President. – The next item is the statement by the Vice-President of the Commission and High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy on the Eastern partnership summit to be held in Warsaw on 29 September.

  Catherine Ashton, Vice-President of the Commission/High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy. − I am very pleased to be able to address honourable Members in advance of the Eastern partnership summit, which is to be held in Warsaw at the end of this week. Mr President, this House has been a consistent supporter of the Eastern partnership and you, Mr President, will speak at this event on behalf of the Parliament. I welcome your personal commitment, your presence at the summit, and I pay tribute to my colleague, Štefan Füle, for the immense work that he has put into the Eastern partnership in every possible way to support its development.

The strengthening of our relationship with our neighbours is a key priority and I said at the beginning of my time in office that I considered this to be the first priority for the European Union and the one on which we should be judged. Our Eastern neighbours have changed dramatically in the last twenty years, but it remains vital for us to help them sustain the process of transition, towards democracy and a market economy. This process, of course, is not only in their interest, but we would argue in our interests, as it enhances our own security and prosperity.

It was in May 2009 that we launched the Eastern partnership as a framework in which to build up political association and economic integration with six countries, Armenia, Azerbaijan, Belarus, Georgia, Moldova and Ukraine. We have made some progress in the last two years and strengthened those bilateral relationships with those partners. This year, we want to finalise negotiations for an association agreement with Ukraine, including a deep and comprehensive free trade area. We also aim to launch negotiations on deep and comprehensive free trade areas with Moldova and Georgia once they meet the requirements.

In addition, we have made progress on mobility, implementing visa action plans with Ukraine and Moldova, and visa facilitation and readmission agreements came into force with Georgia a few months ago. We want to launch negotiations on a similar basis with Armenia, Azerbaijan and Belarus in the future.

In Warsaw, we will be meeting in the context of those relationships. Our partnership extends way beyond governments to links between peoples. I strongly support this Parliament’s efforts to enhance its links with Eastern counterparts, to the creation of the Euronest Parliamentary Assembly. Civil society and business forums have been set up within the partnership and both will meet in the margins of the Warsaw Summit. Štefan Füle will participate in those.

In addition, over the last four years, more than 2 000 students and academics from Eastern partnership countries have been funded to study in the EU. We believe that this partnership is built on mutual accountability and responsibility and a shared commitment to the principles of democracy, human rights, freedoms and the rule of law.

In Poland, we will leave our partners in no doubt that the EU’s acknowledgment of their European aspirations and their European choice goes hand in hand with our expectations for their commitment to progressing towards deep and sustainable democracy.

Mr President, our partners are at different stages and our role is to give practical support to that process of political association and economic integration within the EU.

Early this month, I conveyed a strong message to Ukraine, stressing that respect for democratic principles and the rule of law, including the right to fair and independent legal processes, must remain the basis of our future relations. Štefan Füle and I are particularly concerned about the cases against Yulia Tymoshenko and other members of her government and plans to revert to earlier electoral systems against international advice. As I have already indicated, Štefan has been working closely with Ukraine over these past months to deliver these messages and to develop the relationship in order that they are able to move forward.

We have been unequivocal in the face of clear repression of democratic and human rights in Belarus in last December’s presidential elections and since that time. We have imposed sanctions against the regime and called for the immediate release and rehabilitation of all political prisoners. At the same time, we have increased our assistance to Belarusian civil society.

Following the review of the neighbourhood policy that Štefan and I undertook, a key element is that the EU applies more conditionality in its actions, linking them more closely to the efforts made by our partners towards reform. That means more financial support, closer political cooperation, deeper economic integration for those partners who embark on deep reforms. It is what is called ‘more for more’.

Another important ingredient of this new Neighbourhood Policy is that some support will now be redirected towards non-governmental organisations as we build partnerships with civil society. We have the tools to make this happen through the new Neighbourhood Civil Society Facility and we are working on the establishment of a new European Endowment for Democracy to support change in the neighbourhood. I thank honourable Members who participated in giving us advice on both of these.

But, Mr President, the conflicts in the region in Nagorno-Karabakh, in Transnistria, in Abkhazia and South Ossetia are perhaps the most concerning obstacles to progress. We expect our European partners to do the most they can to make progress towards peaceful settlement, just as we are making specific dedicated efforts to deal with the many challenges these conflicts pose.

In August, on my recommendation, the Council approved the appointment of Philippe Lefort as the EU Special Representative to the South Caucasus and the crisis in Georgia. His mandate includes contributing to the peaceful settlement of conflicts in accordance with the principles of international law, working closely with all involved.

Of course Nagorno-Karabakh remains high on our agenda. In support to the Minsk Group, we are in a dialogue with all the parties to help find a shared solution.

Mr President, we have the will and capacity to take action in support of conflict stabilisation and settlement. We established the EU Monitoring Mission after the war in Georgia and we are co-chairing the Geneva international talks. In Transnistria, we have played a part in ensuring a decision on the resumption of the official negotiations in the ‘5 + 2’ format was taken on 22 September and we are looking forward to a negotiating process in which all parties will act in good faith and the spirit of cooperation.

Mr President, we are all committed to making this summit in Warsaw a success, to give renewed momentum to building the closest relationship with our Eastern partners and neighbours, and to give strong messages on the need for them to act appropriately to develop deep democracy and to make sure that we have the rule of law in action.

  Elmar Brok, on behalf of the PPE Group. – (DE) Mr President, Commissioner, I wonder why Baroness Ashton is speaking from the Council bench. After all, the Eastern partnership is part of Community policy. Perhaps we should discuss this at a later stage.

There are a few comments I should like to make. I hope that the Warsaw Summit will be a substantive success and will also improve the climate of relations. I hope that, despite the different developments in the various countries – in particular Belarus, of course – it will prove possible to combine increased efforts in a multilateral approach and that the Member States of the Eastern partnership will come to recognise their mutual interests, making it easier to resolve the ‘frozen conflicts’ you referred to earlier – Nagorno-Karabakh, for example – because a commonality of interests has been established.

I believe that the Eastern partnership needs a much stronger structure in terms of this multilateral approach for economic and political reasons if progress is to be made on the economic front as well as in the political context. It is important for us to concentrate on increasing our cooperation with civil society and with the opposition parties in countries like Belarus and, until the European Endowment for Democracy is finally put in place, that we should use the already established European Instrument for Democracy and Human Rights to ensure the implementation of the appropriate supports for democracy and human rights independently of the state apparatus.

Baroness Ashton and Mr Füle, please allow me to comment on today’s events. I have heard that the Ukrainian Attorney-General today called for a seven-year gaol sentence for Yulia Tymoshenko and a fine of USD 1.5 billion on the basis of an article of the Ukrainian Penal Code introduced in 1957 by Joseph Stalin and strengthened once again by a number of changes in 1962. It has also come to our attention that this situation applies not just to Ms Tymoshenko, but also to 15 or 16 representatives of the opposition.

I would be very interested to know how we are to respond and what we are to do if there is no explanation forthcoming in regard to this question by Friday, contrary to the impression gathered by Mr Füle, Mr Bildt and myself in our meeting with President Yanukovych. I believe that we need to make progress here. An association agreement, or a free trade zone as Ukraine sees it, is also in our interests. We want to seal the deal. However, it must be made clear that another country that seeks a European perspective must also observe a minimum number of rules in relation to democracy and the rule of law.

  Hannes Swoboda, on behalf of the S&D Group. – (DE) Mr President, I would like to thank Baroness Ashton for her commitment to the Eastern partnership and for her praise for Mr Füle. He has genuinely earned these kind words because he is working extremely hard, not just on behalf of the Eastern partnership as such, but also in support of the necessary democratic change in the various countries.

Let me start by saying that the Eastern partnership is not an alliance against Russia. It is an alliance that supports the countries of the Eastern partnership and their right of self-determination and how they wish to cooperate with Europe in the context of the European Union, with Russia, and with other countries.

