Verbatim report of proceedings

Tuesday, 1 April 2025 - Strasbourg

9. CFSP and CSDP (Article 36 TUE) (joint debate)

  President. – The next item is the joint debate on:

– the report by David McAllister, on behalf of the Committee on Foreign Affairs, on implementation of the common foreign and security policy – annual report 2024 (2024/2080(INI)) (A10-0010/2025);

– the report by Nicolás Pascual de la Parte, on behalf of the Committee on Foreign Affairs, on implementation of the common security and defence policy – annual report 2024 (2024/2082(INI)) (A10-0011/2025).

  David McAllister, rapporteur. – Madam President, High Representative/Vice‑President, ladies and gentlemen, dear colleagues, our Interinstitutional Agreement stipulates in part two, section G, paragraph 43, that each year, the Council Presidency will consult the European Parliament on a forward‑looking Council document, which will be transmitted by 15 June for the year in question, setting out the main aspects and basic choices of a common foreign and security policy.

Since 2010, this task has been delegated to the HR/VP. Dear Kaja Kallas, welcome therefore, to your first debate on the main aspects and the basic choices of our CFSP and the CSDP in plenary.

Dear colleagues, tomorrow at noon, we will hopefully adopt Parliament's CFSP report, reacting to the assessment of the former High Representative, and we do so amidst rapid and radical uncertainty. A world where authoritarian actors are trying ever more aggressively to mark out their zones of influence through military might, political pressure, and economic control.

Our report comprehensively analyses these shifting dynamics. In fact, with 1 019 amendments at the committee level, and another 167 at the plenary level, the negotiation team was compelled to conduct an even more meticulous review than initially expected. I would like to thank everyone who has been involved in this extraordinary task.

As a result, the text has expanded to, let me put it this way, unprecedented lengths. For those who actually take time to unpack it, this CFSP report is much more than a mere review of last year's events. It also outlines a strategic direction and sets clear expectations from our side for our executive. These expectations are structured along four distinct priorities.

First, addressing the consequences of the Russian war of aggression against Ukraine. Let me be very clear, any attempt to blackmail Ukraine into surrendering for the sake of a peace deal will only empower the aggressor. Putin must not achieve through negotiation what he failed to secure on the battlefield. In the coming weeks and months, we will stand united together as steadfast partners of Ukraine. We will ensure Ukraine has the means to liberate its people and deter further Russian aggression.

Second, resolving conflict and supporting peace in the Middle East. Our current strategy in the Middle East is obviously not fit to account for the political realities of the region. The atrocious attacks committed by Hamas on 7 October set the entire region on fire. An arc of instability has since settled from Khartoum to Baghdad, and Europe is not left untouched.

Thirdly, asserting interests through strategic partnerships. Whether it be Mr Putin's imperialism or the escalation in the Middle East, all these developments significantly increase the pressure on the European Union to build alliances and to mobilise partner countries, from our closest neighbours to those who are far away but need us most.

And finally, let's not forget that we are, as a European Union, the undisputed world champion in development cooperation. Yet, recent developments have highlighted the poor understanding of the EU's perspective in some of our partner countries around the world and this therefore limits our political influence. So it is time to act with confidence. Our actions must speak as loudly as our words and they must be seen.

I look forward to an interesting debate this noon. Once again, I would like to thank the shadow rapporteurs and all those involved behind the scenes for working on this extensive report.

  Nicolás Pascual de la Parte, ponente. – Señora presidenta, señora Kallas, queridos amigos, me cabe el honor de presentar el informe de la política común de seguridad y defensa europea del año 2024. Es un informe que, por su naturaleza, es un poco especial. Primero, porque refleja no solamente las prioridades del Parlamento Europeo en estos temas, sino también las de la Comisión y las del Servicio Europeo de Acción Exterior por ser el primer informe de esta legislatura. Pero es que, además, es un informe de transición, porque se recoge precisamente el reto geopolítico, el cambio de paradigma que se está produciendo en el mundo. Ante ese cambio de paradigma y ante esos nuevos retos, la Unión Europea tiene que dar una respuesta a la altura de las circunstancias.

Este informe se centra en esta transición de ser dependientes de otros a ser políticamente y estratégicamente autónomos. Ha incorporado la inmensa mayoría de las modificaciones de los distintos grupos políticos, pero al final hemos sido capaces de presentar —gracias al trabajo de todos los servicios del Parlamento, de la Secretaría, de los ponentes alternativos y demás— un informe coherente y un informe centrado en las prioridades de las instituciones europeas y no solamente del Parlamento Europeo.

¿Cuáles son estas prioridades? La primera, que Europa, como digo, tiene que empezar a tomar las riendas de su futuro en sus propias manos y ser capaz de defender su modelo de vida, sus valores, sus convicciones y sus principios ahora y en el futuro. Para eso necesitamos tiempo. Y, aunque queramos crear la Europa de la defensa del futuro en los próximos cuatro o cinco años, necesitamos que los Estados Unidos de América estén con nosotros en la OTAN y fuera de la OTAN para crear una disuasión creíble con respecto a Rusia, para que a Putin no se le ocurran nuevos aventurerismos militares de nuevo. Necesitamos crear una disuasión fuerte y, para eso, Europa necesita tiempo. En el mejor de los escenarios, es decir, si tenemos la voluntad política, movilizamos los recursos financieros necesarios y mostramos unidad y determinación para crear esa Europa de la defensa, necesitaremos como mínimo cuatro o cinco años. Por tanto, hemos de ser conscientes de que necesitamos mientras tanto la asistencia y el apoyo de los Estados Unidos y de la OTAN. No queremos hacer nada sin los estadounidenses, siempre y cuando quieran participar como nosotros. Pero tenemos que dotarnos de esos medios y de esos recursos para defendernos en las crisis de nuestros vecindarios este, sur y más allá.

Evidentemente, hacemos también un repaso geográfico de todos los conflictos en los cuales Europa tiene que tener una posición única, empezando por Ucrania. Ahí repetimos, como ha dicho antes mi amigo David, que nosotros apoyaremos financiera, política y defensivamente a Ucrania todo el tiempo que sea necesario. Y aquí lo haremos incluso sin los Estados Unidos de América. Hemos de estar al lado del pueblo y del Gobierno ucraniano tanto tiempo como nos necesiten y, para eso, tenemos que articular los mecanismos financieros y políticos que lo permitan. Pero han de contar siempre con nuestro apoyo, en tanto en cuanto estén defendiendo nuestra libertad, nuestra integridad territorial, nuestra independencia y nuestro modelo de vida en el campo de batalla de Ucrania.

En segundo lugar, nos pasamos al conflicto de Oriente Próximo, en el cual, tras la visita de la alta representante, se han mandado los mensajes claros de que necesitamos proseguir y reanudar la tregua, de que la tregua negociada entre Hamás e Israel no se puede romper, porque necesitamos todavía el intercambio de rehenes y de prisioneros, y de mantener un espacio de paz y de diálogo que permita reanudar el diálogo político para sentar en la mesa de negociación a Israel y a los palestinos para buscar un futuro que asegure a Israel la tranquilidad y la prosperidad y el futuro a los palestinos. Y eso solamente se puede hacer dentro de la perspectiva de dos Estados viviendo back to back y en paz. Por supuesto, hemos hecho también un repaso de otros conflictos: el de la República Democrática del Congo, el de los uigures, el de Birmania. Pero hemos hecho especial hincapié, como digo, en estos dos grandes conflictos en Ucrania y en Oriente Próximo.

En resumen, tenemos un informe a partir del cual podemos empezar a aplicar una agenda de implementación de estas conclusiones que, como insisto, ha intentado integrar no solamente las prioridades del Parlamento Europeo, sino también de la Comisión y del Servicio Europeo de Acción Exterior. Estoy esperando con mucho deseo el debate a continuación sobre esta propuesta.

  Kaja Kallas, Vice-President of the Commission / High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy. – Madam President, honourable Members of the European Parliament, the two reports which provide the basis for our exchange today are comprehensive and an integral part of the European Union's work on foreign policy. I want to thank the rapporteurs, Mr McAllister and Mr Pascual de la Parte and every Member who contributed to these reports.

You have not only looked in depth at what we have already done on foreign policy, but also looked where we could go. And I think this is extremely important. I'm very grateful for your important insight in this regard.

As this is the first time I'm here to discuss this annual reporting by the European Parliament, let me start with a promise – a promise with the support of the European External Action Service to make the best use of the foreign policy toolbox at our disposal and to continue defending the rules-based international order, including on a multilateral level.

This year will be a big year of multilateralism, with the EU-African Union summit and the summit with the Latin American and Caribbean states. But there are three clear challenges that dominate our agenda, which the rapporteurs also pointed out: first, our own security and defence; second, Ukraine and third, the Middle East.

On the first, Europe must take greater responsibility for our own defence. We have done a lot to boost European defence in 2024. However, more work lies ahead in 2025. The white paper on defence – Readiness 2030 – sets out what the European Union can do, including freeing up EUR 800 billion for defence, pooling resources for joint defence projects and working closer with our partners.

The same goes for preparedness. Our new preparedness strategy paves the way for a more resilient Union to face the widest range of crises and threats against our territory and interests. And I count on the European Parliament to contribute to turning these plans and strategies into concrete action. Like my colleague Commissioner Kubilius likes to say, it's all about 'implementation, implementation, implementation'. This includes supporting the necessary financing to get the job done.

With regards to Ukraine, from the earliest days of Russia's full scale war of aggression, the European Union has stood shoulder to shoulder with Ukraine. We have provided EUR 138 billion, including close to EUR 50 billion of military assistance. We have trained more than 72 000 Ukrainian soldiers through the EU Military Assistance Mission to Ukraine.

Our civilian mission, EUAM, has continued to support Ukraine's security, helped to stabilise liberated areas and strengthen accountability for war crimes. We have recently adopted the 16th package of sanctions to put more pressure on Russia. We are now discussing the 17th package and there is already a clear consensus: we need this.

Yesterday marked three weeks since Ukraine agreed to an immediate a 30-day ceasefire. Since then, Putin has stalled, obstructed and evaded efforts for peace. Ukraine has shown it wants peace, but Moscow is not negotiating in good faith. We need to keep supporting Ukraine as much as we can to strengthen their hand at the negotiation table when the time comes.

European leaders have decided to urgently step up efforts to address Ukraine's pressing military needs. I've proposed a way to make that happen: two million rounds of ammunition worth EUR 5 billion. This is also what President Zelensky asked for. We are adamant that no agreement on Ukraine's fate and Europe's security will work without Europe or Ukraine at the table.

In the Middle East, the situation is very grave. Now we must be doing everything to stop this spiral of violence. As I underlined to every interlocutor during my recent visit to the region, the EU's priority is permanent ceasefire and a hostage release deal and the resumption of humanitarian aid and deliveries into Gaza.

We will discuss this in more detail later, but the EU's positive contribution is already very clear. Since October 2023, we have provided over EUR 1 billion for Palestine and UNWRA, both through our humanitarian assistance and through our support to the Palestinian Authority. During the temporary ceasefire, our Border Assistance Mission in Rafah has helped more than 4 000 people across the border, including more than 1 600 requiring medical attention. I regret that this has been stopped now.

