Verbatim report of proceedings

Wednesday, 18 January 2006 - Strasbourg

10. Chechnya after the elections and civil society in Russia

  President. The next item is the Council and Commission statements on Chechnya after the elections and civil society in Russia.

  Hans Winkler, President-in-Office of the Council. (DE) Mr President, Commissioner, honourable Members, the conflict in Chechnya is still a source of instability in the northern Caucasus. The political, economic, social and human rights situation in this Caucasus republic continues to be extremely unsatisfactory and a real cause for concern. All of the European Union's institutions are well aware of how important this matter is in our relations with the Russian Federation.

As you know, Chechnya held parliamentary elections on 28 November last year, its first legislative elections in eight years. Unfortunately, the European Union and the OSCE were unable to send observers to these elections for security reasons. However, the simple fact that, for the first time in eight years, it was possible to hold parliamentary elections in Chechnya was viewed by the then Presidency as a positive step, even though, it must be emphasised, there were some serious problems. The European Union helped to train local observers for these elections, and the Commission provided aid amounting to EUR 60 000 to support objective and professional local election observers from various civil society organisations.

Immediately after the elections, the then EU Presidency issued a statement noting that the elections had not been problem-free and that some observers had raised concerns. It strongly urged the Russian authorities to investigate reports of irregularities or intimidation. The statement concluded that the further strengthening of democratic institutions, as part of an inclusive political process, is essential for the sustainable and peaceful long-term development of Chechnya as well as for peace and stability in the northern Caucasus as a whole.

The European Union has frequently raised serious concerns regarding the political process in Chechnya and continues to strongly urge the Russian authorities to give this political process greater transparency and legitimacy. Issues of human rights and democracy are regularly and repeatedly raised in the context of relations between the European Union and the Russian Federation. The Partnership and Cooperation Agreement, in laying the basis for relations between the EU and Russia, refers to respect for shared values such as democracy, human rights and the rule of law.

Chechnya is an important topic in the twice-yearly human rights consultations with Russia, which were officially launched in March 2005 under the Luxembourg Presidency. The EU makes a particular point of using these consultations to express its concerns regarding the disappearance of people and the general failure to punish violations of human rights. The most recent round of these extremely important consultations was held in Brussels on 8 September 2005 and they will be continued this year under the Austrian Presidency. We need the European Union and its Member States to make a sustained commitment here, as these consultations provide a forum where such issues can be discussed very openly and constructively.

Following the outbreak of the second Chechnya conflict in September 1999, the European Union has taken and maintained a clear position on the issue of respect for human rights. The EU continues to advocate a political solution to the conflict, and has called on the Russian Federation to work closely with international human rights mechanisms, in particular with the United Nations and its special rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment, and also with the Council of Europe, particularly the European Committee for the Prevention of Torture and Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment, and of course with the OSCE. A resumption of the permanent presence of the OSCE, in the form of a field mission in Chechnya, would in any case be welcomed. The OSCE has already played an extremely important role in the efforts to find a solution to the first conflict in Chechnya, and a comparable role would also be of great significance this time.

At the EU-Russia Summit in November 2004, Russia agreed to the European Commission's EUR 20 million aid programme to support socio-economic recovery in the northern Caucasus, in addition to continuing humanitarian aid. This programme is intended to contribute to promoting an open and democratic political process in Chechnya.

With regard to civil society, the situations of non-governmental organisations and human rights activists, judicial reform and freedom of the media in Russia are areas that give particular cause for concern and that are regularly raised in discussions between the EU and Russian representatives. The EU is firmly convinced that it is in Russia's interest to have a strong and independent civil society.

At the end of December 2005, the Duma and the Federation Council adopted the draft law on non-governmental organisations. The EU has repeatedly expressed its concern at this draft, notably in its letter of 22 November 2005 to the Speaker of the Duma, Mr Gryzlov, and at a troika démarche on 2 December 2005. I also expect that we will make our feelings known once again on this matter now that the law has been signed. According to the draft as it stands, foreign NGOs must provide the Russian authorities with reports on their programmes, funding and organisation. Russian NGOs may be prohibited from working in restricted areas, which of course severely limits their activities in sensitive areas and regions, or even makes them impossible.

Russia's Presidency of the G8, since 1 January 2006, was expected not only to give the country an incentive to improve its image on the international stage, but also to help it make more active and sustained efforts than previously to resolve the conflict in Chechnya and thus to improve the situation in the southern Caucasus, where the three conflicts in South Ossetia, Abkhazia and Nagorno-Karabakh, although frozen, urgently need to be resolved. The EU has announced that it will closely monitor Russia's actions during the G8 Presidency. The issue of civil society will also be raised repeatedly at the twice-yearly human rights consultations with Russia.