This is particularly true of Ukraine. Ukraine is an important partner for us and we are aware that this has a lot to do with the situation in Ukraine, which is why we wish the Polish Presidency every success at this summit conference. The people of Ukraine rightly wonder how this agreement with Russia in relation to gas prices was ever reached. How has Russia suddenly switched from an enemy of Tymoshenko to a Tymoshenko supporter and why has Russia suddenly started defending Tymoshenko? What I do know is that the price negotiated was not a very good price for the people of Ukraine, but rather, on the contrary, can be seen as a negative factor. However, my group is very clear on its position: such questions should be dealt with in the political arena rather than in the criminal courts. That is why we would urge Ukraine, the Ukrainian Government and the President to find a way out of the current situation. A judgment against Tymoshenko on this basis – I believe that Stalin was already dead at the time mentioned by Mr Brok, so that cannot be completely right ...

(Heckling from Mr Brok)

You mentioned a date of 1957, but it does not really matter as Stalin was certainly dead by this time. Whatever the legal position may be, it is not acceptable for political objectives to be pursued using the courts. For this reason, I hope that, together, Baroness Ashton, the Commission and Parliament can make it clear that we want the closest possible relations between Ukraine and the European Union. Yet we also want a democratic Ukraine that pursues political objectives by political means. I hope that Ukraine understands this and that the responsible parties in Ukraine also choose this path.

  President. – You were right, colleagues, to mention Commissioner Füle. I would like to thank him for being with us during the discussion, being responsible for our closest neighbours.

  Gerben-Jan Gerbrandy, on behalf of the ALDE Group. – (NL) Mr President, Baroness Ashton, Commissioner, it takes two to tango, as the saying goes, and after a somewhat tentative opening dance with our partners in North Africa and the Middle East, we need to recognise that we share a dance floor with our partners in the Eastern partnership as well, and that the party is really starting to swing in one or two places.

The atmosphere on the eastern edges of Europe, however, is generally one of awkward and icy reserve. Apart from Poland and Sweden, amongst the Member States, there is little genuine political will or interest in improving relations between the EU and our eastern partners. That is short-sighted, because we actually stand to benefit from stable neighbourly relationships, if only because of our dependence on energy from that region.

The summit’s draft statement confirms this picture. I would therefore ask Madam Ashton, Commissioner Füle and all Member States to show more initiative in genuinely deepening the political dialogue. The EU should not behave like a dance teacher to these countries, but like a flexible and sympathetic partner. I am deeply concerned by the show trial in Ukraine and the continuing arrests of activists in Belarus and Azerbaijan. It is, therefore, important right now that we hold out our hand to our partners and step onto the dance floor in the East, ready to attempt some ambitious and creative moves. We need deeper economic cooperation and fewer barriers to travel for us and our partners there. Obviously, there will be conditions attached to this, but continually postponing the dance will not do anyone any good. I wish to thank Madam Ashton for her willingness to intensify the dialogue with progressive social movements, such as the Public Chamber in Azerbaijan.

Relations in the Eastern partnership are also changing. After Russia, Turkey is the next dancer to take to the floor. New dance partners may feel uneasy in each other’s presence, but what we need is clear vision and commitment. A fortnight ago, we had the chance to attend our first ball with our partners from the five Euronest partnership countries. It was felt that it was a little too early to send an invitation to Belarus. Although we did not produce a statement that everyone could endorse, I do believe in this process and am confident that, if we continue to practise our dance steps and, in particular, listen to each other, it could lead to something beautiful.

  Charles Tannock, on behalf of the ECR Group. – Mr President, whilst the eyes of the EU are understandably focused on the Southern dimension of the European Neighbourhood Policy and the Middle East and North African countries, we must not lose sight of the importance of the Eastern partnership and our support for closer relations with the six countries to the East.

Ukraine is going through a very difficult phase with deterioration, clearly, now in its democratic structures and the rule of law, as we have seen over the selective justice applied to Yulia Tymoshenko. This is happening just as it wants to sign a deep and comprehensive Free Trade Agreement with the European Union. Belarus is still in the grip of a dictator, Lukashenko. The situation in the Caucasus is worrying, with continued Russian occupation of Georgia and the escalation of tensions between Azerbaijan and Armenia over Nagorno-Karabakh (NK).

I welcome the new European Union Special Representative appointment for the ‘frozen conflicts’ from the High Representative, but at the inaugural meeting of Euronest, which I attended two weeks ago, the impasse over EU membership prospects under Article 49 for the six countries, including the three Caucasus republics, and also the NK dispute, basically paralysed the day’s proceedings, which does not augur well for Euronest parliamentary cooperation.

I hope that the Warsaw Summit does not get bogged down in the same way on 29 September. The EU should primarily focus on a pragmatic basis on issues like trade liberalisation and visa facilitation as the way forward, not the intractable issues like NK.

  President. – I would like to apologise to Mr Dowgielewicz. I have noticed that you are present with us as well, in the second row. Welcome to the Polish Presidency in this Chamber. Thank you for being present.

  Werner Schulz, on behalf of the Verts/ALE Group. – (DE) Mr President, ladies and gentlemen, the newly established principle of ‘more for more’ should be brought to bear on the Eastern partnership, in particular, when it comes to the development of civil society. The Civil Society Forum is doing an enormous amount of work in this area. At present, it is one of the very few areas in which we have contact with the Belarusian opposition and cooperate with it. Hence, my urgent call on you, Baroness Ashton, and to you, Commissioner Füle: press for the establishment of a secretariat in Brussels for this forum, so that its work can be supported. At present, everything is done on a voluntary basis and the people involved are overwhelmed with the organisational tasks involved. This has a negative impact on substantive content, the area where we wish to see progress.

The importance of this issue and the extent to which regional conflicts obstruct mutual trust and cooperation have been brought home to me by the controversies in the Euronest Parliamentary Assembly. It is for this reason that conflict resolution should play a central role in our Eastern Neighbourhood Policy, particularly in the case of Transnistria, where the EU has observer-only status in the 5+2 talks and does not have the necessary acceptance or mediating powers.

I am very hopeful that we can press for the release and rehabilitation of all political prisoners in Belarus at the Warsaw Summit and that we can make it clear that all other questions are dependent on this point. In future, the aim should also be for Russia to be more involved in the resolution of these problems.

IN THE CHAIR: LÁSZLÓ TŐKÉS
Vice-President

  Jiří Maštálka, on behalf of the GUE/NGL Group. – (CS) Mr President, in my opinion, we should support everything which assists the development of peaceful relations and cooperation in Europe. Even though I am not sure that the architects of the Eastern partnership plan have a clear set of motives, I would like to believe that the planned summit will strengthen European unity, and will not lead to the creation of a new cordon sanitaire around Russia. I would like it if, before setting out for Warsaw, the EU negotiators could include in their luggage a determination to unify Europe from Ireland to the Urals, and an aspiration to help address problems such as the slow growth of some partner state economies, as well as a determination to resolve disputes such as the one in Nagorno-Karabakh. I would very much appreciate it if the EU negotiators could learn to listen to their partners and abandon the urge to keep giving them advice.

  Juozas Imbrasas, on behalf on the EFD Group. – (LT) Mr President, the Eastern partnership summit, due to be held in Warsaw, will be a good opportunity to assess the progress made and further improve the strategic guidelines of this policy of partnership.

During this summit, it is important for particular attention to be paid to nuclear security, among other issues. Above all, the question of the security of the construction of new nuclear power plants on the European Union’s borders should be examined. Russian and Belarusian plans to build new nuclear power plants near the European Union’s eastern borders may significantly weaken the nuclear and environmental security not just of eastern countries, but the whole of Europe.

We must do our utmost to ensure the continuation of the visa liberalisation process with Moldova and Ukraine and of negotiations on free trade agreements. I also welcome the thoughts expressed by Mr Swoboda and Mr Brok on the Yulia Tymoshenko issue.

The Eastern partnership policy is very important and meaningful for Lithuania. It will also be one of the priorities of the future Lithuanian Presidency. We will make every effort to ensure that we strengthen the rapprochement of Eastern partnership countries with the European Union during the Presidency. I propose that an Eastern partnership summit should be held in Lithuania during the Lithuanian Presidency.