We are also committed to raising our concerns at the highest level. Last month, I chaired a frank EU-Israel Association Council. This month we will hold a high-level dialogue with the Palestinian Authority. Diplomatic work must continue. This is why we have also increased our political engagement to sustain the ceasefire agreement between Lebanon and Israel. We have also increased our humanitarian assistance and, in December 2024, our financial support through the European Peace Facility to the Lebanese Armed Forces in the sum of EUR 60 million.

In Syria, where hope is hanging by a thread, we have suspended some sectorial sanctions to give a boost to Syria's nascent economy. We also organised the 9th Brussels Conference on Syria, raising EUR 5.8 billion to support the Syrian people. Work now continues towards the Syrian-led and Syrian-owned inclusive transition process.

These two examples show that the EU can be a relevant security provider across multiple crises in parallel. But none of this important work would be possible without our network of EU delegations around the world. As MEPs, you witness the value added by our delegations firsthand when you go on missions in the field. In the current geopolitical context, I'm committed to strengthening our network of delegations and making them as efficient as possible and as modern as possible, because in times like these, the world needs more Europe, not less.

I count on your support in this crucial exercise, including through securing adequate budget for the remainder of the current MFF and also the next one. These discussions will be very hard.

I also believe that none of the EU's progress on foreign policy would be possible without the European Parliament and the work you do through parliamentary democracy. This is also a key component of our foreign policy. So, thank you, dear Members of the European Parliament, for all the work you do. Thank you for the exchange and I'm also looking forward to hearing your views.

  Michael Gahler, im Namen der PPE-Fraktion. – Frau Präsidentin, Hohe Beauftragte, liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Es ist gut, dass wir eine verbundene Debatte zur Außen-, Sicherheits- und Verteidigungspolitik haben, denn wir sind in einer Weltlage, die wir seit Ende des Zweiten Weltkrieges so nicht erlebt haben – auch gerade als Europäer. Und deswegen ist es so wichtig, dass wir nicht nur hier im Europäischen Parlament zusammenstehen, bei den großen Mainstream-Fraktionen mit großer Mehrheit die Politik unterstützen, die unsere Kommission, die der Rat betreibt gegenüber der Ukraine, sondern auch bei den anderen Fragen.

Deswegen ist es wichtig, dass wir hier auch die Maßnahmen weiterhin unterstützen, die langfristig angelegt sind – das eine geht in Richtung Sicherheit und Verteidigung, was wir dort debattieren, und das andere in der Tat im Hinblick auf die Ukraine. Und deswegen sollten wir auch das ansprechen, was hier an Störfeuer funktioniert oder versucht zu instrumentalisieren und zu aktualisieren in der Art und Weise, wie man hier blockiert. Und da müssen wir den Namen auch nennen: Da ist es leider Ungarn, was hier sowohl die Peace Facility blockiert in der Auszahlung, aber auch den Beginn des ersten Clusters der Verhandlungen mit der Ukraine.

Und da sage ich ganz deutlich: Der ungarische Ministerpräsident dient nicht der ungarischen Minderheit in der Ukraine, wenn das Ergebnis wäre, dass diese Menschen wieder unter russische Kontrolle kämen. Es ist eine Schande, wie sich diese Regierung hier verhält. Und ich bin auch überzeugt, dass die Mehrheit der Ungarn diesen unverantwortlichen Kurs nicht unterstützen. Wir werden Mittel und Wege finden, um hier dafür zu sorgen, dass diese Politik keine Blockade auf die Dauer bewerkstelligen kann.

  Sven Mikser, on behalf of the S&D Group. – Madam President, High Representative, colleagues, Europe's security situation obviously is extremely serious. Russia's aggression against Ukraine has brought large‑scale conventional war back to our continent and its outcome, if negative, threatens to overthrow the international rules‑based order altogether.

Certain first steps by the Trump administration in the US have further exacerbated this already dire situation and, in this situation, Europe will have to emerge as an anchor of stability in our immediate neighbourhood as well as a defender of the rules‑based order globally. For this to happen, two things are needed.

First, the EU will have to unwaveringly support and uphold international law, support the inviolability of international borders, sovereignty and territorial integrity of states, but also accountability for war crimes and crimes against humanity everywhere, from Russia to Palestine.

Secondly, we have to back up our principal positions by real capabilities. That involves real money. On the level of Member States, we simply have to get rid of these huge discrepancies when it comes to defence spending and the military support for Ukraine. On the EU level, it means providing adequate budgetary means for all the noble instruments we have created for supporting our industries and filling the existing capability gaps. And obviously, real money is also needed if we want to fill some most critical gaps left by the US withdrawal from the international cooperation.

Finally, we need to take a holistic approach to security, making sure that while we rightly focus on external threats, we do not leave our own societies more vulnerable to rising illiberal and populist sentiment on our continent.

  Kinga Gál, a PfE képviselőcsoport nevében. – Tisztelt Elnök Asszony! Ijesztő, hogy az EU egyfajta háborús pszichózist propagál. Ebben a szellemben született a közös kül- és biztonságpolitikáról szóló éves jelentés is, ami igencsak elfogult szövegnek sikerült. Ha ezzel a külpolitikai stratégiával haladunk előre, akkor nem csoda, hogy az Unió magára marad az új geopolitikai erőtérben. Az uniónak a pánikkeltés helyett sokkal inkább a béketeremtő diplomácia és az európai védelempolitika megerősítésén, valamint a polgárok felé közvetített intézményi hitelesség kiépítésén kellene dolgoznia.

Az Európai Bizottság eszkalációs narratívát gyárt. Legújabb készenléti stratégia javaslata, hogy az európai polgárok halmozzanak fel 72 órára elegendő vészhelyzeti tartalékot, félelmet kelt, azt az üzenetet közvetíti, hogy a háború eszkalálódik, a katasztrófa bármikor bekövetkezhet, folyamatos veszélyérzetet keltve. Pedig az EU-ban nincs háború, és reméljük, nem is lesz.

Az Uniónak el kellene ismernie az amerikai vezetés tűzszünet és béke irányába tett erőfeszítéseit, hogy véget érjen végre a pusztítás Ukrajnában. Európának a béke hangján kell szólnia, hiszen békeprojektként jött létre, nem működhet katalizátorként háborús gépezetben.

A jelentés elfogadhatatlan nyomást gyakorol Magyarországra, amiért nem támogatjuk a fegyverszállítást Ukrajnába. A szöveg támadja a miniszterelnök békemisszióját, holott azóta számos akkori kijelentése beigazolódott. Őszintén kéne beszélni arról is, hogy mivel jár a választóknak, az európai polgárok számára a csatlakozása Ukrajnának a mezőgazdaság, a biztonság, a munkaerőpiac terén?

  Adam Bielan, on behalf of the ECR Group. – Madam President, dear High Representative, both reports rightly acknowledge the increasingly dangerous strategic environment Europe faces today.

Russia's aggression against Ukraine continues. New hybrid threats are emerging and our neighbourhood remains volatile. In this context, the European Union must be firm, united and realistic in how it responds.

This year's CFSP and CSDP reports reflect many of my group's priorities. They strongly condemn Russia's war of aggression and express unwavering support for Ukraine's sovereignty and Euro-Atlantic future, and adopt a firm stance on Iran's destabilising actions.

We also welcome the clear recognition of NATO as the cornerstone of European security, and the emphasis of on strengthening transatlantic cooperation. We particularly support the call to reinforce EU-NATO coordination, improve military mobility, particularly in frontline states like Poland, and bolster hybrid defence while encouraging defence spending above 2 % of GDP.

However, there are serious concerns. Once again, we see proposals to abandon unanimity in foreign defence policy. We firmly believe that these decisions must remain in the hands of sovereign Member States, not be centralised in Brussels. We also caution against the push for a fully-fledged defence union and the vague propulsion of strategic autonomy, which risks duplicating NATO structures and distracting us from our most important ally, the United States.

And that is why we cannot support these reports. European security must be based on responsibility, strong NATO cooperation and clear strategic vision.

  Urmas Paet, on behalf of the Renew Group. – Madam President, dear High Representative Kaja Kallas, we have Russian war against Ukraine, hybrid war against Europe, strong turbulence in the relations between traditional allies. What else needs to happen for Europe to finally put itself together and to contribute adequately to its own defence, to the realisation of its international potential and to the development of its own economic space?

It is human to start acting only when some big mess is already in the offing. But Europe as a whole must be wiser, have more foresight and not simply wait for another catastrophe. Europe is capable of much more. But for this to happen, diplomacy, defence capability, development cooperation and international trade must all go hand in hand.

We must finally abandon the demand for consensus in foreign and security policy, because it does not work in times of crisis. We must build strong and functioning relations with our allies from Great Britain and Norway to Japan, Korea, Canada and others. Member States that have come under unfair political attacks, such as Denmark, must be strongly supported.

Europe is potentially the strongest power in the world and at the same time the kindest power.

  Marc Botenga, on behalf of The Left Group. – Madam President, dear colleagues, High Representative, first of all, you're the minister of foreign affairs – a little bit – of the European Union. You know that the International Criminal Court asked for the arrest of Israeli leaders, yet you go to Israel and your first words are: 'We are very good partners.'

Ms High Representative, what 'very good partners'? In crime, in genocide, in ethnic cleansing? These words are a shame for the European Union. They should never be uttered again.

Ensuite, soyons clairs: ici, avec l’Union européenne, nous sommes en train de créer un monde plus dangereux. Pourquoi? Parce que nos actes ne suivent pas nos paroles.

Nous parlons souvent des droits des enfants, mais comment en parler quand, en même temps, nous soutenons Israël, qui kidnappe chaque année des centaines d’enfants palestiniens? Comment parler de démocratie quand nous n’avons pas un mot de critique par rapport à une élection présidentielle au Rwanda qui voit le président se faire élire avec plus de 99 % des voix? Comment parler de justice quand nous nous taisons sur l’Arabie saoudite, qui exécute des centaines de prisonniers? Comment parler de souveraineté quand nous n’osons pas dénoncer l’illégalité de la présence américaine en Syrie, pas plus que l’illégalité de la présence israélienne au Liban et en Syrie? Comment, enfin, parler de paix quand nos pays ont eux-mêmes envahi de nombreux pays africains ou arabes?

Nous parlons d’un monde fondé sur des règles, mais en réalité nous sommes en train de saper tout le droit international, ce qui, non content d’être absolument inacceptable, est dangereux pour nos citoyens. En effet, comment pouvons-nous demander aux autres pays de respecter les règles quand nous-mêmes nous les violons ou acceptons leur violation par nos alliés, parce que, tout compte fait, ils garantissent des profits à nos multinationales?

C’est inacceptable! L’Union européenne a besoin de fondamentalement changer de politique étrangère pour une politique de paix et de justice dans le monde.

  Станислав Стоянов, от името на групата ESN. – Г-жо Председател, визията за европейската външна политика, представена в доклада за 2024 г., е погрешна. Тя е остаряла, небалансирана и несвързана с интересите на гражданите на Европейския съюз.