Mr President, we must remain determined to continue the dialogue with the Russian Federation with regard to Chechnya and other human rights matters, regardless of all the difficulties and resistance, and to press for an improvement in the situation.

  Benita Ferrero-Waldner, Member of the Commission. Mr President, President-in-Office, honourable Members, I am most grateful for this opportunity to give the Commission’s view on the future of Chechnya after the elections. It is positive, as the Presidency mentioned, that the elections took place without violence, even if one cannot ignore the deficiencies in the process. Three parties received sufficient support to be represented in the new parliament, with the pro-Kremlin United Russia far outweighing the others. We hope that this constitutes a step towards greater political representation, greater stability and eventually peaceful democracy.

Neither the OSCE nor the Council of Europe sent a fully fledged observer mission, since the conditions on the ground did not permit it, but the latter did send an eight-member fact-finding mission. We therefore have no official reports, but we are aware of statements by members of the latter mission and by other organisations drawing attention, in particular, to deficiencies in the process, and we expect such allegations to be properly investigated.

While we welcome the Russian Federal authorities’ commitment to allocate significant funds for reconstruction, a number of other actions need to be taken if these elections are to be a step towards more peace and democracy. Although there appears to have been an improvement in the security situation in Chechnya, unfortunately a culture of impunity remains. Reported cases of disappearances and torture should be fully investigated and the perpetrators, including members of the law enforcement authorities, brought to justice.

We note that Russia has expressed its willingness to cooperate with UN human rights mechanisms including, for instance, the High Commissioner for Human Rights, Mrs Louise Arbour. These assurances should be put into practice and there should be cooperation with the UN Special Rapporteurs. It is also important that the local ombudsman in Chechnya be seen to be carrying out his duties impartially, as well as effectively.

As has already been mentioned, I would like to emphasise that the European Commission is playing its part in the region. We have agreed a EUR 20 million programme for socio-economic recovery in the North Caucasus, because we believe that to be one of the root causes of that conflict. This is in addition to humanitarian assistance, for which we are already the biggest donor through ECHO. This gives a clear indication of our willingness to be actively involved in the process of strengthening democracy and stability in the region.

Our programme will help support the much-needed rehabilitation of the health and education sectors and assist in job-creation and income-generation activities. In my former capacity as Austrian Foreign Minister I visited Chechnya as chairwoman of the OSCE. I remember my visit very well. We saw health establishments at first hand and a lot of improvement is indeed necessary.

It is also our intention to open an office in the North Caucasus region, possibly in Vladikavkaz, which would help us to monitor the implementation of our programme and keep us better informed on the situation on the ground.

I should, however, express our concern at the continuing difficulties that NGOs have to face – as the Presidency mentioned – including those receiving support from the European Commission, such as the Russian-Chechen Friendship Society in Nizhny Novgorod. This also affects NGOs delivering humanitarian assistance under the ECHO programme.

In that context I should like to draw your attention to the recent amendments to Russian legislation on NGOs. We expressed our concerns about the effect of that legislation on NGOs financed under ECHO in the North Caucasus through the EIDHR and TACIS programmes to the chairwoman of the Presidential Council on the development of social society and human rights. I also discussed the matter with the Foreign Minister, Mr Lavrov, who assured me that there would be changes to the proposal at second reading in the Duma. The text of the legislation finally approved by the Duma does indeed take some account of concerns expressed by the European Union and the Council of Europe, which we welcome. However, we remain concerned that some of the provisions remain too far-reaching – for example the scope for denying registration to local NGOs and the controls exerted on both local and foreign NGOs.

We are taking careful note of the way in which these provisions are implemented. That is our task now. And we shall also be taking every available opportunity to make the Russian authorities aware of any concerns that arise with regard to that implementation. Our regular political dialogue with Russia and the next round of EU-Russia human rights consultations set for March are an excellent chance to do this.

  Charles Tannock, on behalf of the PPE-DE Group. – Mr President, Russia clearly faces a serious criminal and terrorist threat in Chechnya, and the surrounding northern Caucasus remain unstable, with daily killings of both the security forces and criminals. There are also frequent civilian kidnappings that go unpunished and are carried out by unaccountable ugly paramilitary units. Everyone remains conscious of the tragedy of Beslan. And I still have had no satisfactory reply from my Government, the British Government, as to why it grants refugee status to Ahmed Zakayev, who is part of the same so-called Chechen Government-in-Exile as the wanted terrorist Shamil Basayev, who was behind Beslan. There is nevertheless still also a westward flow of genuine innocent Chechen refugees caught up in this brutal war. So, the EU has every interest in calling for human rights to be respected, as well as becoming more critical of the democratic standards of the elections in November 2005.