  Andreas Mölzer (NI). – (DE) Mr President, there is little doubt that Russia is quite opposed to our objective of supporting the six former Soviet Republics in achieving political and economic reform. We are aware of this. In the final analysis, the countries that are members of the Eastern partnership are also possible candidates for accession to the EU.

While the planned free trade agreement with Ukraine will finally depend on whether Ms Tymoshenko receives a fair trial under the rule of law, negotiations with Belarus have been placed on hold. We are aware of that too. An EU perspective in itself is not enough to engender democracy, human rights and internal peace, as we see in the example of Turkey and once again in the case of President Lukashenko, Europe’s last dictator.

He seems to release imprisoned opponents of his regime every time he needs Europe. The latest announced release of political prisoners has a lot to do with the immense need for financial support, which even a loan of several billion from China has been unable to satisfy. Lukashenko continues to reject democratic reforms, however, despite the fact that these are a condition of financial aid from the West. This is a major criterion for us.

  Gunnar Hökmark (PPE). – Mr President, the summit meeting in Warsaw must give strong support for, and reaffirm the priority of, the Eastern partnership, which is an important means of influencing the development of those societies. All of these countries are balanced between two different options: either authoritarian structures, or the path towards democracy and open societies.

That is going on just now. The opportunities we lose today will be extremely difficult to regain in the future. I think that it is important to state that this is about Europe, and it is about democracy and the rule of law. Ukraine is an example of that, with what is happening with Yulia Tymoshenko. They are undermining the rule of law and strong support for human rights and an open society.

I think that it is of the utmost importance that the European Union should use all its tools. We are the biggest economy of the world, with the opportunities provided by association agreements, scholarships, and visa liberalisation. At the same time, the strong message is that the preconditions must be fulfilled if you want closer cooperation.

I think that the focus of the summit meeting must be to take the concrete actions which make both of these tracks credible and worthwhile.

  Marek Siwiec (S&D). – (PL) Mr President, the Eastern partnership has proved its worth. It is a policy which has been in operation for several years now. Today, we can say that after the review, and after all the Commission’s work – thank you, Mr Füle, for your excellent report on the subject – we are on the right track. It is true that the Eastern partnership is a policy which must be diversified. It is a policy which includes Belarus and Moldova, and the European Union is using two completely different approaches to what is happening in these two countries. This explains the principles of ‘more for more’ and ‘less for less’ – this is how we are going to shape this policy. We want to build a strong democracy based on interpersonal relations; we want everything which concerns future relations with the European Union to have strong foundations in society.

On the eve of the summit, which is an occasion for celebration, there are three things I wish to mention. Warsaw has earned the right to host the summit because Warsaw and Stockholm were the two capitals which promoted the Eastern partnership, so this is a cause for celebration for us and for all Poles.

Firstly, Ukraine and everything that is taking place in connection with the association agreement is a truly great historical process. Knowing about the terrible things that are going on in Ukraine with its justice system and bearing this in mind, let us not confuse historical matters with the short-term situation.

Secondly, visas will be a great encouragement for the people of these countries, something which will show that it is worth trying for and working towards a closer relationship with the European Union.

Thirdly, membership. We should give a clear signal that this is possible. For many countries, membership provides the motivation for change in their country and it should always be stressed that the Treaty of Rome is binding for European countries.

  Anneli Jäätteenmäki (ALDE). – Mr President, civil society and pluralistic political culture is vital to all nation states. Therefore, I welcome the idea of a civil society facility introduced in the review last May. The concept is not, however, completely clear for me. That is why, Vice-President/High Representative Ashton, I would like to ask you how the civil society facility will be developed, and what is its role within the neighbourhood policy and in relation to the much discussed idea of European Endowment for Democracy?

  Michał Tomasz Kamiński (ECR). – (PL) Mr President, Baroness Ashton, firstly, I would like to thank you, Ms Ashton, on the eve of the Eastern partnership summit, for your words of support for Georgia. On the eve of the summit, I would like it to be said in this Chamber that the territorial integrity of Georgia is a matter of honour for the West – this is certainly my opinion. Of course, a very large part of our debate today is on the situation in Ukraine and I would like to say that however far I may be from being a supporter and admirer of President Yanukovych, I feel it is completely inappropriate to compare today’s situation in Ukraine with the Stalinist period, as this comparison is simply dishonest, especially from those who are silent on human rights in Russia.

I would like to say that if our colleagues in the Chamber are showing a very justified interest in the issue of human rights in Ukraine – I repeat, very justified – I would expect my colleagues and their political groups and chairs to show the same amount of care for human rights in the Russian Federation, in which, I would like to remind them, yet more parties are being banned and others are not being allowed to take part in the upcoming elections to the Duma, while almost half of the Ukrainian Parliament consists of members of the opposition.

  Fiorello Provera (EFD). – (IT) Mr President, ladies and gentlemen, the Eastern partnership is an important political dimension for the European Union, but the obstacles to its future development are currently rather concerning.

Dialogue with Belarus remains difficult, while in Ukraine, the Tymoshenko case confirms a relapse on respect for human rights as well as rampant corruption. Parts of Georgia and Azerbaijan are under military occupation and the tension between Azerbaijan and Armenia is increasing, with a risk of ensuing armed conflict.

Without losing hope on the future of the Eastern partnership, we must remind these six partner countries of their responsibilities: respect for the fundamental rules of democracy and the resolution of territorial conflicts. Here, I am referring in particular to Nagorno-Karabakh and to Georgia. Europe cannot accept violations of international law guaranteeing territorial integrity as, moreover, this House has already appealed for in its resolution on the South Caucasus, and we cannot repudiate our basic principles on respect for human rights.

  Dimitar Stoyanov (NI). – (BG) Mr President, first of all, on the issue of the Eastern partnership, I would like to draw your attention to the Caucasus region. It is extremely important to view this region as a single whole because, at the moment, this region is actually split into two groups of states, basically one group and one other state.

At present, Georgia and Azerbaijan are conspiring with Turkey to isolate the third state in the region, Armenia, economically, in terms of transport links and in any other way. This is totally unacceptable. The European Union must oppose any external interference from a country outside the EU which is basically attempting to wreck everything that the Eastern partnership is aiming to achieve.

Secondly, with regard to Ukraine and the case involving Ms Tymoshenko, I think that Ms Tymoshenko is, indeed, entitled to a fair trial. This is a basic human right which has slightly been brought into question due to her excessively long period of detention. However, the Ukrainian people are also entitled not to get hurt and to be governed for their benefit. If Ms Tymoshenko has violated the interests of the Ukrainian people, she must be held to account for this.

  Jacek Saryusz-Wolski (PPE). – Mr President, when I compare this hemicycle during the debate about the South and the debate about the East, I am less optimistic and less able to be as optimistic as my predecessors. I approve the course of policy, Mrs Ashton and Mr Füle, all the texts and documents and declarations, but I am worried about the capacity to deliver.

The summit is happening – and let us not hide this – in a very difficult context. We have negative dynamics in the EU due to the crisis and the South, we had an example of the failure of Euronest to agree a message to the summit, and we have negative dynamics in the East because of the retreat of democracy. Does our offer, what is on the table, create sufficient leverage for our policy in the East?

We have been taken by surprise in the South. We do not want the same to happen in the East. We need to have a good answer or another Tahir Square will happen in Minsk, Baku and in Yerevan.

I have a question about Ukraine that must be asked. Commissioner, Madam High Representative, do you exclude the possibility that Yanukovych is playing a double game by declaring himself for the European cause and, at the same time, sabotaging it in terms of the abuse of democracy standards displayed in the Tymoshenko case? He is blackmailing us by saying that if not, he will turn to Russia and he is blackmailing Russia by saying that he will turn to the European Union. But Ukraine is the test.

We should conclude an association agreement by the end of the Polish Presidency and then refuse to ratify it if matters continue in Ukraine as they are.