Докладът ни връща във времената на Студената война, когато като пренебрегва сложната геополитическа динамика на съвременния свят, обсебеността от Русия и Китай подхранва ненужна ескалация, измествайки фокуса и ресурсите от жизненоважни въпроси като икономическата стабилност и енергийната сигурност. Той изисква неограничена военна подкрепа за Украйна, държава извън Европейския съюз и извън НАТО, като същевременно пренебрегва бремето върху европейските данъкоплатци. Още по-лошо, докладът тласка Европейския съюз към ролята на глобален полицай, призовавайки за намеса в региони като Тихият океан.

Ние отхвърляме този подход. Европейският съюз трябва да даде приоритет на прагматичното сътрудничество, а не на поляризацията. Съюзът трябва да защитава дипломацията, а не ескалацията и безкрайната война. Европейският съюз е създаден като проект за мир. Време е външната му политика да отрази това.

  Rasa Juknevičienė (PPE). – Madam President, dear colleagues, populists are manipulating peace and saying that the EU should not take on defence issues. On the contrary, precisely to bring lasting peace to the European continent, we need a strong European defence while maintaining the transatlantic bond.

The democratic world is much stronger than Putin's Russia. We could have already won if the aid to Ukraine had been sufficient when the Ukrainians pushed the Russians out of Kherson and Kharkiv, but then there was a fear of Putin's blackmail and fear to defeat Putin.

Now, Trump has fragmented the power of democracies, and we have a much more complicated situation.

What do we need? First, common threat perception in Member States. Second, solidarity and trust – first of all, the ability to implement ReArm EU in solidarity and help Ukraine with this instrument. Third, geopolitical thinking. Despite being from the Baltics, I would like to particularly emphasise the importance of the Black Sea region for European security. Fourth, the ability to include non-EU countries in the defence format: Great Britain, Norway, Canada, Türkiye.

Putin helped the EU understand the importance of security. Maybe Trump will help the EU regain self-confidence to create a strong European defence for peace.

  Tobias Cremer (S&D). – Madam President, dear colleagues, we have to be crystal clear. Europe is facing today the greatest geopolitical challenge in a generation. According to the latest assessment of Germany's security services, Russia will be in a position to attack NATO and EU territory by the end of this decade. I myself received this latest report during a trip to Washington DC last week, and while the tone of the discussions was friendlier, it was no less sobering in terms of content.

For the first time in 80 years, we have to confront this threat without the certainty of America doing the heavy lifting for us. And this new reality of Russian aggression and American retreat requires a fundamental reassessment of our strategic priorities. This is the aim of the CSDP, but this report is also the chance to develop a positive and forward looking strategic vision of the Europe we want to live in, in the Europe we want to defend. Because here in Europe, security has never been just about military strength. Our security is built on social cohesion, economic fairness and solidarity between Member States just as much as it is built on military progress. This is the foundation of our resilience and the true source of our soft power. And that's why defence spending must always go hand in hand with investment in infrastructure, competitiveness and the social fabric of our societies.

Colleagues, at this geopolitical turning point, Europeans rightly expect their governments and the EU to protect their physical safety, but they also expect us to invest in a future that is worth defending.

  António Tânger Corrêa (PfE). – Madam President, High Representative, dear colleagues, well, as the shadow rapporteur for the Patriots for Europe, I feel compelled to express a fundamental concern. This is not a political disagreement, but a procedural and democratic failure.

Every single amendment, Mr McAllister, that I proposed was rejected without debate, without engagement. Not because they were extreme, but because they came from the wrong family. I hope it is not nothing personal against me, of course.

So, I give you some examples. The persecution of Christians all over the world, which is probably the group more persecuted these days. The Balkans who live a very sensitive situation right now, mainly in Bosnia, where the Islamisation is in full process. EU funds and human rights violations, I mean, demanding EU funding must never support regimes or organisations to violate basic freedoms and that's not what's happening.

So, this has been a report with a lack of democracy, a lack of participation from everybody. Mr McAllister, you are not marginalising me. You are marginalising millions of European citizens who voted for us, for the parties who composed the Patriots for Europe in this Parliament. This Parliament is supposed to be the House of democracy, and my person, the votes on me are the same as the votes on anybody else in this House.

  Alberico Gambino (ECR). – Signora Presidente, signora Alta rappresentante, onorevoli colleghi, questa relazione ci impone una riflessione: vogliamo un'Europa forte o solo più burocratica?

La cooperazione è necessaria, ma non può sacrificare la sovranità degli Stati membri. L'accordo con l'Albania, ad esempio, sui rimpatri è qualcosa di concreto; contrastare l'immigrazione illegale si può, servono coraggio e pragmatismo. La Commissione ha confermato che è pienamente conforme al diritto dell'Unione. Basta ideologie, servono soluzioni concrete.

Sostenere l'Ucraina è doveroso ma non dimentichiamo l'obiettivo: costruire una pace giusta e duratura, non alimentare un conflitto senza fine.

E basta con l'illusione di un'Europa alternativa alla NATO, o in contrapposizione agli Stati Uniti: l'Occidente si difende insieme, con equilibrio e una visione comune.

L'Europa torni ad essere protagonista senza complessi, e senza rinunciare alla propria identità.

  Bart Groothuis (Renew). – Madam President, colleagues, dear Vice-President/High Representative, the biggest victim of the past months of Trump being in office is, of course, Russia.

For the past 108 years, generations of Russians have been told that everything wrong in Russian society is to blame on the United States. It's the fault of the Americans. But now that Russia has gloriously won the second Cold War and increasingly has an ally in Washington, Russia needs a new enemy. And you and I, dear Commissioner, know what enemy that's going to be. It will be Europe.

So we need to rebuild deterrence comparable to NATO's deterrence in the 1980s, re-arm Europe, not individually but collectively with the friends we have in Norway, the United Kingdom and even Canada.

But what is not yet in today's reports, and what should be, is the acknowledgement that the United States also competed with Russia in Africa, in the Global South, between its intelligence services, in space, on military bases, etc. Europe should now take on that effort too or the autocratic order will grow.

So I urge you to vote in favour of the defence report I had the honour of co-negotiating, but this is merely the beginning.

  Hannah Neumann (Verts/ALE). – Madam President, colleagues, what a time to shape European foreign policy. Russia and China are launching one hybrid attack after another on the one side, the US Government preoccupied with weakening us through trade wars and bullying on the other – both trying to tear European unity apart. And here we stand between a rock and a hard place, or we finally wake up and become a power of our own.

We hold all the cards, dear colleagues: the people, the money, the skills. We are seen as the reliable, the predictable partners. So many governments, so many individuals are waiting for us to rise to the challenge. So let us stand united – united in our commitment to the values this Union is built upon: democracy, international law and the burning desire for freedom.

But what credibility do we have if we only help the most vulnerable when their governments accept forced returns? When the same people that demand the ICC to act more forcefully against Putin attack it over its arrest warrants against Netanyahu? When the Commission deepens security cooperation with Türkiye while Erdoğan jails his main opponent?

Like many, dear colleagues, I am ready to defend this Union with weapons if need be. Not the territorial notion, but the vision of its founding fathers and mothers, the values enshrined in the first articles of the Lisbon Treaty: freedom, justice, democracy.

Dear colleagues, let's not lose sight of what we are here to protect in the days, weeks and years to come.

  Özlem Demirel (The Left). – Frau Präsidentin! Es war die europäische Geschichte, die uns lehrte, was Krieg bedeutet. Unser kollektives Gedächtnis lehrte uns, dass der Weg zu Sicherheit und Frieden gegenseitige Abrüstung, Entspannungspolitik und Diplomatie ist. Die EU nannte sich mal eine Diplomatiemacht, doch das Wort Diplomatie erscheint nur noch beiläufig.

Kollegen, Sie reden nur noch von Aufrüstung und Kriegstüchtigkeit – auch der Bericht über die Gemeinsame Außen- und Sicherheitspolitik folgt dieser Logik. Für Waffenschmieden und den Krieg mobilisieren Sie in einem rasanten Tempo Milliarden, während bei der Armutsbekämpfung, für Umweltschutz oder die Daseinsvorsorge vorgeblich kein Geld da ist. Sie sagen, zum Schutze der Demokratie müsse man aufrüsten, doch im Zuge der weltweiten Aufrüstung geraten liberale Freiheiten immer weiter unter Druck. Autokraten bleiben Ihre Premiumpartner, solange sie Ihren geopolitischen Interessen entsprechen, Ihnen ihre Märkte öffnen und Ressourcen zugänglich machen.

Diese Doppelmoral schadet – so verlieren Sie nicht nur Glaubwürdigkeit im Ausland, sondern auch hier. Einhergehend mit dem Militarismus erstarkt auch der Rechtspopulismus und Nationalismus – eine fatale Entwicklung. Militarismus ist auch schädlich für das Klima. Jetzt wollen Sie auch im Raumfahrtprogramm der EU militarisieren. An Universitäten wollen Sie jetzt quasi Forschungseinrichtungen für Kriegsfähigkeit schaffen.

Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen, wir verteidigen die Lehren, unser kollektives Gedächtnis. Wir sagen Nein zu diesem total falschen Kurs der EU. Wir brauchen Frieden und Diplomatie, nicht Kriegstüchtigkeit.

  Marcin Sypniewski (ESN). – Pani Przewodnicząca! Można dostrzec powtórkę z historii. Cesarstwo Rzymskie upadło przez kryzys moralny, ekonomiczny i inwazję barbarzyńców. I dzisiaj Europa popełnia te same błędy. Europa jest zagrożona, bo przez lata wierzyliśmy w koniec historii i wyższość naszego modelu. Porzuciliśmy realną politykę, rozbroiliśmy się i otworzyliśmy drzwi dla masowej migracji. I ta migracja dzisiaj rozsadza naszą cywilizację od środka. Dlatego ochrona granic to jest najwyższy priorytet. Mówimy tutaj o granicach zewnętrznych Unii Europejskiej, a przede wszystkim, z mojej perspektywy, o zaporze skutecznej, realnej zaporze na wschodzie.

Wsparcie w tym zakresie Polski to jest interes Unii Europejskiej. Jest to konieczność wobec hybrydowych ataków Łukaszenki i Putina na nasz kraj, a tym samym na Unię Europejską. Sami pod sobą kopiemy dołki. Musimy wzmacniać nasz przemysł, bezpieczeństwo energetyczne, porzucić ideologię Zielonego Ładu, żebyśmy byli też mocni gospodarczo. I mówimy też stanowcze „nie” dla superpaństwa europejskiego. Przeciwko temu protestujemy. Europa suwerennych narodów to przyszłość Europy.

  Monika Beňová (NI). – Vážená pani predsedajúca, chápem dôvody, pre ktoré je potrebné obnoviť vojenské kapacity Európy, a najmä po politickom rozhodnutí, že všetku kľúčovú vojenskú techniku poskytneme Ukrajine.

