room for an efficient political process, for reasoning, for negotiation, reasoning in our institutions. Dear Ms O’Reilly, please allow me to wish the office of the Ombudsman a further successful 25 years, and you can count on our support also in the future.

Madam President, I'm sorry. We have heard from the European Commission that it is withdrawing the published document for recasting, and we have not been waiting for this response, because this means that this ambition for language censorship will remain and will come back in the form of a new proposal, but still. I lived under the communist regime, and I have to say that the current text of the Commission could have been in honour of the party bureaucracy of that time. The name "Christmas" or "Jesus" was not to be pronounced, but at least the name "John" or "Mary" was not to be offended at that time. There are many religions living side by side in Europe. I am convinced that the supporters of neither of them would like us to no longer welcome Christmas, Hanukkah or Eid Mubarak for the sake of equal opportunities. And atheists should be tolerant to hear religious greetings for a few days a year. Commissioner Dalli is attempting to abolish Christian culture and religious traditions, and she has no authority to do so. There's no excuse for that, Mr. Vice President. This document should not be corrected, but should be solemnly burned in front of the Brussels Commission building and its ashes thrown into the North Sea so that it does not come out again in any form. Merry Christmas, dear friends.

Dear Madam President, Mr. Secretary of State. You must be madam. Excessive authority and police violence against Roma are not new. We must experience that, unfortunately, there is still such a phenomenon in Europe today, and each case is one more than is acceptable in a democratic welfare society. I am concerned that we are devoting little time and attention to this phenomenon. In addition to the legal violations outside the seven-seven countries, we should deal with racial hatred, ethnic exclusion and violence at home in Europe at least as much as we do. We cannot say that such cases sometimes happen. We cannot allow it to happen in the Czech Republic or anywhere else. In addition to detecting, investigating and holding those responsible to account, Member States have a duty to prevent, raise awareness, counter hate speech, encourage inter-community dialogue, social inclusion of Roma, and the Commission should act more quickly when it finds that police violence against Roma is being suppressed by some German national authorities.

Mr President, Myanmar is not in the news every day. For a few weeks after the military coup, there was strong interest and world indignation when witnessing the atrocities committed by the new regime. Colleagues, our role today is to send a very clear signal to the world, especially the states in the regions and international organisations. The truth is that Myanmar (Burma) is the stage of one of the world’s longest ongoing civil wars. The military junta’s rule from 1962 until 2011 was marked by the most brutal crimes and human rights abuses. One decade ago, the hope with which the Burmese and the world greeted the rise of Aung San Suu Kyi to power proved to be misplaced. Her rule was also marked by continued abuse and severe persecution of smaller ethnic and religious groups. Unfortunately, in recent months, things have turned even worse under military rule, in such a short time. Since the coup, more than 1 100 people have been killed, over 8 000 people arrested, and over 300 people have been sentenced, a number of them to death, including children, with others dying in custody or being subject to torture. This year alone, over 200 000 people have been internally displaced, while over 3 000 000 are in need of humanitarian aid. The Rohingya has been the most severely impacted ethnic group over the past seven decades. The situation of other ethnic and religious communities is no better. They are the subject of direct attacks by the army or attacks by the main population that are sanctioned or even encouraged by the army. As a Christian and democratic group, we witnessed with horror the human rights abuses in Kachin and northern Shan states, where the majority of Christians live and where churches have recently been raided, priests and pastors have been arrested, and military troops have set up camps in church compounds. One of the most recent examples of Christian persecution is the murder, three weeks ago, of a 31—year—old pastor, Cung Biak Hum, in Chin State, who was shot dead as he tried to extinguish the blaze from a house fire caused by military artillery. Such terrible events pose the risk of an even greater escalation of violence and a larger humanitarian emergency. The recognition of the National Unity Government by the UN General Assembly as the legitimate representative of the will of the people would be a first step in restoring the basic principles of democracy. Should the elected government be restored, much more sustained effort would be needed to transition to a true democracy and a tolerant society in Myanmar. As stated in the resolution, we must, therefore, use all the EU, UN, ASEAN and other international means at our disposal to avoid the loss of innocent women’s, men’s and children’s lives, and to ensure that everyone in Myanmar can enjoy the right to their identity and belief without fear of persecution.

Mr President, the United States has always been the European Union’s closest and most important strategic partner, and so it should remain. However, looking to the developments on the global stage in the last decade, it is clear that the EU is lagging behind in policy areas that represent a priority for the US. The Australia–United Kingdom–United States (AUKUS) deal and the abrupt US withdrawal from Afghanistan must be a wake-up call for the EU to place this partnership on a new footing. We must be aware that America will always place its own interests at the forefront. The US security pledge makes us dependent on Washington to act. The rhetoric may have changed with the new administration, yet its intensifying focus on its rivalry with China has not. As strange as it sounds, the EU needs to become more egoistic. The US will accept us as a partner on the global stage if we are able to defend our own economic and trade interests, if we are able to develop a robust EU defence policy. Filling up this partnership with content depends today more on us than on our transatlantic partners.