  Kristian Vigenin (S&D). – Mr President, I think we should not expect too much from this summit but, at the same time, we have to admit that a lot has been achieved since 2009, when the Eastern partnership summit launched the new initiative. Two years is not very long, but, at the same time, we were able to shape a policy which is now starting to produce results. I cannot be so pessimistic about the dynamics because I can see with my own eyes that more and more people from the eastern countries, from the eastern partners, see their future in a family with us. They want to work in the same way that we work, with more transparency, with more responsibility, and this is something that we should encourage.

I think that with the ENP review in May this year, the Commission’s communication gave the policy a new impetus towards the east as well. Here, we should say that we can only achieve results if we coordinate more and if we support each other’s initiatives at different levels – Commission, Council, Parliament and the Member States.

We need to pay equal attention to the East and South. This is a message we got from all our partners. We need as a common goal visa-free travel, and this is important for the people as well. We also need to open more programmes for the partners, especially those in education and science. Finally, an association agreement with Ukraine is something that could be a good example for all the others, and I must say that the fact that the penal code dates from Stalinist times only shows how much reforms are needed, and also that Ms Tymoshenko failed to change this code when she had this opportunity.

(The speaker agreed to take a blue-card question under Rule 149(8))

  Paweł Robert Kowal (ECR). – (PL) I have a question for Mr Vigenin concerning his statement and that of Mr Saryusz-Wolski. Based on your experience, do you think that Euronest has been and still is sufficiently attractive and interesting to our Eastern partners? Based on your experience and that of your country, do you think it deserves greater consideration?

  Kristian Vigenin (S&D). – Mr President, I am grateful for the question, because I did not really have the opportunity in this short time to say a few words about Euronest. It is true that we were not able to adopt the report that was presented.

This was due to a very small disagreement on very small issues – I say small, because it is only one small part of the whole range of issues that have been discussed in the Euronest Assembly. This is something that we will take into account for future meetings, but my experience is that all five countries are interested in continuing this cooperation under Euronest. This is a lively structure. They are all very happy with the possibility of working with us and they will invest great effort in the future work as well. This is the message I got from my recent visits to Armenia and Azerbaijan after the first plenary session of Euronest two weeks ago.

(The President cut off the speaker)

  Mirosław Piotrowski (ECR). – (PL) Mr President, the Eastern partnership is one of the priorities of the Polish Presidency. The partnership summit’s final report should contain practical proposals including the future introduction of visa-free travel for the countries involved. The European Commission has not made nearly enough funds available to achieve this, in view of the importance of the area. We should seriously think about recapitalising the eastern border regions of the European Union, including the Lublin region, which could, to a greater extent, take on the practical aspects of facilitating contacts within the framework of the project.

We have noted an asymmetry in the neighbourhood policies of the European Union towards the South and the East. The political turbulence in Belarus and Ukraine should not be allowed to hamper the whole project. The Eastern partnership should become a platform for cooperation to prevent, among other things, a repetition of the ‘Arab Spring’ scenario in the form of a serious conflict immediately outside the eastern borders of the EU. Destroying the idea of the Eastern partnership due to a lack of funds may give the impression that we do not have a vision for the European Union’s future.

  Traian Ungureanu (PPE). – Mr President, the Warsaw Summit will acknowledge the European aspirations of our East European partners. That is true, but is it enough or is it a ritual phrase unfit for the political realities developing along our eastern borders? At a time when Tymoshenko is subjected to a Stalinist trial, at a time when Putin and Medvedev swap places like interchangeable tsars, our message should reaffirm the democratic alternative, as a counterweight to the Putinist contagion that threatens the whole area. And yet our messages are not exactly convincing.

Membership prospects are almost taboo. Liberalisation and trade agreements are moving forward, but at a slow pace. The focus on the events in the South has generated frustration in the East. Our partners have reason to believe that they have been downgraded. The Nabucco project is less visible than it used to be. The mediation capacity of the Union cannot properly deal with so-called frozen conflicts. As a result, the frozen conflicts are ready to ignite.

To sum it up, all is quiet on the eastern front. This deficit of political will does not encourage our partners to pursue democratic reforms. This could add a strategic and an energy crisis, which would multiply the economic crisis that we already know. The eastern dimension of our policies is ours to develop.

  Monika Flašíková Beňová (S&D). – (SK) Mr President, it is understandable that recently, we have paid more attention to the southern borders of the Community than to its eastern borders. However, we should not forget our partners to the east of the European Union. After the enlargement in 2004 and 2007, we have new neighbours. I believe that mutual cooperation can benefit not only the six participating countries but also the European Union. The opportunity provided by the Warsaw meeting should not remain unused. A number of observers consider the year 2011 to be a key one for the partnership and its future.

One of the priorities is, of course, the financial aspect. Although the annual financial volume is to be increased by three quarters in the period from 2008 to 2013, a key role will be played by the discussions on financial support for the period from 2014 to 2020. This is a key challenge not only for the Polish Presidency, but for all of us. From the diplomatic and political perspective, it will also be important to address at the summit Russia’s role in the policy of the European Union vis-à-vis the six former countries of the Soviet Union. Although Russia is not involved in these initiatives, such a partnership cannot be interpreted in any way whatsoever as anti-Russian activity.

Finally, I would like to emphasise that an initiative of this type must not miss an opportune moment in 2011 under the Polish Presidency. On the other hand, such an initiative should be built systematically and in a long-term perspective with the participation of all EU Member States.

  Marek Henryk Migalski (ECR). – (PL) Mr President, I remember how, in the 1990s, the prospect of Poland’s membership of NATO and the European Union gave us discipline and helped us to comply with democratic standards. If our partners from the Group of the European People’s Party (Christian Democrats) are so justifiably concerned today about human rights in Ukraine, for example, to the point that they have added four years to Stalin’s lifespan, I am sure they will also agree that the clear prospect of membership for countries of the Eastern partnership is the best thing we can do for these countries and their human rights. This means that we are appealing to the Commissioner and, of course, to the Polish Presidency, for the Warsaw Summit to be a celebration, not because it is taking place, as Mr Siwiec would have it, but because it will provide these countries with a clear prospect of membership. As a result, we will be of help to them both in their geopolitical situation and concerning respect for human rights in their countries. So I appeal to Ms Ashton to ensure that a clear signal is given at the Warsaw Summit concerning integration of these countries with the European Union.

  Michael Gahler (PPE). – (DE) Mr President, the Eastern partnership is important both for us and for our Eastern European partners. The level of rapprochement with the EU depends on how our neighbours develop in terms of the rule of law and democracy. The EU has thus chosen the right approach by demanding ‘more for more’. However, the corollary of this is ‘less for less’.

This is particularly evident in our relations with Ukraine. I hope that Mr Yanukovych understood the words clearly expressed by all three bodies in Yalta last week, formulated by Carl Bildt, Elmar Brok and Štefan Füle.

To date, the Stalinist paragraphs from the Criminal Code, on which the political cases against Lutsenko, Tymoshenko and others are based, have still not been abolished. Yanukovych must be measured in terms of the rule of law and democracy. Anyone seeking to associate himself with the EU should not provide grounds for the united opposition to come together in a committee to prevent the re-establishment of a dictatorship. The opposition parties are doing this because they hope their country can have a shared European future. I agree with Mr Kamiński’s criticism of the situation in Russia in relation to human rights. He mentioned the elections. We should not send a team of election observers because, sadly, it is already evident that the elections to be held there will not be democratic. Naturally, the criticism we express against Ukraine must be expressed equally vociferously against a large country like Russia.

(The speaker agreed to take a blue-card question under Rule 149(8))

  Marek Henryk Migalski (ECR). – (PL) Mr President, I must admit that I did not understand the last sentence. Did you mean, Mr Gahler, that you do not want us to send our delegations and observers to countries we suspect of rigging elections? I do not understand. I believe that the point of sending observers is solely for them to fulfil their role in monitoring and informing us of any possible irregularities. This is why I believe we should send our observers to Russia, even if we suspect that their elections might be staged or fraudulent.