Nedávne dáta Eurobarometra však ukazujú znepokojujúcu realitu. Viac ako jedna tretina našich občanov očakáva zhoršenie kvality života v dôsledku narastajúcej krízy životných nákladov. Ako dlho si môžeme dovoliť, aby toto pokračovalo, keď teraz prichádza návrh, že potrebujeme takmer 800 miliárd, ktoré budeme dávať na obranu? Členské štáty momentálne konsolidujú svoje rozpočty a častokrát dochádza k ostrej kritike zo strany opozičných strán, vidíme to aj na Slovensku, napriek tomu, že tá konsolidácia je nevyhnutná. Je preto mimoriadne znepokojujúce, a dokonca nebezpečné riskovať vznik finančnej krízy na úkor bežných Európanov len preto, aby profitovali vojenské spoločnosti a prehlbovala sa vojenská dilema spôsobená náhlym nárastom vojenských kapacít.

Vždy som vystupovala proti globálnej militarizácii. EÚ musí ostať verná svojim základom a svojej základnej identite, diplomatickej sile a mieru.

  Łukasz Kohut (PPE). – Pani Przewodnicząca! Pani Komisarz! Jesteśmy tutaj dla obywateli. Obywatele w tych niestabilnych czasach muszą czuć, że instytucje europejskie działają sprawnie i że Unia się rozwija. Ludzi naprawdę nie interesuje konflikt polityczny między Parlamentem, Radą czy Komisją Europejską. Ludzi interesuje konkret, bezpieczeństwo i rozwój.

I tak w tych trudnych czasach Islandia rozważa wznowienie negocjacji dotyczących akcesji do Unii Europejskiej. Trzymamy kciuki za Islandię. Bardzo ciekawie jest także w Norwegii. Oslo od lat uczestniczy w Europejskim Funduszu Obronnym czy w PESCO, a także hojnie wspiera Ukrainę i nakłada sankcje na Rosję. Nie ma bliższego sojusznika Unii w polityce bezpieczeństwa od Norwegii. Doceńmy to i życzmy sobie, aby nastroje prointegracyjne w Norwegii rosły w siłę.

You may say that I am a dreamer. Ale kto by jeszcze trzy lata temu przypuszczał, że Szwecja i Finlandia będą w NATO? Więc nie dajmy sobie wmówić prawicowym populistom i rosyjskim trollom, że my, Europejczycy, jesteśmy gorsi. Nie jesteśmy. My nie musimy czynić Europy ponownie wielką. Europa jest wielka. Tylko mniej biurokracji, więcej deregulacji, szybkie działania w sprawie Węgier, Orbana, artykuł 7 i unifikacja polityki obronnej w całej Unii Europejskiej. Do przodu Europo!

  Γιάννης Μανιάτης (S&D). – Κυρία Πρόεδρε, αγαπητοί συνάδελφοι, η Ευρώπη βρίσκεται αντιμέτωπη με σημαντικές γεωπολιτικές προκλήσεις. Οι προτεραιότητες της νέας αμερικανικής κυβέρνησης διαφέρουν σημαντικά από αυτές της Ευρώπης. Οι δύο εκθέσεις του Κοινοβουλίου για την εξωτερική πολιτική, την ασφάλεια και την άμυνα τεκμηριώνουν την ανάγκη, σε αυτό το νέο και ασταθές περιβάλλον, η Ένωση να έχει ισχυρή παρουσία. Με μια αυτόνομη εξωτερική πολιτική και με ολοκληρωμένη στρατηγική τόσο για τη Μεσόγειο όσο και για τη Μέση Ανατολή. Με ισχυρή αποτρεπτική παρουσία, ώστε να είναι ικανή να προστατεύσει τα κράτη μέλη της από αυταρχικούς ηγέτες με αυτοκρατορικούς αναθεωρητισμούς, τόσο στα ανατολικά σύνορα και την περιοχή της Βαλτικής όσο και στην περιοχή της Ανατολικής Μεσογείου. Με κοινά εξοπλιστικά προγράμματα για την ενίσχυση της ευρωπαϊκής αμυντικής βιομηχανίας σε όλα τα κράτη μέλη που θα χρηματοδοτηθούν με φρέσκο ευρωπαϊκό χρήμα. Όχι δάνεια που επιβαρύνουν τους εθνικούς προϋπολογισμούς. Όχι περικοπές στο Ταμείο Συνοχής που υπονομεύουν τις κοινωνικές μας αντοχές. Μια Ευρώπη-πυλώνας σταθερότητας σε έναν όλο και πιο ασταθή κόσμο.

  Pierre-Romain Thionnet (PfE). – Madame la Présidente, le contexte international que nous vivons est en pleine recomposition. Les nations européennes n’ont plus le droit à la faiblesse et à la naïveté. Au-delà du nécessaire réarmement militaire que chaque État doit fournir, c’est à un réarmement moral que nous devons procéder.

On le sait, le XXIe siècle ne sera pas seulement le siècle de la puissance, il sera aussi celui de l’identité, celui de la capacité à défendre ce que nous sommes, ce en quoi nous croyons. Pour être crédible sur la scène internationale, l’Europe ne doit pas prêter le flanc à des déstabilisations internes. Elle doit éviter à tout prix de dire ou d’agir de telle manière à offrir à nos adversaires et compétiteurs l’occasion de nous affaiblir et de nous discréditer.

C’est pourquoi, chers collègues, je veux dénoncer ici les profondes atteintes à la démocratie opérées par nos propres nations, ici, au cœur du continent qui a donné vie à la démocratie. Après la Roumanie, c’est la France qui a décidé hier de priver ses citoyens de leur liberté de vote en éliminant la principale candidate à l’élection présidentielle. Je crains, chers collègues, que cette dérive antidémocratique n’entache gravement notre réputation, et donc notre capacité à faire entendre notre voix de liberté dans le monde.

  Rihards Kols (ECR). – Madam President, dear colleagues, the EU's credibility as a geopolitical actor depends on three things: coherence, speed and resolve.

First, we must strengthen the EU's External Action Service with the political weight, intelligence capabilities and coordination tools needed to act, not just react.

Second, conditionality must not be optional. Every euro, every agreement – from trade to development aid – must reinforce our strategic goals and core values. No more partnerships à la carte.

Third, we must expand trade agreements with like‑minded partners, reducing dependency on systematic rivals.

And finally, enlargement. The process must move faster with clear criteria, yes, but without letting internal blockers sabotage the will of candidate countries determined to join our Union. Power unused is power lost.

And, Madam High Representative, please break this curse that for seven years in a row, the High Representative hasn't paid respect in person the CFSP conferences. That is a disgrace.

  Hilde Vautmans (Renew). – Voorzitter, collega’s, hoge vertegenwoordiger, alle brandhaarden in de wereld hebben één iets gemeenschappelijk: Europa zit niet mee aan tafel als er over vrede wordt gesproken. Europa speelt niet mee, niet in Oekraïne, niet in het Midden-Oosten.

Wat de Europese buitenlandmachine nu nodig heeft, is een geopolitieke motor. Hoe moet die motor er dan uitzien? Wel, drie dingen: eerst en vooral moet onze voet van de rempedaal af. Schaf de unanimiteitsregel af. Ten tweede: creëer die eengemaakte defensiemarkt. Verplicht mensen om te investeren in Europese goederen, los van Amerika. Ten derde: integreer onze Europese diplomatie in die Europese defensie, zodat onze soft power steunt op geloofwaardige afschrikking.

Het debat over wat ons Europees buitenlands beleid nodig heeft, gaat niet over thema’s, noch over regels. Het moet gaan over het systeem, over het oplossen van de systeemfouten die veto’s belonen en actie voorkomen. Eigenlijk is het heel eenvoudig. In de jaren negentig hebben we één gemeenschappelijke markt gecreëerd voor goederen, personen en diensten. Laten we vandaag ook één veiligheids- en defensiebeleid in Europa tot stand brengen.

  Jaume Asens Llodrà (Verts/ALE). – Señora presidenta, señora Kallas, su discurso del miedo —los búnkeres, los kits de supervivencia en caso de guerra— es un despropósito. Ustedes no solo nos toman el pelo sino que quieren manipularnos e inocularnos miedo para anestesiar nuestras conciencias, porque saben que una sociedad con miedo, en estado de shock, es una sociedad que puede aceptar cualquier recorte, resignada, que puede firmar ese cheque en blanco de 800 000 millones de euros para el rearme masivo, que se queda en casa y no sale a la calle a protestar.

Pero nuestra obligación es quitarle el miedo a la ciudadanía y recordarle que de lo único de lo que debemos tener miedo es del propio miedo, como decía Roosevelt en la Gran Depresión. Porque ahí donde hay miedo, no hay esperanza, ni libertad, ni conciencia social. Hay egoísmo, odio, nacionalismo, racismo, fascismo y extrema derecha.

Lo que necesitamos, señora Kallas, no es miedo, sino una reflexión serena sobre el modelo de seguridad. Necesitamos información, no propaganda. Necesitamos una economía social, no de guerra. Un kit de derechos, no de recortes. Casas para vivir, no búnkeres.

  Lynn Boylan (The Left). – A Uachtaráin, I'd like to welcome VP Kallas here today, given her notable absence at recent debates. And today I want to compare what Israel says with what Israel does, seeing as the Commission is unable to make that distinction.

Israel claims it facilitates humanitarian aid entering Gaza. Yet all entry points into Gaza are closed for cargo since early March. At the border, food is rotting, medicine is expiring and vital medical equipment is trapped. Israel originally denied bombing the Al-Ahli Arab Hospital. It has now attacked all hospitals in Gaza. Israel denies targeting journalists, yet they've killed over 200 journalists in Gaza. Israel denies killing humanitarian workers, yet they've murdered 15 paramedics and aid workers one by one and buried them in a shallow grave, some of them with their hands bound.

Under the EU's watch, Israel has normalised genocide and contempt for international law. When will the EU find its humanity and stand up to this rogue state. Sanction Israel, free Palestine!

  Hans Neuhoff (ESN). – Frau Präsidentin! Die Außen- und Sicherheitspolitik der Union ist ein Wirrwarr aus verzerrter Wahrnehmung und moralischer Verstiegenheit. Der Islamismus ist den Berichterstattern bei der EVP nicht eine Silbe wert. In Deutschland müssen Weihnachtsmärkte, Karnevalsumzüge, Bahnhöfe vor islamistischen Gewalttätern geschützt werden, nicht vor russischen Infanteristen. Was macht die EU? Sie finanziert ein Taliban-Emirat in Syrien.

Russland ist nicht der Feind Europas. Russland ist ein defensives Imperium, das sich durch die Erweiterung der NATO bis in den Donbass und den Südkaukasus existenziell bedroht sieht. Wer das nicht versteht und zum Heiligen Krieg gegen Russland rüstet, der führt uns ins Verderben.

Ceterum censeo: Die ESN-Fraktion lehnt die Mitgliedschaft der Ukraine in der NATO und in der EU ab. Die Zukunft der Ukraine kann allein in ihrer Rückkehr zur Neutralität bestehen.

  Francisco José Millán Mon (PPE). – Señora presidenta, yo felicito, en primer lugar, a los ponentes por sus completos informes, que ofrecen un diagnóstico de nuestra política exterior y de seguridad y que trazan también una hoja de ruta a seguir. Vivimos en un nuevo escenario global marcado por una profunda incertidumbre. Quiero detenerme en tres ideas breves.