There is current concern, for instance, at the decision of a local court to shut down the operations in Ingushetia of the Centre for Peacemaking and Community Development, a Russian-British humanitarian group. It is also considering a request to ban another charity, the United States-based International Medical Corps. This shows the degree of hostility to foreign presence of humanitarian NGOs operating in the region. It illustrates the phenomenon of increasing authoritarianism across the whole of Russia, as has been well documented recently by Freedom House, and as we have seen over the recent Duma bill on foreign NGOs, where even the final version still permits refusal of registration to any foreign group that threatens Russian sovereignty, cultural heritage and national interests – grounds which are vague and open to local administrative interpretation.

Our resolution today aims to keep the pressure up on the Russian Federation for higher standards of human rights in this tragic region which has been so besieged by conflict for so long.

  Reino Paasilinna, on behalf of the PSE Group. – (FI) Mr President, ladies and gentlemen, we have been passing resolutions on Chechnya for about fifteen years now, and they have always been critical. Parliament also sent a delegation to Chechnya the year before last, and I was its chairman. That of course has already been forgotten about in today’s resolution.

There are many critical issues regarding this conflict in today’s common position. It suggests that the Duma should establish a research committee of enquiry to investigate the action of the authorities in Chechnya. Another proposal is to set up a temporary international tribunal to investigate these crimes. There are other proposals. Our proposals have not led to any significant results during all this time. I asked the country holding the Presidency whether we could deal with the entire conflict jointly, and not just those parts which vex Russia, putting the whole issue on the table with Russia. We, of course, can provide assistance for that, as Mrs Ferrero-Waldner said. We all have an interest in mollifying Russia and the Russian leadership has asked for some good advice, so surely we should be seeking a way out of this together. The head of the country holding the Presidency would have good means of contact with President Putin in this respect; he could speak to him directly.

  Cecilia Malmström, on behalf of the ALDE Group. – (SV) Mr President, Chechnya is a running sore on our continent, with hundreds of thousands of dead and maimed and with thousands of children traumatised and orphaned. With the appalling refugee crisis, this is a human tragedy in every respect. Atrocities are being committed by both military and paramilitary forces, and no one has been brought to justice or called to account. Both sides are responsible for the excesses, but Chechen civilians have suffered out of all proportion. This means that the international community and we in the EU have an obligation, indeed a duty, to intervene. We cannot remain indifferent. We must condemn the outrages and demand that Russia step up its efforts to find a peaceful solution to the problem. In addition to the very constructive things we are already doing, we in the EU may also in time be able to offer help in the form of mediation, reconstruction and further rehabilitation.

In a way, the election was a success, in spite of everything. The situation is very uncertain, however, and an enormous amount remains to be done. The democratic forces in Chechnya need to be identified and an attempt made to initiate a dialogue, because negotiation is the only possible way forward. Naturally, we condemn the terrorist acts committed by the Chechen separatists, and the abominable events in, for example, Beslan and in the Moscow theatre can never be condemned enough.

With such negotiations in prospect, developments in Russia are very worrying. Both the Commissioner and the President-in-Office of the Council have said as much. As a result not only of the legislation that puts obstacles in the way of the voluntary organisations’ work but also of the successive restrictions on the media, it is difficult to initiate a dialogue. It is difficult both to make criticisms and to make any progress.

It is gratifying that the President-in-Office of the Council is so clear in his criticism of Russia. Here in Parliament, we have for a long time sought a more coherent strategy on Russia. Unfortunately, we well know how, for example, the need for energy means that too many of the individual Member States continue to be hypocritical when it comes to our large neighbour’s human rights record and its violations of the rule of law. Chechnya must always be there on the agenda. That is something we owe both the Chechen and Russian peoples, and it is something we owe ourselves if we are to remain credible.

(Applause)

  Bart Staes, on behalf of the Verts/ALE Group. – (NL) Mr President, Mr Winkler, Commissioner, when I hear you talking, then I am delighted that we are MEPs, that we are fortunate enough not to be diplomats and that we have not lost touch with reality. Luckily, we are still entitled to express our surprise or indignation.