  Michael Gahler (PPE). – (DE) Mr President, as someone who is also acting as chief observer in Tunisia at present, I would like to say that we should send election observer missions to those countries where the hope exists that the overall process could lead to a democratic result. In the light of recent events, I am afraid that it is unfortunately already clear that this process will not lead to democratic elections in Russia. This is because not all the parties who wish to contest the election are to be allowed to stand and the media and the entire state apparatus lacks a structure that allows us to assume that Russia will have elections to the Duma that deserve the name ‘democratic’, in even the most fundamental terms. For this reason, we should save ourselves the expense. I would point out that we did not travel to Russia for the last elections either.

  Ioan Mircea Paşcu (S&D). – Mr President, the Eastern partnership has been our response to the interruption of gas supply from Russia and to the conflict in Georgia. We wanted to reassure the Eastern countries that they were not forgotten and their hope to get closer to the EU is a tangible expectation. The fact that all these countries belong to the former Soviet space has inevitably brought Russia into the equation, complicating it from the very beginning. Moreover, since then, the current problems in the EU created by the crisis, and the unexpected developments in North Africa, have complicated matters even further, while not deterring Russia from taking advantage of these difficulties. I would only hope that when the negotiations on the association agreements are completed, there will not be any last-minute political change of heart, on our part, in honouring them.

  Adam Bielan (ECR). – (PL) Mr President, the Eastern partnership summit is undoubtedly the most important foreign relations event of the Polish Presidency. A clear final declaration from the summit may become a lasting element in the dynamics of developing and intensifying cooperation between Brussels and its Eastern neighbours.

Bearing in mind the crisis which is raging in Europe and the stronger engagement in relations with the south, the decrease in interest in the Eastern Neighbourhood Policy raises serious concerns, because – and this is worth stressing – the next enlargement will, in fact, take place in this region. This is why we should already be building solid foundations, and this is why I am hoping for speedier progress in negotiations on the association agreement with Ukraine. There is still a possibility that this agreement will be signed before the end of the year. Equally, free trade with partnership countries is also an excellent way to improve economic conditions in the whole of the EU. Acknowledging the membership ambitions of Georgia and Moldova will be a significant step forward, and introducing visa-free travel, especially in view of the fast-approaching Polish-Ukrainian European Football Championship, will bring significant benefits to Member States.

In our relations with our Eastern neighbours, we must not forget constantly to promote the idea of freedom. In Belarus, political persecution is a daily fact of life. The long-running conflict in the Caucasus does not help in building stable and positive relations. European countries must present a clear position in these matters.

  Anna Ibrisagic (PPE). – (SV) Mr President, it is true that the countries in our Eastern Neighbourhood are currently at a crossroads where there is a choice between development towards fully functioning democracies or stagnation. Civil society, non-governmental organisations and freedom of the media are extremely important, but we cannot start on anything else until we have ensured that there is peace and stability.

Several fellow Members have previously mentioned Nagorno-Karabakh and, fortunately, the tension that we all felt during the spring has not erupted and developed into something worse. It also showed that when we work together – that is to say, we in this House along with Baroness Ashton and Mr Füle – we can control the situation.

However, the fact that it is calmer at the moment does not mean that we can rest on our laurels. Instead, I would like to send out two messages from this Parliament: firstly, that Baroness Ashton should explain to us more often and more regularly what is being done in these frozen conflicts in particular and, secondly, that we must treat all frozen conflicts in the area in the same way.

This does not only apply to Nagorno-Karabakh. It also applies to South Ossetia, Abkhazia and Transnistria. The EU must take the same approach to all frozen conflicts and treat them all in the same way.

What is accepted as a solution in one country must also be accepted by others, both when it comes to terminology and when it comes to actions.

  Evgeni Kirilov (S&D). – Mr President, the Eastern partnership offers many opportunities for fruitful cooperation between the EU and its eastern neighbours, but its greatest added value lies in its multilateral dimension. Therefore, it is very important to keep the balance in the relations with all the eastern partners, not to focus on separate countries but rather to develop the potential of this neighbouring region as a whole.

Regional cooperation is crucial in this regard, particularly the development of the transport and energy corridors, which is not only indispensable for EU security but also an important element of the partners’ economic integration with the EU. Unfortunately, this cooperation is impossible in a situation of conflict and closed borders. Therefore, we need to create an atmosphere of peace and trust and to step up our efforts to find a peaceful solution to the still unresolved conflicts in the region.

The EU is playing a stabilising role in Georgia but should be much more active as far as the conflicts in Transnistria and Nagorno-Karabakh are concerned. It should put more focus on these issues in the framework of the EU-Russia dialogue, which is very important. Clear EU commitments are also needed for post-conflict participation and stabilisation. I think this is the way forward for the increasing role of the EU as far as the Eastern partnership is concerned.

  Paweł Robert Kowal (ECR). – (PL) Mr President, Ms Ashton, Mr Füle, I do not agree that we have done everything we need to do concerning the Eastern partnership. I have the impression that from the very beginning, Europe has been half-hearted towards the Eastern partnership, whether on matters regarding membership or relating to funding. However, I do appreciate both your commitment, Ms Ashton, and yours, Mr Füle, in ensuring that the Warsaw Summit is a success. I would like to ask you both, and especially you, Ms Ashton, not to look at the partnership from the point of view of the situation today, but from the point of view of the future, from the point of view of young people and education. This is a great opportunity, and we in Central Europe know what is meant by the opportunity to improve our civilisation. I would like to call for a comprehensive education programme, a new initiative from the Eastern partnership aimed at those who, when they reach adulthood, when they grow up and have completed their education, will be part of a shared Europe together with us.

This is why I am daring to propose something new – an Eastern partnership university. We need your new initiatives on membership, on funding, but also on future generations. The whole North African experience has clearly shown us that future generations are something we should think about in the context of partnership.

  Andrzej Grzyb (PPE). – (PL) Mr President, it is very optimistic of Ms Ashton to say that the Eastern partnership summit will be a success. However, I do wish you, Ms Ashton, Mr Füle and especially the Polish Presidency, this success. I hope that, in anticipation of the summit, we will not succumb to the same mood that was prevalent in Parliament after the last Euronest session which failed to adopt any conclusions. Nevertheless, it is also worth saying that it is a great success that this Parliamentary assembly has managed to meet and has begun its work.

What am I expecting from the Eastern partnership summit in Warsaw? Firstly, a unanimous decision to finalise the association agreement with Ukraine. I believe that the Ukrainian Government and President will do everything possible to release members of the opposition, in particular, Prime Minister Tymoshenko. Secondly, the summit should encourage work on association agreements with Moldova and Georgia to begin. I would also like it to support change in Belarus. Thirdly, the summit should encourage the countries of the partnership to cooperate within the context of the Eastern partnership, and this is one of its most important tasks.

What sort of incentives might encourage future cooperation within the partnership? Amongst other things, relaxation of the visa regime. There are no visa requirements for Russia, but the European Union has the Schengen barrier. There is no incentive for the people in the countries of the Eastern partnership. So this is where we must make the most effort. Ukraine, and Moldova in the future, are definitely both on this path. I would also like to see support for civil society, support for border infrastructure, and support for any project which brings our citizens closer to each other.

  Marietta Giannakou (PPE). – (EL) Mr President, the second Eastern partnership summit in Warsaw is a first class opportunity to send out a stronger political message about the European Neighbourhood Policy and the conclusions of the summit will be of crucial importance to the future application of the Eastern partnership.

The neighbourhood policy certainly needs review and, of course, the Commission communication entitled ‘A new response to a changing neighbourhood’ is also important and is a move in the right direction. However, there are sectors in which the steps needed have not been taken. The neighbourhood policy has proceeded in a fragmented manner and we are not always to blame. Of course, the commitment to human rights must remain very strong on our part and, at the same time, support must be given, subject to conditions and depending on the progress made in each individual country. The approach to civil society is, of course, also of vital importance and is a positive development.