En primer lugar, debemos continuar nuestro firme apoyo a Ucrania. Necesitamos la paz, pero tiene que ser una paz justa y duradera. Rusia es el agresor, y ahora pone todos los obstáculos para la paz. No negocia con buena fe, como acaba de advertir la alta representante.

En segundo lugar, en el contexto mundial actual es imprescindible reforzar la defensa europea, como piden nuestros ciudadanos según el último Eurobarómetro. Esto requiere aumentar el gasto en defensa e incrementar nuestras capacidades, mejorar la estandarización y la coordinación, reforzar nuestra base industrial y reducir dependencias.

En tercer lugar, en un mundo tan convulso, debemos intentar preservar el vínculo transatlántico sustentado en una profundísima integración de nuestras economías y en valores también comunes. Pero también tenemos que diversificar nuestras relaciones, como por ejemplo ahora profundizándolas con Mercosur.

Este es el momento de tomar decisiones en materia de política exterior y, en especial, de defensa.

  Nacho Sánchez Amor (S&D). – Señora presidenta, intentaré concentrar en un minuto tres asuntos.

En primer lugar, una falta de ajuste entre nuestras expectativas en política exterior y los medios que empleamos. Hay una crónica infrafinanciación del Servicio Europeo de Acción Exterior pero, al mismo tiempo, hay una crónica inflación de las expectativas. A usted todos le pedimos de todo y hay que preocuparse para que, en el nuevo marco financiero, no siga esa situación: que haya que mendigar cada pocos meses en la Comisión un refuerzo financiero.

En segundo lugar, su obligación es siempre tratar de acordar a veintisiete, de tener a todos a bordo. Ese es su papel. Pero, si no se consigue en un plazo razonable para llegar a tiempo a las crisis, hay que normalizar trabajar a veintiséis o a veinticinco. No insisto en la idea del diputado Gahler. Cualquier medida salvo seguir dando una impresión de parálisis o de llegar tarde.

En tercer lugar, los dobles estándares son el cáncer de nuestra política exterior. Y ya sé que no siempre es posible conseguir la unanimidad pero, usted, con sus declaraciones públicas, sí puede tratar de limitar el daño que nos hace aparecer ante el mundo en unos casos alzando mucho la voz y, en otros casos, siendo muy tímidos.

  Αφροδίτη Λατινοπούλου (PfE). – Κυρία Πρόεδρε, αγαπητοί συνάδελφοι, δεν μπορεί να υπάρξει καμία απολύτως συζήτηση για κοινή εξωτερική πολιτική και φυσικά για πολιτική ασφαλείας και άμυνας αν δεν ξεκαθαριστούν οι βασικές διαφορές μας. Η Τουρκία είναι φίλη ή εχθρός της Ευρωπαϊκής Ένωσης; Για εμάς δεν υπάρχει δίλημμα, γιατί πολύ απλά και ξεκάθαρα είναι εχθρός της χώρας μου αλλά και της Ευρωπαϊκής Ένωσης, ειδικά όταν κατέχει παράνομα για 51 χρόνια το 38 % της Κύπρου. Συμφωνούμε όλοι σε αυτό; Πώς θα υπάρξει λοιπόν ενιαία πολιτική ασφαλείας αν δεν ξεκαθαρίζονται τα σύνορα της Ευρωπαϊκής Ένωσης; Δηλαδή, εάν υπάρξει θερμό επεισόδιο Ελλάδας-Τουρκίας ή Τουρκίας-Κύπρου, λόγου χάρη, θα επέμβει ο ευρωπαϊκός στρατός υπέρ της Ελλάδας ή της Κύπρου, χωρίς ναι μεν και αστερίσκους;

Τα οπλικά συστήματα ενός ευρωπαϊκού στρατού θα πρέπει να διασφαλιστεί πως θα φτιάχνονται αποκλειστικά εντός της Ευρωπαϊκής Ένωσης, με συμμετοχή όλων των κρατών μελών. Και φυσικά η Τουρκία θα πρέπει να αποκλειστεί από οποιοδήποτε ευρωπαϊκό πρόγραμμα. Αν αυτά δεν εξασφαλίζονται ως ελάχιστες προϋποθέσεις, τότε αυτή η συζήτηση εδώ δεν έχει πραγματικά το παραμικρό νόημα. Η Κύπρος είναι Ελλάδα και τα σύνορα της Ελλάδας είναι το νοτιότερο άκρο της Ευρωπαϊκής Ένωσης. Απλά, λιτά και ξεκάθαρα.

  Nathalie Loiseau (Renew). – Madame la Présidente, je n’ai qu’une minute et je n’irai pas par quatre chemins. Si l’Europe veut rester en paix, il n’y a qu’une voie: nous devons soutenir l’Ukraine militairement, massivement et immédiatement. Hélas, l’heure de la paix n’a pas encore sonné en Ukraine. Les cessez-le-feu boiteux proposés par Washington n’ont fait qu’enhardir Vladimir Poutine.

Si nous voulons une paix juste et durable, nous devons permettre à Kiev de négocier en position de force. Il nous faut bien sûr renforcer notre défense européenne face à la menace russe, mais nous devons aussi amoindrir cette menace en soutenant mieux la résistance ukrainienne contre la Russie, et le faire vite.

Que le Conseil européen du 20 mars, chère Madame la Haute Représentante, ait échoué à s’accorder sur un surcroît d’aide militaire à l’Ukraine est une erreur historique. Affaiblir la Russie aujourd’hui en Ukraine est beaucoup plus efficace et moins coûteux que de se défendre demain contre une menace russe décuplée.

Enfin, cessons de commenter les dernières saillies de Donald Trump. Nous ne pouvons plus compter sur Washington, qui négocie sans nous et mal. L’Ukraine et le reste du monde se demandent si nous sommes enfin devenus adultes, enfin capables d’aider nos alliés seuls. Si nous en donnons la preuve, nous serons pris au sérieux; si nous échouons, plus personne ne comptera sur nous.

  Hanna Gedin (The Left). – Fru talman! Förra veckan avrättades 15 sjukvårdare och räddningsarbetare av israeliska styrkor. "Vi gräver upp dem i sina uniformer med handskarna på. De var här för att rädda liv. Istället hamnar de i en massgrav", berättar en FN-chef.

Samtidigt som detta hände åkte Sveriges utrikesminister Maria Malmer Stenergard till Israel på en ren propagandaresa. Och Israels utrikesminister hyllade naturligtvis besöket och prisade Sverige för att ha brutit sitt stöd till livsviktiga UNRWA. Det är en ofattbar skam.

Utrikesminister Maria Malmer Stenergard! Kommissionär Kallas! Ni har makten att stoppa folkmordet. Ni har en skyldighet att stå upp för internationell rätt. Er flathet mot den brutala israeliska regimen kommer att gå till historien som ett exempellöst svek.

  Salvatore De Meo (PPE). – Signora Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, in un contesto geopolitico sempre più instabile la sicurezza e la difesa comune non sono un'opzione, ma una scelta obbligata.

L'Europa ha bisogno di una capacità di deterrenza credibile, che mostri al mondo un'Unione forte, coesa e capace di proteggere i propri cittadini, i propri interessi e i propri valori.

Per questo dobbiamo rafforzare il pilastro europeo all'interno della NATO, con cui dobbiamo essere in sinergia e non in competizione, assumendoci la nostra parte di responsabilità e rendendo l'Alleanza atlantica e l'Occidente tutto ancora più forte.

Ma è fondamentale anche un cambio di percezione culturale, perché quando parliamo di difesa i cittadini non vanno spaventati, né possiamo pensare solo alla dimensione militare.

Oggi difesa significa anche cibersicurezza, tutela delle infrastrutture critiche, delle rotte commerciali, dell'approvvigionamento energetico; significa controllo dell'immigrazione irregolare e supporto nelle attività di protezione civile.

La sicurezza non è un costo. Investire nella difesa non significa fare la guerra, ma è il presupposto della nostra stabilità sociale ed economica, della nostra libertà, della nostra credibilità internazionale.

O diventiamo attori globali, o continueremo a essere solo spettatori di decisioni altrui.

  Hana Jalloul Muro (S&D). – Señora presidenta, señora Kallas, señorías, la Unión Europea se encuentra ante una encrucijada geopolítica que exige claridad estratégica. La guerra de agresión rusa sigue socavando el orden europeo mientras la rivalidad global se intensifica. Incluso alianzas históricas como la transatlántica son inestables. Ya no basta con proclamar principios, debemos dotarlos de fuerza política y coherencia exterior.

En Oriente Próximo la crisis humanitaria, con la pérdida de decenas de miles de vidas y la destrucción de ciudades en su totalidad, exige más que silencios o declaraciones. Nuestra ambigüedad ha tenido consecuencias. Hemos perdido peso en una región que fue central en nuestra acción exterior y que debe serlo. Si queremos recuperar esa voz, debemos dejar atrás la ilusión de neutralidad entre partes iguales y los dobles estándares que comentaba antes mi compañero Nacho Sánchez Amor. La neutralidad ante el sufrimiento no es equilibrio, es complicidad.

Debemos defender activamente el respeto del orden internacional basado en normas y utilizar con decisión los instrumentos de los que ya dispone la Unión, como condicionar nuestras asociaciones al respeto de los derechos humanos y el Estado de Derecho. Al mismo tiempo tenemos que tejer alianzas más sólidas con América Latina, África y Asia y también con algunas regiones emergentes como el Golfo.

  Claudiu-Richard Târziu (ECR). – Doamnă președintă, stimați colegi, discutăm astăzi despre apărare și securitate în Uniunea Europeană. Foarte bine, pentru că sentimentul de nesiguranță și teama de o posibilă agresiune sunt fenomene sociale devastatoare pentru orice comunitate.

Dar care este astăzi cea mai mare amenințare la adresa Uniunii Europene? Au fost vremuri în care o amenințare militară sau de tip hibrid la adresa Uniunii Europene era de neconceput. Vorbesc de timpul în care credința cetățenilor în valorile și în viitorul acestei construcții politice era de nezdruncinat. Astăzi vorbim despre amenințări externe și despre nevoia de a întări forța armată. Este esențial să fim pregătiți pentru orice, dar în calitate de oameni politici responsabili, trebuie să fim mai întâi realiști.

Cea mai mare amenințare la adresa Uniunii Europene vine astăzi din interior, din deciziile pe care oamenii le înțeleg din ce în ce mai puțin din decalajele între statele Uniunii Europene și din sistemul decizional tot mai concentrat la vârful Uniunii. Este din nou vremea fabricanților de arme și muniții. Dacă vom găsi înțelepciunea și curajul să ne amintim marile lecții, vom (...)

(Președintele a retras cuvântul vorbitorului)

  Petras Auštrevičius (Renew). – Madam President, Madam High Representative, dear colleagues, more than ever before, Europeans have clearly and highly rightly made the EU's foreign and security policy an existential priority, making it a central theme in the last European Parliament elections. We must respect this and respond without undue delay.