It is for that reason that the European Parliament has, in recent years, taken the lead in condemning what has been going wrong in Russia and Chechnya. There is a definite sense of lawlessness that pervades Chechnya and the whole of the northern Caucasus. There are a growing number of abductions, abuses and random killings. It is fair to say that the Russian Federation has no control over the situation. Indeed, the contrary is the case; the conflict is spreading from Chechnya across Ingushetia to the whole of the northern Caucasus.

For the Council or Commission to claim that elections organised while this sort of thing is going on went reasonably well is a real disgrace, and so I would urge the Commission, the Council, Foreign Affairs Ministers and particularly the Belgian Foreign Affairs Minister who is currently Chairman-in-Office of the OSCE, to say it as it really is. In conclusion, I would like to make an appeal for help for Russia at this point to …

(The President cut off the speaker)

  Jonas Sjöstedt, on behalf of the GUE/NGL Group. – (SV) Mr President, as has been pointed out in this Chamber, the elections in Chechnya did have significant deficiencies and shortcomings. There is no doubt about that. At the same time, they are a step forward. There is now an opportunity for building political institutions in Chechnya and for doing so with a little more credibility. What is quite obvious after all these years of atrocities and war is that there can be no military solution to the conflict in Chechnya. The idea that it will, as the Russian Government believes, be possible to crush all opposition in Chechnya is a myth. Ultimately, a political process and negotiations are required.

It is a fact obvious to us all that the loathsome acts of terrorism committed by Chechen separatists have to be condemned. It is also important to see that Russia has, in actual fact, also conducted a policy of terrorism against parts of the Chechen population. It has committed huge acts of cruelty without anyone being held to account. This is something that plays directly into the hands of the most extreme forces in Chechnya. Only when acts of this kind cease will there presumably be an opportunity for dialogue and for a peaceful solution.

  Michał Tomasz Kamiński, on behalf of the UEN Group. – (PL) Mr President, today’s debate in the House exemplifies the democratic nature of this Parliament.

I should like to thank previous speakers for their accurate and reliable assessment of the situation in Chechnya. Nonetheless, it must be stated quite clearly that although such a debate can be held here in the European Parliament, it cannot be held in Russia, because democracy as we in the West understand it does not currently exist in Russia. Moscow and Saint Petersburg are not on a war footing. If there is no democracy in those areas there will certainly be none in Grozny or the rest of Chechnya, where there is a war on.

Mrs Ferrero-Waldner stated today that the European Union had been unable to send observers to monitor the elections in Chechnya because the conditions on the ground did not permit it. I should like to thank the Commissioner for her honesty. Nonetheless, I am bound to point out that if the conditions on the ground were such that it was impossible to guarantee the safety of any observers, how can we accept that the conditions were right for elections to be held in the first place? They simply were not. One of the reasons for this was that in terms of international law, Chechnya is an independent state under foreign occupation. I must emphasise this most strongly. The Chechen people have never freely expressed a desire to form part of the Russian Federation. Chechnya declared its independence and the whole world saw how Russian tanks rolled into the country in response to that declaration.

Regardless of the political party we represent in this House, if we truly share the fundamental values such as democracy and the right to self-determination upon which our Community is based, we must send out an urgent appeal from Parliament calling for freedom for the Chechen people.

  Luca Romagnoli (NI). – (IT) Mr President, ladies and gentlemen, I have the impression that the European Union and Parliament do not miss a chance, often on scant objective evidence, to criticise and oppose the authorities and governments of countries with which it would be in their interests to cultivate good relations instead. That is what they should be doing with Russia, rather than wasting millions of euros of European taxpayers’ money on doubtful initiatives to support so-called ‘democratic monitoring’ organisations.

In order to create a Europe for everybody, it is essential to think rationally and objectively when assessing security and antiterrorism measures that have influenced, or may influence, the peace and stability of our Union as well.

I do not think I have to remind this House of certain terrible crimes committed against the civilian population in Chechnya and in Russia by those who claim to be fighting for the self-determination of the Chechen people. I have to say, however, that some people insist on interfering and criticising, and that double standards are often used in assessing similar situations in different parts of the world.

The resolution on Chechnya is the umpteenth example of this, and yet again I will not endorse hypocritical resolutions that also go against the interests of stability on the Union’s south-eastern borders, interests that should consider the need…

(The President cut off the speaker)

  Tunne Kelam (PPE-DE). – Mr President, according to Russian human rights groups, these so-called elections took place only on paper. Participation by the local population was very low – almost non-existent. Instead, and scandalously, thousands of Russian army soldiers took part in the vote, together with an armed faction of the Kremlin-appointed leader Kadyrov. These elections must therefore be seen as a masquerade to cover up the continuing violence and oppression.