Finally, Baroness Ashton, Commissioner, the proposal to create a European Fund for Democracy is clearly welcome. However, this will take time to set up and, at the same time, there are funds and instruments that have not been utilised as they should, which have only been partially utilised, and I think that, until such time as the European Fund has been set up, this is what the Commissioner should focus on together, of course, with the Council’s political decision of decisive importance which, I am sure, will come out of the Warsaw Summit.

  Eduard Kukan (PPE). – (SK) Mr President, the Warsaw Summit is undoubtedly one of the key events of the Polish Presidency and I believe that it will also become a significant milestone in the relationship of the European Union with its eastern partners. In a situation where the European Union has the ambition of playing an important role in global politics, it should define clearly its stance towards its nearest strategic partners. It needs to send a clear signal that it is determined to play a key role in this region. To ensure the success of the eastern partnership, it is necessary to create a real political partnership through a strengthening of relations, taking clear decisions, and promoting values and objectives leading to reforms and a strengthening of cooperation with the European Union.

The summit offers an opportunity to set up an agenda for these relations and to determine their intensity for the next period, which may be crucial. Otherwise, these countries, which are to be our partners, may begin to view their relations with the European Union from an instrumental perspective and may get stuck halfway between democratic reforms and the Soviet past. This is not in our interest. Therefore, we have to respond decisively to problems such as visa liberalisation, the strengthening of democratic institutions and civic society and, last but not least, issues such as trade, economic cooperation and security. Thus, the European Union should get closer to these countries and should offer them, at the same time, an opportunity to get closer to the European Union. I hope that the Warsaw Summit will be successful in this respect.

IN THE CHAIR: ANNI PODIMATA
Vice-President

  Miroslav Mikolášik (PPE). – (SK) Madam President, the forthcoming summit in Warsaw brings hope for a revival of EU relations with its eastern partners. However, such dynamics require a clear definition of the strategic interests and objectives of the European Union, as well as the development of a robust strategy for their achievement. I believe that the eastern partnership should become a useful instrument for mutual benefit based on common interests and the respect of each other’s obligations.

The Warsaw Summit should primarily bring more clarity into the negotiations concerning the association agreement and free trade with Ukraine. At the same time, it will be necessary to accentuate the EU’s interest in the strengthening of economic and democratic reforms in that country. We cannot remain indifferent, for instance, to the treatment of ex-Prime Minister Tymoshenko in this neighbouring country, a country which shows much promise.

Besides economic issues, the key areas that will have to be discussed should include energy, investment projects, security and environmental issues. A number of sensitive issues are still open. We are well aware that the Nagorno-Karabakh issue has been left unresolved for a long time from the European side too, and I believe that the tension there is rising. On the one hand, there are certain claims on the side of Azerbaijan; on the other hand, there is Armenia of course, which is supported by Russia. We must find a prudent political solution.

  László Tőkés (PPE). – Madam President, the Eastern partnership summit in Warsaw will take place this September. Similarly to the preceding Hungarian Presidency, enlargement is high on the agenda of the Polish Presidency, the two being partners in the organisation of the upcoming summit.

I would like to congratulate Poland, the driving force behind the launch of the Eastern partnership, along with Sweden. As a Member from a state from the former Soviet bloc, Romania, I would like to stress the solidarity that the Hungarian Presidency expressed vis-à-vis Croatia before accession, just as Poland is now showing towards Ukraine. On the 20th anniversary of the fall of the Soviet Union, it is my firm conviction that the EU, divided to the extreme, can be reunited with its region on the other side of the Iron Curtain only through this kind of solidarity, and thus complete its integration process.

We well know what happens in our neighbourhood; it affects the entire Union. So our neighbourhood policy is essential for a stronger Europe. The Eastern partnership countries are carrying out reforms in order to come closer to the EU. We continuously ask for further reforms, and stress the need to respect human rights in Belarus and Ukraine. We need to remain united in our commitment to establishing closer ties and to use the summit to send the right political signal of our will to play a leading role in the region.

  Krzysztof Lisek (PPE). – (PL) Madam President, Ms Ashton, Mr Füle, of course, as a Pole, I am very proud that we are hosting the summit. I think that Poland, Sweden and the whole European Union can be proud, as this is a step in the right direction. This is something, maybe the most important thing of all, that the citizens of the six countries which are members of the Eastern partnership have been waiting for. These are people who have also been wishing for economic development to take place in their countries – and we can certainly help here – and for political stability, democracy and, finally, for security.

Speaking of economic development and the help we can give, a positive move would undoubtedly be to bring talks with Ukraine on the association agreement to a conclusion before the end of this year, and another very positive move would also be to send a clear signal concerning the opening of talks on free trade agreements with Georgia and Moldova.

  Monika Smolková (S&D) . – (SK) Madam President, the eastern partnership policy is a very good policy, which is mutually beneficial for the six eastern European states and the EU. This policy requires a longer process; its results will not be achieved immediately, but will only appear after several years. Through this policy, the European Union is offering a helping hand to these states to follow a democratic path and to improve the living standards of their citizens.

This morning, we have talked about a new trade policy for Europe. This is an area that can also be boosted by the eastern partnership and free trade agreements. The advantages of a single common market will make it possible to gain more from the free movement of capital, goods, services and people. An improvement in economic cooperation will definitely make room for a change in the visa system and the development of tourism, and will also support security and stability in the states of Eastern Europe.

  Cristian Silviu Buşoi (ALDE) . – (RO) Madam President, the Eastern partnership offers a particular opportunity for the European Union’s eastern neighbours and can become a real driving force for these countries’ political and economic stability, security and prosperity. This is why I think that this initiative, launched in 2009, must not only be continued, but, above all, consolidated. I am pleased that the Polish Presidency regards the Eastern partnership as a priority. I firmly believe that Thursday’s summit will give new impetus to cooperation with these countries.

We must take into account the conclusions from the implementation report and the various country reports, and therefore come up with solutions to suit the progress made by and specific needs of each country. In addition, in future, the actions taken as part of this cooperation must deliver the most tangible benefits possible to the citizens of these countries, which will encourage them in their efforts towards democracy and economic development.

Last but not least, we need adequate financial resources and it will be important for us to allocate an impressive proportion to the Eastern partnership for the 2014-2020 period.

  Jaroslav Paška (EFD). – (SK) Madam President, the Eastern partnership summit in Warsaw should be an opportunity to give new impetus to cooperation between the European Union and the countries of the former Soviet Union. For the representatives of the eastern partnership, Warsaw will be an illustration of what has been brought by democratic changes in a country that was recently in the same political bloc as them. Despite the fact that the closest neighbours of the Poles – the Belarussians and the Ukrainians – have political representations which we can legitimately criticise for their democratic deficits in the administration of their countries, we have to keep in mind in particular the citizens of these countries, who should receive a clear signal from Warsaw that Europe respects them and is interested in friendly coexistence with them, irrespective of the political leadership ruling their countries. More openness to the possibilities of travel for young people and other citizens of these countries would definitely be a good sign for the future.

  Krisztina Morvai (NI). – (HU) Madam President, to hear the European Parliament chastise Stalinist-type unfair criminal proceedings is music to my ears; however, this music is unfortunately out of tune, as it is once again third countries that are being criticised.

I wonder if Baroness Ashton, High Representative for Foreign Affairs, is aware that in Hungary, an EU Member State, Judit Szima, one of the most renowned and perhaps the most active trade union leader, was taken into police custody on the day before a country-wide demonstration and has been under house arrest ever since, which has been months now.

Is Baroness Ashton aware that in Hungary, two opposition leaders, György Budaházy and Endre Szász, have been in provisional custody for three years in unfair trials that are now consistently being held in camera, barring even the principal accused, that is, opposition leader György Budaházy, from attending his own hearings. Even Stalinism hardly went this far, as back then, efforts were made to at least keep up appearances. How will Baroness Ashton respond if the Ukrainians, Belarus or others enquire about this? Would it not be better if the European Union finally conducted investigations into these matters and put an end to these disgraceful infringements?