Let us not forget that those who have challenged our way of life have not changed and intend to continue their destructive actions.

Above all, the European Union must strengthen its foreign policy, security and defence instruments and its financial capacity to implement them. It is clear that the sanctions imposed must be implemented at the level of the Union and have real leverage on third countries that violate United Nations or EU values.

Ensuring the security of our citizens cannot be subject to any reservations and therefore Member States must agree on how to coordinate national military planning and procurement in a realistic and more coordinated way, optimising the total cost of defence.

  Davor Ivo Stier (PPE). – Madam President, I'm glad that the CFSP report begins with the Western Balkans, because if there is a place where the EU is expected to have a leading role in fostering peace, it is exactly in this region.

Our ambition is to integrate all the six countries in the EU on an individual and merit-based approach. As the biggest of the six, Serbia has an important position, but the Commission and the Council should be much clearer and firmer in conveying the message that progress depends on the full alignment with the EU's CFSP, the respect of the rule of law, as well as the implementation of the Brussels and Ohrid Agreements for the normalisation of relations with Kosovo. It is also time for the EU to lift sanctions to Kosovo and accept its candidacy.

We welcome the progress made by Albania and encourage it to strengthen the rule of law. We strongly support the EU aspirations of Montenegro, and we caution about the forces wanting to undermine its sovereignty. We look forward to the constitutional changes that will allow North Macedonia to unblock accession negotiations.

And we strongly condemn the separatist policies of Milorad Dodik and support the territorial integrity of Bosnia and Herzegovina, the equality of its three constituent peoples and all its citizens, and we urge it to make the final steps to open accession negotiations.

(The speaker agreed to take a blue-card question)

  Diana Iovanovici Şoşoacă (NI), întrebare adresată conform procedurii „cartonașului albastru”. – Nu știu dacă am înțeles eu bine, dar dumneavoastră ați spus ca Serbia să nu mai solicite Kosovo? Bunicii mei paterni sunt din Serbia și din Macedonia, bunicul chiar născut lângă Kosovo. Aveți idee despre istoria Serbiei? Știți că Kosovo este Serbia? Știți că o astfel de mișcare poate duce și la probleme în Spania, în Italia și în România, cu Transilvania, care dintotdeauna a fost a României și o vrea Ungaria?

  Davor Ivo Stier (PPE), blue-card answer. – What we know is that both Serbia and Kosovo have accepted obligations under the Brussels and Ohrid Agreements.

Kosovo has its part of obligations with the Association of Municipalities in the north, and Serbia has voluntarily accepted the obligation not to block Kosovo's membership in regional and international organisations.

What we are asking both countries is to fulfil the obligations they freely accepted.

  Tonino Picula (S&D). – Madam President, Madam High Representative, colleagues, both documents are a complex reflection of a very challenging, uncertain and changing international environment, requiring constant updates as we wake up every morning with the new uncertainties.

The indispensable importance of transatlantic partnership should be enhanced with the more realistic approach after all the threats and offensive statements from the new Trump administration.

There is also the fundamental dilemma on how to redefine our relationship with China in this new environment. Enhanced cooperation and coordination with like-minded partners is essential too.

The grave state of the world can be also a chance for Europe to take the lead in fighting for democracy, security and the rules-based order. In that sense, we must not forget about our immediate neighbourhood and the fragility of many candidate countries.

Lastly, the common security and defence policy should finally become a reality not only through ReArm Europe, but also by coordinating better.

  Lucia Yar (Renew). – Vážená pani predsedajúca, Rusi zbroja, akoby už nič pozajtra nemalo existovať. Ak Putina nezastavíme spolu, pôjde ďalej. Tieto slová mi v sobotu v Kyjeve na mojej ceste povedal zástupca ministra obrany. A viete, mňa naozaj šokuje, že kolegovia aj v tomto pléne žijú stále v ilúzii, že nás sa to netýka.

Obe správy, o ktorých tu dnes rokujeme, konštatujú, že jedinou cestou, schodnou cestou k obnoveniu ukrajinskej suverenity je mier. Ale vy, ktorí voláte po rýchlom mieri bez záruk a ešte si chodíte aj po inštrukcie do Moskvy, tak sa už konečne choďte spýtať aj do Kyjeva! Ukrajinci už mali rýchlokvasený ruský mier na stole veľakrát. A kam ich to priviedlo? Nevoláte po skutočnom mieri, ale po kapitulácii. Takýto mier by bol len prestávkou, ktorú Putin potrebuje na prípravu na ďalší útok, a tentoraz už priamo na Európsku úniu.

Vám, pani Kallas, chcem ešte poďakovať, že rovnako hlasne podporujete Ukrajinu, stojíte za ňou a čelíte kritike napriek tomu, že nazývate Rusko pravým menom: agresor.

  Βαγγέλης Μεϊμαράκης (PPE). – Κυρία Πρόεδρε, ακόμη μια χρονιά καλούμαστε να ψηφίσουμε την ετήσια έκθεση για την Κοινή Εξωτερική Πολιτική και Πολιτική Άμυνας της Ευρωπαϊκής Ένωσης, την οποία υπερψηφίζω. Αυτή τη φορά όμως η σημασία της είναι μεγάλη, καθώς η Ευρώπη έχει θέσει την άμυνα και την ασφάλεια στην κορυφή των προτεραιοτήτων της, σε συνέχεια και της υιοθέτησης της Λευκής Βίβλου από το Ευρωπαϊκό Κοινοβούλιο. Προς την κατεύθυνση αυτή, αναγκαζόμαστε λοιπόν να κάνουμε άλματα τεράστια για να κερδίσουμε τον χρόνο που χάσαμε. Γιατί εδώ και χρόνια και εγώ και άλλοι συνάδελφοι επαναλαμβάνουμε στην Ολομέλεια του Κοινοβουλίου ότι χρειαζόμαστε περαιτέρω εμβάθυνση στον τομέα της άμυνας, ώστε η Ένωση να μπορεί να δρα με μία ενιαία φωνή και με ενισχυμένη θέση στο τραπέζι των διαπραγματεύσεων. Λόγω των συνθηκών, τώρα κατανοούμε και καταλήγουμε στο ότι πρέπει να δράσουμε γρήγορα, βρίσκοντας πόρους για την αμυντική μας θωράκιση. Ωστόσο, αντί αυτό να είχε γίνει σταδιακά, με σωστές προβλέψεις και χρονοδιαγράμματα, τώρα πρέπει να κάνουμε θαύματα, και οι έκτακτοι αυτοί πόροι να λείψουν από άλλους τομείς. Το συμπέρασμα λοιπόν είναι ένα και πρέπει να γίνει κατανοητό: καλύτερα να προλαμβάνεις και να προετοιμάζεσαι βήμα-βήμα, παρά να φαίνεται ότι στο επιβάλλουν οι συνθήκες και να επιβάλλεις ελλιπείς πολιτικές, οι οποίες δείχνουν πολλές φορές προχειρότητα, ενώ απαιτείται σύνεση και αποτελεσματικότητα.

(Ο αγορητής δέχεται να απαντήσει σε ερώτηση με γαλάζια κάρτα)

  Petras Gražulis (ESN), pakėlus mėlynąją kortelę pateiktas klausimas. – Gerbiamas pranešėjau, Jungtinės Amerikos Valstijos, Ukraina ir Rusija, tarpininkaujant Amerikai, veda derybas, taikos derybas. Kaip jūs žiūrite į šitas derybas? Ir vis tiktai, Europos Sąjunga pažadėjo 40 milijardų paramą Ukrainai, bet nerado nei penkių milijardų. Kas čia per politika Europos Sąjungos?

  Βαγγέλης Μεϊμαράκης (PPE), απάντηση σε ερώτηση με γαλάζια κάρτα. – Έχει γίνει κατανοητό ότι αυτός ο πόλεμος πρέπει να λήξει με ειρηνευτικές πρωτοβουλίες. Αλλά νικητής πρέπει να είναι εκείνος ο οποίος δεν προσπαθεί βιαίως να επιβάλει την διαφορά των συνόρων, αλλά ο πολιτισμός και η ειρήνη. Και για αυτό ακριβώς εμείς πιστεύουμε ότι η Ευρωπαϊκή Ένωση πρέπει να είναι στο τραπέζι των διαπραγματεύσεων, ταυτόχρονα με ειρηνευτικές πρωτοβουλίες, ώστε να μπορούμε να τελειώσουμε αυτόν τον πόλεμο με νίκη του πολιτισμού, νίκη της ειρήνης.

  Thijs Reuten (S&D). – Madam President, High Representative, colleagues, if generally, the EU was as principled, firm and engaged about other geopolitical issues as it has been about Russia's full-scale invasion, we would be in a better place. It also shows us once more we need a truly common foreign and defence policy without unanimity, led by you, the HR/VP. But let's be honest: while the EU has indeed led on Ukraine, not all Member States have followed, and we – you, HR/VP and us – are allies here. We understand the difficulty of your role. We must make the capitals understand how serious the situation is. The conversation at the kitchen table in Finland or Estonia should not be different from that in Portugal, Italy or Ireland. It affects all of us alike if we don't get it right.

Double standards, a tendency to appeasement and overly passive and soft approaches harm our values and strategic interests. So, this Parliament was right about Ukraine, to quote the Commission presidents. Let's live up to our obligations to Ukraine and ourselves and do what you refer to and look at the numbers that the Kiel Institute presented on spending for Ukraine.

  Marta Wcisło (PPE). – Pani Przewodnicząca! Pani Komisarz! Szybsze debatowanie i szybsze działanie. Kraje Europy Wschodniej, takie jak Polska, są dziś na pierwszej linii obrony przed zagrożeniami ze Wschodu. Dlatego inicjatywy takie jak Tarcza Wschód i Bałtycka Linia Obrony są dzisiaj konieczne. Polscy europosłowie EPL złożyli kolejne poprawki, aby wzmacniać obronność na lądzie, powietrzu, morzu i w innych dziedzinach. Ponadto składamy poprawkę dotyczącą odblokowania 450 mln euro dla Polski za przekazany Ukrainie sprzęt wojskowy. Pieniądze te są blokowane przez Węgry.

Wzywamy Komisję Europejską oraz państwa członkowskie do zniesienia węgierskiego embarga czy blokady. Wzywam też wszystkich europosłów z Polski, bez względu na barwy polityczne, o działanie na rzecz bezpieczeństwa. Unia Europejska nie może uzależniać bezpieczeństwa wspólnoty od zgody prorosyjskich polityków. Nasze bezpieczeństwo, Pani Komisarz, w naszych rękach.

  Riho Terras (PPE). – Madam President, High Representative, the European response to the existential threat from Russia has been insufficient for too long. I wish I could say that our focus has shifted, and we have a common understanding with regard to the security and defence. Unfortunately, that is not the case.

Even today, when there is no doubt that Russia's aim is to destroy our security architecture; even today, when the signals from across the Atlantic are absolutely clear that we must invest in our own defence ourselves; even today, we have countries in Europe that spend less than 2 % on defence, there are countries that spend less than 1 % and saying that they are neutral. We do not have time to play with the option to spend or not to spend. We should agree upon the Union-wide mandatory minimum for defence spending.