  Jan Kozłowski (PPE). – (PL) Madam President, in spite of the scepticism of some Member States due to the regime in Belarus and the trial of former Prime Minister Tymoshenko in Ukraine, I believe that the Polish Presidency should continue to intensify cooperation with the countries of the Eastern partnership, primarily in order to sign an association agreement with Ukraine. I believe that the contribution of the Warsaw Summit and the Civil Society Forum and Conference will be to provide a greater impetus to the process of bringing the Eastern partnership countries and the European Union together. I would also like to mention the importance of strengthening the regional dimension in this integration. An example of this could be the inauguration, on 8 September in Poznań, by the Committee of the Regions of the Conference of Regional and Local Authorities for the Eastern partnership.

  Catherine Ashton, Vice-President of the Commission/High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy. – Madam President, congratulations on your election.

Members have raised a range of different issues and I begin with the one that our colleague Mr Brok raised, which is: why am I sitting here and not there? I move between the two places each time; if you build me a bench in the middle I would be very happy to sit there. I am trying to fulfil my obligations!

The most important question that I think has been raised in our discussion has been: do we have the political will to put the amount of energy and effort into our partnership in the east in the way that we have spent a lot of our energy looking to our southern neighbourhood? From the commitment of honourable Members and, I hope from what I have said in this debate and the number of times Štefan has discussed these issues from his perspective and from our joint perspective, I believe the answer is very clearly ‘yes’. The summit that we have this week in Warsaw is really important and I want to thank the Polish Presidency very much for the enormous amount of work that they have put in. I can bear witness to that work and I thank them very much for all the effort that they have made.

It is because of the work that they have done and because of the commitment that I think you will see from Štefan and myself that we see a strong representation from the European Union and, I hope, a successful summit in the making. However, I do not underestimate all the challenges as we look at our six partners in our eastern neighbourhood. Our relationship with each one of them brings with it some challenges that need to be addressed and concerns, all of which have been expressed in this House this evening, in terms of frozen conflict, the potential for new conflict, the need to espouse the value and principles that we must hold within the European Union. However, we expect those we wish to collaborate with also to take these on, so it is important to make sure that how those concerns are dealt with is clear and transparent.

This brings me to the case that has been raised most often in our discussions, which is that of Yulia Tymoshenko. I want to be clear that the issue that we have raised is this apparently selective use of criminal judicial measures, and to say that the criticisms come not only from us but from many others, from independent experts. I think it is very important they be taken very seriously. This is the issue that I have raised with them, the issue that Štefan has raised with them. When we see judicial process, we wish to see due process. We wish to see people dealt with fairly and properly, within the way in which we operate as a European Union. Having once been a justice minister, I know how important this is as part of that journey in the development of the European Union and how important it is that we stand absolutely by those principles.

We are going to continue with our discussions on the deep and comprehensive free trade area and the association agreement because we believe that an association agreement provides stronger guarantees on some of the issues with Ukraine that we think are so important. As Members have pointed out, it goes without saying that any agreement has to be ratified, that national parliaments and the European Parliament will want to make sure that they are comfortable with the spirit in which this is done.

Specifically, too, Members raised the issue of the civil society facility. We have already identified EUR 22 million for this facility. Its purpose is to focus on the empowerment of civil society and increase public accountability, which is a really important issue. Coming back to my point about transparency and openness, the value of the Endowment for Democracy proposal is to enable us to do things that we cannot already do. It is not to duplicate what the instruments that we have do, but to look at some of the questions that have been raised in our discussions with our partners across the east and the south. How do we support the processes more effectively? How do we support young people? How do we support the growth of the political process? That will enable us, we hope, to work in a slightly more arms-length way, which can be of great value to those who wish to get support and help but do not meet the criteria that we quite rightly have for our instruments.

I want to end by focusing again on what I think the deliverables will be at this summit. First of all, the clear timeframe for the signing of the Ukraine Association Agreement and the free trade agreement, and for the start of those negotiations with Moldova and Georgia. If we are able to move forward on these, that would be important. Mobility is a big issue for many countries, and the importance of looking at what we can deliver on mobility over the coming months will also be a big part of this.

There is also the question of some cooperation between different sectors, particularly energy and transport, and, of course, political cooperation and dialogue. If we are able to use this opportunity to bring together the leadership with the European Union and with our eastern partners, and develop a stronger relationship, being clear about the commitments that we expect as well as the commitments that we give, with ‘more for more’ and mutual accountability being the watchwords of how we operate, I think it will have been an enormous success and it will give new energy to our work with our eastern partners.

As I began, may I thank the Polish Presidency especially, and the Hungarian Presidency for the groundwork that they put in. I look forward very much to what I am sure will be a successful Presidency event in Warsaw.

  President. – The debate is closed.

(The sitting was suspended for two minutes)

Written statements (Rule 149)

  Lidia Joanna Geringer de Oedenberg (S&D), in writing. – (PL) I am pleased that the forthcoming Eastern partnership summit will be taking place in Warsaw, which will, without doubt, be one of the most important events of the Polish Presidency. European Union and Eastern partnership Heads of State or Government will be taking part in a meeting planned for 29-30 September, giving a strong political signal for greater integration and involvement on the part of the EU and its Eastern partners in joint action.

The first Eastern partnership summit took place on 7 May 2009 in Prague. Today, the promotion of democracy throughout the neighbourhood of the EU is one of the priorities of the Polish Presidency. The aim of the summit is to stabilise and increase the prosperity of our Eastern neighbours, and although the Eastern partnership does not promise membership of the EU, it does foresee progressive and far-reaching integration with EU policies and the EU economy and legislation.

The Eastern partnership intends to strengthen cooperation by improving bilateral and multilateral cooperation in the regions, by creating a free trade zone, introducing visa liberalisation in the long term and extending the Erasmus programme. The European Commission is preparing to implement, before the end of this year, an institutional development programme for Eastern partnership countries, with a total budget of EUR 173 million. The Commission is also holding discussions with partner countries on regional development pilot programmes, for which over EUR 150 million has been earmarked for 2010-2013.

These are important first steps in strengthening cooperation with our Eastern neighbours. Involvement in joint efforts to promote democracy and remove borders in the whole of the EU’s neighbourhood should be a priority for us all.

  Kinga Göncz (S&D), in writing. – (HU) Countries in the EU’s eastern neighbourhood should also be brought closer to Europe. A deepening of these relations is in our interest as well, because an EU neighbourhood comprising countries that adhere to democratic principles enhances economic development and the stability of the region. Although the events of recent months rightly drew our attention to North Africa, we must keep in mind that just like the masses that ignited the spark of the Arab Spring, citizens of the countries in the European Union’s eastern neighbourhood are driven by democratic motivations. We have a great responsibility in this situation: Are we able to offer an alternative that can make these countries remain faithful to the European Union and the values it represents in the long term? I support the efforts of the Polish EU Presidency to give an impetus to the European Union’s Eastern Neighbourhood Policy and to conclude the relevant agreements and begin negotiations about tightening economic and commercial relations – from free trade agreements to visa liberalisation – as soon as possible, once the partner countries are ready. In the future, the European Union should assume a greater role in the management of deadlocked conflicts that are poisoning relations between our eastern neighbours. I am pleased that according to the plans, the Eastern partnership summit to be held in the second half of the week will see all EU Member States represented at the highest level except for three large countries. This indicates both the importance of the event and the prestige of the organising country’s government.

  Cătălin Sorin Ivan (S&D), in writing. – (RO) I think that improving relations with our eastern neighbours is of paramount importance, and we must strengthen democracy in these countries. The Prague Declaration, followed by the launch of the Eastern partnership, includes an initiative containing the following phrase: ‘we will take steps towards visa liberalisation’. We cannot talk about the countries in the Eastern partnership drawing closer without taking this important step seriously.