  Antonio López-Istúriz White (PPE). – Señora presidenta, cuando se trata de garantizar la seguridad y la defensa de nuestros intereses europeos y españoles, más vale prevenir que curar. Y encima sale más barato prevenir que curar.

En Europa se está previniendo. Tenemos una política ya de defensa que se está implementando. Tenemos ya un Libro Blanco sobre la defensa, un comisario de defensa. Tenemos ya una Comisión de Seguridad y Defensa en el Parlamento Europeo. En algunos de nuestros países, por ejemplo, en Letonia, en Lituania, en Polonia, en Grecia, se duplica ya el gasto para alcanzar los niveles de la OTAN e incluso ir un poco más allá.

Es desgraciadamente en mi propio país, en España, donde no un debate de la oposición con el Gobierno, sino uno dentro del propio Gobierno, entre los elementos radicales, más radicales, de ese Gobierno, impide que España esté en estos momentos con todos participando de esa seguridad y defensa comunes.

Yo pido al Gobierno de España que cambie de actitud inmediatamente y que estemos con todos cumpliendo los compromisos de seguridad y defensa que esta Unión Europea necesita.

  Mārtiņš Staķis, on behalf of the Verts/ALE Group. – Madam President, this report should mark a turning point. We welcome the progress made: higher defence budget, stronger EU- NATO cooperation and increased support for our defence industry. But it is not enough. 2 % GDP target for defence is a peacetime goal. There is a war in Europe. Shouldn't we invest much more in defence? Countries on Russia's border, we allocate at least 5 %. Latvia, for example, is doubling its army and building Eastern Shield and Baltic Defence Line to secure our borders with Russia and Belarus.

We are asking for more support, not for ourselves, but to defend European borders and our shared values, peace and democracy. Russia must be defeated right now in Ukraine. If we fail, we will be forced to stop Russia within our own borders. Ukraine needs 0.25 % of GDP on military aid, as it was proposed by Ms Kallas.

Thank you for supporting this target in this report. But now every European country must act. This is not just about individual nations. It is about defending all of Europe. Winter is coming. Ukraine has already found ways to create a smart and efficient military industry that produces cost-effective, advanced technology. This means Europe can follow this example. More investment, more cooperation and stronger defence. Europe must act now before it's too late.

  Sebastian Tynkkynen (ECR). – Madam President, according to the latest Eurobarometer survey, 36 % of Europeans named security and defence as the EU's top three priorities to focus on. This was the highest vote share amongst all the options given. The results are clear: the European people want their leaders to focus on providing safety first and foremost.

Is this body acting accordingly? It is not. Have we seen a total overhaul of Europe's immigration policy? No, we haven't, even though past mistakes are now risking our security. Or have we been strong enough to push Russia away from Ukrainian soil? No, we haven't.

Now it's time to do what the people are asking us to do: focus on solving security problems, not creating them by repeating our previous mistakes.

Catch-the-eye procedure

  Tomislav Sokol (PPE). – Poštovana predsjedavajuća, proces proširenja ima ključnu ulogu u jačanju stabilnosti, sigurnosti i demokracije u Europi. Stoga je dobro što izvješće prepoznaje stvarne izazove, a jedan od njih svakako je destabilizirajući utjecaj Srbije na cijeli prostor jugoistočne Europe, o čemu sam već više puta govorio. Srpska hegemonistička politika ostaje najveća prepreka proširenju. Ona se najjasnije ogleda u odnosima unutar Crne Gore gdje Beograd, kao jedan od saveznika Moskve, sve snažnije utječe na političke i društvene procese. Svjedoci smo sustavnih pokušaja potkopavanja crnogorskog suvereniteta poput ideja o izmjenama Zakona o državljanstvu, koje bi u praksu označile kraj neovisne Crne Gore. Također, jedan od vođa vladajuće koalicije u Crnoj Gori, srpski političar Milan Knežević, zaziva vojni savez sa Srbijom i širi dezinformacije o nekakvoj uroti protiv pravoslavaca na Balkanu, čime izravno doprinosi destabiliziranju ovog prostora. Takvi pokušaji destabilizacije, kao dio koncepta Srpskog sveta, predstavljaju ozbiljnu prijetnju sigurnosti cijelog europskog kontinenta. Zato je ključno da se Europska unija konačno jasno odupre ovoj politici i stavi Srbiju tamo gdje joj je mjesto.

  João Oliveira (The Left). – Senhora Presidente, Senhora Comissária Kaja Kallas, os povos precisam de relações internacionais orientadas para a paz, para a cooperação, para a solidariedade, para a solução política dos conflitos, para o desanuviamento das tensões internacionais e para o respeito pelos princípios do Direito Internacional.

Nenhum desses objetivos está presente na Política Externa e de Segurança Comum e Defesa, nem nas resoluções que hoje aqui discutimos.

Estas resoluções que hoje discutimos são o verdadeiro tratado belicista, orientado para o militarismo, para a guerra, para a política de ingerência e de confrontação. E são também um exercício despudorado de hipocrisia e desprezo pelos princípios do Direito Internacional, por uma União Europeia que recusa condenar Israel e o seu genocídio contra o povo palestiniano, sempre cúmplice dessa política de genocídio. Uma União Europeia que foi cúmplice de guerras de agressão na Síria, na Líbia, no Iraque ou no Afeganistão.

Senhora Comissária, este não é o sentido que serve os interesses dos povos. A política que serve os interesses dos povos é a política contrária à ação que a União Europeia tem desenvolvido em matéria de Política Externa, Segurança Comum e Defesa.

  Željana Zovko (PPE). – Poštovana predsjedavajuća, zahvaljujem Davidu McAllisteru na sveobuhvatnom izvješću kojim je obuhvatio i moje amandmane na ključni problem koji ostaje da se riješi u Bosni i Hercegovini. Stoga pozdravljam konačnu odluku visoke povjerenice da ide u Bosnu i Hercegovinu i adresira pitanje svih pitanja, a to je izmjena Izbornog zakona, gdje bi tri naroda, nakon Daytona - trideset godina nakon Daytona - konačno svi dobili svoju jednakopravnost, što je garantirano u Daytonu i potpisano u Parizu prije 30 godina. Srbi, Hrvati i Bošnjaci moraju u Bosni i Hercegovini imati puna prava ustavno, što im je garantirano mirovnim sporazumom. To je ključna točka mosta sa Sjedinjenim Američkim Državama i sa Trumpovom administracijom, gdje možete poentirati i konačno napraviti mir na zapadnom Balkanu. Bez toga nema napretka niti u jednoj zemlji na zapadnom Balkanu, u jugoistočnoj Europi. Bez toga nema napretka ni u Ukrajini. Bez toga, ukoliko se ne poštuje mirovni sporazum, ne možemo očekivati da ćemo imati mir i sigurnost na granicama Europe.

  Lukas Sieper (NI). – Frau Präsidentin, liebe Mitmenschen! Da stellt sich der Kollege Neuhoff von der AfD doch heute hier wirklich hin und nennt Russland ein defensives Imperium. Ein defensives Imperium, das einen Angriffskrieg führt und das nunmehr seit mehr als drei Jahren Kriegsverbrechen begeht, das die Souveränität anderer Staaten mit Füßen tritt. Und das ist der Staat, den die selbsternannten Patrioten und nationalistischen Politiker in diesem Parlament hier verteidigen.

Wenn Sie mich fragen, erklären sich diese Leute damit zu den Feinden unserer Demokratie, zu den Feinden unseres Systems, und vielleicht sollten wir sie genau so behandeln. Allein der Kollege Bystron, über dessen Immunität wir heute abgestimmt haben und die wir aufgehoben haben, wird deshalb strafrechtlich verfolgt, weil er sich von den Russen hat bestechen lassen.

Und nur zum Ende: Das ist die gleiche Partei, mit der – leider – der Vorsitzende der Konservativen, Herr Weber, den ich eigentlich sehr schätze, heute ein nettes Pläuschchen gehalten hat. Lassen Sie uns diese Leute nicht als unsere Freunde behandeln!

  Michał Szczerba (PPE). – Pani Przewodnicząca! Pani Komisarz! Donald Tusk zwrócił się bezpośrednio do Donalda Trumpa z takimi słowami: współpraca jest zawsze lepsza niż konfrontacja. Cały czas mamy nadzieję, że te słowa znajdą zrozumienie po drugiej stronie Atlantyku. Chcemy bardzo wyraźnie powiedzieć, mamy absolutną świadomość, że nasze relacje, relacje transatlantyckie, znalazły się na zakręcie i te filary, jakimi są z jednej strony bezpieczeństwo, z drugiej strony współpraca gospodarcza, są bardzo zagrożone i również mogą uderzyć w europejską gospodarkę, która buduje swój potencjał obronny.

Pani Komisarz, jest druga sprawa: jest nadzieja. Tą nadzieją jest praca, którą również podejmują instytucje europejskie, szczególnie Pani, Komisja, w obszarze przyszłego Paktu Bezpieczeństwa i Obrony z Wielką Brytanią. Chcielibyśmy, żeby szczyt Unia Europejska - Wielka Brytania zakończył się konkretami, wspólnym sukcesem i wzmocnieniem naszego sojuszu obronnego z naszym europejskim partnerem.

  President. – I will now give the floor to the Vice-President/High Representative, but before that I want to explain that those who were here during the debate got the floor under catch-the-eye. If you are not here during the debate, there is no right to have the catch-the-eye due to the rules.

(End of catch-the-eye procedure)

  Kaja Kallas, Vice-President of the Commission / High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy. – Madam President, thank you, honourable Members, allow me to thank you for your continued support to the EU's common foreign and security and defence policies, and few very specific comments and questions that were addressed.

So, many of you on the left addressed this, that we shouldn't talk about what is going on – although, with the war in Ukraine and what threat it poses, what Russian threat poses to the whole of European Union – because it makes people afraid. But we have to be honest with the people. If you listen to what the intelligence services are telling us, what the chief of staff of armies are telling us, this threat is real. Russia is spending more than 9 % of its GDP on the military. They will want to use it again. That's why we need to prepare because if we prepare, then it acts as a deterrence, then we don't need it.

The problem with defence spending is that you need to do these decisions before you actually need it. You need to do those decisions when you have peace time and when it comes to fear – no, we don't need fear – but how you address the fear is that you are prepared and then you are not afraid because you know what to do. That is why we prepare for this, that it would act as a deterrent, that we would never have a war in Europe again. That is why we are doing these things.

Now, I encourage you to not only listen to the first sentence, but actually to listen to the whole speech and all addresses that I had in the Middle East. I also got criticism from Israel, so maybe that shows that the approach has been a balance. But what I want to stress is that I'm in the position to represent the European Union. That means 27 Member States. That's why we have to focus on those things that we agree on and we agree on a lot.

We agree on the two‑state solution. That's why we are pushing this and we are part of the coalitions for the two‑state solution, in order to have a balanced approach to talk about the security of Israel, but also the rights of Palestinians. Then, we also agree that humanitarian law must be followed. That means that civilians and civilian infrastructure cannot be targeted. We also insist on stopping the killing in Gaza. We also insist on the hostages being released. We also insist on the humanitarian aid not being politicised and humanitarian aid reaching the people in need. So, there are many things we agree on.

That's why I'm also representing the 27 Member States that, you know, also from this Chamber, we have very different views. Engaging with Israel, we have to do that because we also need to address all these issues. Otherwise we don't have the possibility to do that. That's why we had the EU-Israel Association Council, where 27 Member States were also able to raise all these issues.

Then, whoever asked on the Black Sea, we have the Black Sea strategy coming out the end of May. Then, somebody also talked about the quality of life deteriorating if we invest in defence. I can assure you, if you watch the news, then the quality of life will be much worse when there is a war. That's why we need to do this, to preserve our quality of life.

Then, when it comes to Syria, yes, there is this balance we have to do. We need to be in a position where this process is Syria‑led, Syria's own. We welcome the Assad regime falling. So the people of Syria also need to have new opportunities. That's why we were lifting sanctions so that there will be jobs and no radicalisation in Syria. Of course it presents risks, but I think we need to avoid also the mistakes we did in Afghanistan, where we don't have the right and possibilities to address the issues that are common or are important to Europe. We are not helping the leadership. We are helping the Syrian people. That is also very important to understand.

Then, on budget: I thank you, also the European Parliament, to have been really pushing for the budget of the European External Action Service to be taken into account and especially you, Mr Sánchez Amor, for working on this. I think this is extremely important. On our side, we are working with making the delegations more effective and more modern. I think this is also a needed from our side.

On the Western Balkans, I agree with those who are speaking. This is definitely a very important region. It's in Europe, so we shouldn't overlook them. Our neighbours' problems today are our problems tomorrow, so we will work with that.

And in the end, on the EU‑UK security pact, I work towards to have that for the summit. I hope that everybody will also come on board.

To conclude, I think we must do more for our own security and defence, and we must take greater responsibility to become stronger. I really thank you for your continued support to making Europe stronger.

  David McAllister, rapporteur. – Madam President, I would just like to thank the shadow rapporteurs, all the involved staff members and also the team of the High Representative and Vice-President for the constructive cooperation on this report and also today's open debate.

I have listened carefully to all the members who took the floor in the last 90 minutes. My impression is that most of the political groups and the majority of colleagues in this House want to act in concert towards a stronger common foreign and security policy. I do hope to see this reflected during the final vote tomorrow.

The High Representative and the Commission, dear Kaja Kallas, are both explicitly invited to use this report as a guide for their priorities. Rest assured that we in the European Parliament will try to follow up also on your expectations.

  Nicolás Pascual de la Parte, rapporteur. – Madam President, thank you very much indeed. I, as well as my colleague, have been listening very carefully to all the interventions I think I can draw four main ideas.

The first one is that we have to face a new geopolitical paradigm. This new paradigm changes from the multilateralism that helps everybody to a zero-sum geopolitics scenario in which the powers like the US, China and Russia are comfortable, but we are not.

The second idea is that security is a common global good. If it is a common global good, it is a matter not only for those in uniform, but the whole society at large. And then we have to mobilise our society to convince and seduce them that we are defending the lever to the freedom in order to have the support, because the politicians alone will not be able to get through it.

The third idea I have felt here with all the interventions is a sense of urgency. We have to react quickly because Europe has in front of us a great challenge, which is to keep our own defence and security in our own hands, and to rise up to the challenges ahead.

That means not only to have the political will, but to find the political leadership, to mobilise the funding necessary for that and to row in the same direction. We will be strong if we are united and we will be strong if we have our people, our voters, behind us.

The fourth idea is that there cannot be peace in Ukraine without justice. If the peace has to be sustained, it has to be fair. It will not be sustained if it's not fair. And for that, we have to support our Ukrainian friends in order to go with a strong hand to the negotiating table, in which the European Union, by all means, has to be present.

  President. – The debate is closed.

The vote will take place tomorrow.

Written Statements (Rule 178)

  Michał Dworczyk (ECR), na piśmie. – Szanowni Państwo, tak, w sprawozdaniu o WPBiO są elementy pozytywne, jak np. jednoznaczne stanowisko wobec rosyjskiej agresji i innych bezprawnych działań Kremla czy też wspomnienie o Tarczy Wschód.

Niestety jest to swego rodzaju zasłona dymna, bo sedno tego dokumentu stanowi coś zupełnie innego.

To kolejny krok w stronę odbierania państwom członkowskim ich traktatowych uprawnień. Nie zgadzam się z próbami ograniczania zasady jednomyślności w polityce bezpieczeństwa i obrony. To dla Polski absolutna czerwona linia. Jeśli pozwolimy, by o naszym bezpieczeństwie decydowano większością głosów, to oddamy kluczowe decyzje w ręce tych, którzy jeszcze niedawno nazywali Rosję strategicznym partnerem. Tych, którzy ignorowali ostrzeżenia państw mojego regionu, prowadzili naiwną politykę wobec Kremla, a własne interesy z Putinem przedkładali nad solidarność i bezpieczeństwo Europy.

Dlatego równie stanowczo odrzucam postulat europejskiej unii obrony. Nie potrzebujemy fikcji „strategicznej autonomii”. Dublowanie struktur NATO nie wzmocni naszego bezpieczeństwa, a je osłabi, rozbijając jedność i więzy transatlantyckie.

Szkoda, że zamiast jasno wezwać do wypełniania naszych sojuszniczych zobowiązań wobec NATO, w tym przeznaczania co najmniej 2% PKB na obronność, sprawozdanie skupia się na działaniach, które tworzą jedynie iluzję bezpieczeństwa. Niestety propozycje zawarte w dokumencie w praktyce prowadzą do rozmycia odpowiedzialności za obronność w nowych strukturach UE, osłabiając przy tym jedność Sojuszu.

  Λουκάς Φουρλάς (PPE), γραπτώς. – Αγαπητοί συνάδελφοι, δυστυχώς δεν μπορώ παρά να εκφράσω την έντονη μου ανησυχία όσον αφορά την απόσταση μεταξύ των αρχών που διακηρύσσουμε στην εξωτερική μας πολιτική και των πράξεων μας. Η Ευρωπαϊκή Ένωση έχει καθήκον να λειτουργεί ως δύναμη ειρήνης και να προασπίζεται το διεθνές δίκαιο και τα ανθρώπινα δικαιώματα. Ωστόσο, 50 χρόνια μετά την τουρκική εισβολή στην Κύπρο, η κατοχή συνεχίζεται, τα ανθρώπινα δικαιώματα των Κυπρίων παραβιάζονται σε καθημερινή βάση, και η ΕΕ εξακολουθεί να αποφεύγει να θέσει την Τουρκία προ των ευθυνών της.

Η ΚΕΠΠΑ και η ΚΠΑΑ πρέπει να αποτελούν εργαλείο προάσπισης των αξιών αλλά και των συμφερόντων μας, ξεκινώντας πρώτα από την εδαφική ακεραιότητα των κρατών μελών μας. Ως Κύπρος, βρισκόμαστε στην πρώτη γραμμή γεωπολιτικών εξελίξεων. Αντιμετωπίζουμε προκλήσεις, όχι μόνο με στρατιωτικούς όρους, αλλά και μέσω υβριδικών απειλών, εργαλειοποίησης μεταναστευτικών ροών, παραβιάσεων του δικαίου της θάλασσας και άλλες. Η στρατηγική μας αυτονομία πρέπει να εντατικοποιηθεί, και η ΚΠΑΑ να ενισχυθεί, πάντα με σεβασμό στις εθνικές μας θέσεις και εμπειρίες. Η Κύπρος μπορεί και πρέπει να είναι ενεργός εταίρος στην οικοδόμηση μιας πιο ισχυρής Ευρώπης στον κόσμο.

  György Hölvényi (PfE), írásban. – Az Európai Uniónak nagyobb szerepet kell vállalnia saját védelmében, mindezt szoros együttműködésben a NATO-val. A kérdés most az, hogy Európa hogyan reagál a megváltozott geopolitikai helyzetre. Az európai védelmi képességek fejlesztését úgy kell végrehajtanunk, hogy tiszteletben tartjuk a tagállamok sajátos biztonságpolitikai érdekeit. A védelempolitika tagállami hatáskörbe tartozik.

Fontos leszögezni, hogy Európa védelmének megerősítése nem Ukrajnáról szól. Nem engedhetjük meg, hogy a háború finanszírozása tovább merítse ki a tagállamok készleteit. A forrásokat saját védelmi iparunk fejlesztésére kell fordítanunk, nem pedig Ukrajnának adnunk. Elfogadhatatlan tehát, hogy minden tagállam a GDP 0,25%-ának megfelelő katonai támogatást nyújtson Ukrajnának. A romokban álló ország uniós csatlakozása vállalhatatlan anyagi terheket róna Európára, ezért helytelen az európai emberek megkérdezése nélkül kvázi tagállamként kezelni.

Ehelyett olyan közös fellépésekre kell összpontosítanunk, amelyek valóban hatékonyak: a terrorizmus elleni fellépés, a határvédelem, az illegális migráció elleni küzdelem és a kiberbiztonság.

Európa erősítése a cél – de ez Európa jövőjéért történik, nem Ukrajnáért. Az EU nem kapott felhatalmazást a háborús felfegyverkezésre. A helyes irány a béke fenntartása. Az Unió ereje éppen abban rejlik, hogy képes volt megteremteni és fenntartani a békét egy olyan kontinensen, amelyet évszázadokon át háborúk szaggattak. Európa biztonságát nem a háborús logika fenntartása biztosítja, hanem a versenyképesség és gazdasági fejlődés erősítése.

  Erik Kaliňák (NI), písomne. – Výročná správa o spoločnej zahraničnej a bezpečnostnej politike za rok 2024 je výkrikom do tmy. Nie je dôvodom na hrdosť, ale dôkazom odtrhnutia bruselskej elity od reality a jej posadnutosti centralizáciou moci, ignorujúc vôľu národov.

„Strategická autonómia“ znamená viac moci pre byrokratov a menej pre štáty. Odmietam to. Svet nie je hračka eurokratov – štáty označené za hrozby sa smejú, kým my sa hádame o neuskutočniteľnú jednotu. Národná suverenita je základom silnej Európy, nie prekážkou. Oslavovať Európsku službu pre vonkajšiu činnosť je výsmech. Je to drahý klub diplomatov bez kontaktu s ľuďmi. Zahraničná politika patrí národným vládam, nie úradníkom. Zameranie na militarizáciu a ignorovanie hrozieb, ako je nelegálna migrácia či ochrana hraníc, ukazuje slepotu EÚ. Obrana áno, ale nie pod diktátom Bruselu snívajúceho o európskej armáde. Skutočná bezpečnosť začína doma. Hlasovanie kvalifikovanou väčšinou je útokom na právo národov rozhodovať. Jednomyseľnosť je sila, nie slabosť. Správa to nechápe – slúži elitám, nie ľuďom.

Táto správa je hanbou. Žiadam jej zamietnutie a návrat k Európe národov – silnej a slobodnej.