A positive development has been noted in Chişinău where, during the extended meeting of the working group dealing with coordinating the visa liberalisation process with the EU, the latest progress in the implementation of the Action Plan on visa liberalisation was presented, along with the first Progress Report published recently by the European Commission.

The EU should remove the phrase ‘long-term objective’ from all the relevant documents concerning visa liberalisation, including the draft association agreements with Moldova and with other Eastern partnership countries. By promoting citizens’ mobility and contacts with the EU, we are also supporting the development of the countries neighbouring Europe, such as the Republic of Moldova. Visa liberalisation promotes good understanding, links with civil society and intercultural exchanges. This would be the first sign that the Eastern partnership is sincere and serious in its intentions.

  Tunne Kelam (PPE), in writing. – This summit should mark the EU´s will and commitment to its eastern neighbourhood. The EU has to demonstrate that its eastern neighbourhood is of the highest strategic and political importance. It is crucial that we show our Eastern neighbours the same dedication as we do to our Southern neighbours. An increased budget is a must to ensure sufficient tailored assistance. I especially would like to underline the importance of the new association agreement with Ukraine which is about to be signed in December this year. Ukraine has demonstrated its willingness and readiness to be part of Europe and, despite backlashes, has pursued its policies towards deeper European integration. We need to fully acknowledge this fact and make sure these developments will continue by signing the association agreement as soon as possible. I call also upon our Eastern neighbours to step up their efforts towards respect of human rights, democracy, and freedom of speech, media freedom and rule of law. The EU is based on these values and it is crucial that our Eastern neighbours fully implement and respect these values in order to pursue further European integration.

  Monica Luisa Macovei (PPE), in writing. – (RO) The Eastern partnership summit marks an important occasion for strengthening and highlighting the European Union’s relations with the countries in the east. I welcome the approach presented by the Commission and High Representative Catherine Ashton in Communication COM(2011)303 for treating each country in the EU’s neighbourhood policy according to their merits (‘more for more’ principle) and on the basis of clear criteria.

The Republic of Moldova is a model for the Eastern partnership. During the last two years, the Alliance for European Integration has initiated major reforms in constant consultation with the EU. I welcome the European Parliament’s explicit reference to the prospect of the Republic of Moldova’s accession to the EU, in accordance with Article 49 of the Treaty (the recent resolution on the association agreement). The prospect of accession is important to the reformers in this country, providing them with motivation and encouraging their efforts to continue with implementing the necessary reforms.

The European Parliament has also called for negotiations to be initiated with the Republic of Moldova on a Free Trade Agreement by the end of 2011, and for greater efforts to be made to resolve the conflict in the Transnistrian region, while respecting the Republic of Moldova’s territorial integrity. I welcome the announcement made recently by Prime Minister Vlad Filat on resuming the official 5+2 negotiations. I consider relevant his idea of replacing the troops in the Transnistrian region with a civilian mission. It is important for the EU to play a greater role in these negotiations.

  Iosif Matula (PPE), in writing. – (RO) The Warsaw Summit provides an important occasion for examining the progress that has been made among the European Union’s eastern neighbours, using this as a basis for devising specific policies for a common future. The European Union must support the transition to democracy in the countries of the Eastern partnership. This is why I think that a key step in doing this is to present a clear prospect of the partner countries joining the EU, as well as to implement the structural reforms required to bring them into line with European policies and regulations. I would like to stress the need for the EU to assume specific commitments regarding the signing of association and free trade agreements, as well as the importance of visa liberalisation for Eastern European partners.

We should not overlook either the role played by local and regional authorities in harmonising relations within the Eastern partnership. Their contribution is vital and must be focused, in particular, on territorial development, supporting mutual contacts and improving economic relations. Furthermore, Eastern partnership countries need to take important steps towards increasing respect for human rights, fundamental freedoms and the rule of law. The EU’s objective in its eastern neighbourhood must be to focus on creating a democratic, stable region to ensure respect for freedom, dignity and fundamental rights.

  Radvilė Morkūnaitė-Mikulėnienė (PPE), in writing. – I look forward to an ambitious Eastern partnership summit in Warsaw. A far-reaching Joint Declaration should outline concrete goals to be achieved for the next two years until the EaP summit in 2013. The main pillar of the EaP should remain the European perspective for partners who are willing and able to perform according to the values enshrined in Article 49 of the European Treaty. Next steps should be: fast-forward towards increased mobility for EaP countries – mutual commitments to start up remaining visa dialogues (Georgia) and negotiations on VFRA (Armenia, Azerbaijan and with Belarus); start of DCFTA negotiations with Moldova and Georgia. Conclusion of the negotiations with Ukraine by the end of 2011 would make a much needed success story. Building lively and strong EU and EaP relations is needed for both sides; its success lies in the coordinated actions of all EU institutions and all EU Member States. If we want to create an area of stability, shared values and progress surrounding Europe, it is important to consider carefully and strike the right balance between both ENP vectors.

  Cristian Dan Preda (PPE), in writing. – I would like to underline three main ideas. First of all, I consider that the perspective of membership should be the silver thread that guides our relations with the Eastern neighbours. Not only do these countries belong geographically to our continent, but they are deeply interlinked with the EU through both history and culture. Enlargement has been the most successful foreign policy tool of the EU and can serve as a strong incentive for internal reforms aiming to reach deep democracy in these countries. Nevertheless, we all understand that membership of the EU will not be accomplished tomorrow. Not only because of the enlargement fatigue, but also because these internal reforms take time and sometimes steps forward can be followed by steps backwards, as the case of Ukraine proves so clearly. This is why we should pursue firmly the objective of visa liberalisation in order to provide people-to-people contacts. A democratic evolution of these countries through emulation of already set standards can only come along in this way. Finally, we should apply the principle of ‘more for more’, encouraging countries such as Georgia or Moldova, that have made significant progress lately and whose willingness for reform must be wholeheartedly welcomed.

  Csaba Sándor Tabajdi (S&D), in writing. – (HU) The Eastern partnership cannot be a substitute for candidate status among our neighbours who are seeking EU membership. We cannot ignore the efforts made by Georgia, Moldova and, in particular, Ukraine in building relations with the European Union that are tighter than a free trade association. The Eastern Neighbourhood Policy must, however, be based on mutual trust with Russia. Without this, Russia may resort to drastic steps. Although not a participant in the Eastern partnership cooperation, Russia is an unavoidable actor in the EU’s Eastern Neighbourhood Policy. This is clearly demonstrated in the case of Ukraine. The Ukrainian Government was recently faced with a choice between preserving its good economic relations and favourable gas supply treaties with Russia or entering into a Free Trade Agreement with the European Union. In this delicate situation, it is of great significance that it is Poland, a Member State intimately familiar with relations with Russia and within the eastern partnership, that is holding the EU Presidency. I hope that the Polish Presidency will be able to handle the matter with impartiality and neutrality. However, it would have been even better if the Eastern partnership summit had been held on its original date in February, while the Hungarian Presidency was still holding office. It is unfortunate that, at that time, the summit had to be postponed due to scheduling problems and a poor willingness to participate. As it is, Hungary has lost an opportunity of prestige value, and the European Union has lost valuable time.

  Boris Zala (S&D), in writing. – The Eastern partnership policy will deliver its first major success: the association agreement with Ukraine. It is undoubtedly great news. But, when looking at the way this success was achieved, it also raises some concerns for the future. The Yanukovych government had to withstand enormous pressure from Russia which was meant to deter Kiev from a European path. This time around, we may have successfully snatched Ukraine from Russia’s embrace. But European integration cannot be this three-way strategic game. It is not a model of integration that is viable in the long run: because the closer our Eastern partners come to the EU, the more confrontational the process will get. So, looking ahead, our challenge is to create a more benign geopolitical environment context for our Eastern partners to move closer without being subject to such pressure and dilemmas. This, of course, means a more open and honest dialogue with Russia. But it also implies coordinating and interlinking – strategically, as well as practically – our neighbourhood policy and our Russia policy. This, I believe, is one of the lessons we should learn from the Ukraine negotiations.

  President. – The sitting is resumed.