In 2000, during the attack by Russian forces on Grozny, human rights defender Lida Yusupova sat in the cellar of a half-ruined house. The people there felt defenceless and abandoned. Somehow they had information that at the same time in Strasbourg the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe was discussing the situation in Russia. Listening to a radio set the elderly inhabitants asked Mrs Yusupova: ‘Are they going to help us? Strasbourg is our only hope.’ Six years later this question has still not been answered.

Yesterday’s meeting of the representatives of the Russian civil rights organisations confirmed the concerns we have been expressing for a long time. The last major expression of this concern was the Malmström report. Today’s resolution sadly states that both the Council and the Commission have not adequately addressed these concerns and human rights violations. One could even say that they have failed to do so. Therefore, it is now high time to take a principled and united stand on these issues, because massive human rights violations in Chechnya, which remain unpunished, are spreading throughout the Russian federation like a virus.

Lastly, today’s resolution ...

(The President cut off the speaker)

  Richard Howitt (PSE). – Mr President, I shall begin by expressing my deep regret that President Putin reportedly signed a new bill yesterday to control non-governmental organisations, coinciding with the decision by the Ingush Supreme Court to deny authorisation to the UK charity The Centre for Peace and Community Development, whose Moscow representative I spoke to this morning. This is an organisation that had been providing humanitarian aid to about 1 000 Chechen refugee children and shows what a crackdown that bill represents.

It is clearly incompatible with the European Convention on Human Rights and it is essential that the European Union does not simply protest but takes action, including insisting that non-governmental organisations take part in the EU’s human rights consultation with Russia.

Instead, what we see appears to be an attempt at a military solution by Mr Putin, accompanied by flagrant abuses of human rights, including arbitrary detention, forced confessions and torture, and some 2 500 disappearances since 1999. President Putin calls neighbouring Dagestan a ‘mini Iraq on Russia’s doorstep’. We cannot allow things to progress in that way.

  Milan Horáček (Verts/ALE). – (DE) Mr President, Commissioner, the law on NGOs was signed in secret by President Putin. The first three aid organisations in Ingushetia have already been banned, including one that provided humanitarian aid to refugees.

The attitude of authoritarian regimes towards civil society reflects the undesirability, in their eyes, of independent, accurate information on such subjects as the tragic war in Chechnya. NGOs such as Memorial provide us with information on infringements and violations of human rights in Chechnya, where free elections are impossible.

In the same way that Chancellor Merkel had brought up the subject of Guantanamo in Washington, she brought up the sore point of Chechnya on her visit to Russia, and the Russian President's response to her was to say that there were deficiencies in democracy and human rights in the West, in other words in the EU, too. All I can say to that is: in the EU we do not have such massive restrictions on freedom of opinion, as terrible a war as in Chechnya, a judiciary that disregards the rule of law as completely as in the Yukos case, or prison conditions as inhumane as those experienced by Mr Khodorkovsky and Mr Lebedev. Human rights are universal and indivisible and must not be disregarded.

  Aloyzas Sakalas (PSE). – (LT) Mr President, ladies and gentlemen, first, I would like to note that the proposed resolution is much more substantial than any of the previous ones, in which the massacre of the innocent Chechen people was judged depending on who was doing it – the separatists or the Russian army units. The first case was referred to as terrorism, while the latter one was referred to as a violation of human rights. The conclusion may be drawn that our judgments are not dependent on the fact itself, but rather on whether the violator is powerful and has oil and gas resources.

However, I would like to say that our resolutions will never be effective unless the foreign policy of the EU Member States is adjusted with regard to the content of such resolutions. And, as a matter of fact, why should President Putin react to our sobbing, when he is further warmly welcomed in our states and is even entrusted with some very honourable and responsible duties, such as chairing the G8 meetings. Therefore, while proposing that we approve the draft resolution, I would like to see it supported by the appropriate diplomatic actions, so it does not become just another resolution that does not change anything in essence.

  Józef Pinior (PSE). – (PL) Mr President, as the European Parliament is debating Russia, the trial of Stanislav Dmitrijewski, senior editor of the newspaper Prawo Zaszczyta and head of the Russia-Chechnya Friendship Association, is continuing in Nijni Novgorod.

Mr Dmitrijewski is one of the most distinguished human rights’ defenders in the Russian Federation. The Russia-Chechnya Friendship Association’s web site is the main platform presenting the situation concerning human rights and political freedoms in the Southern Caucasus, notably in Chechnya. The next hearing in Mr Dmitrijewski’s case is set for 3 February 2006.

When discussing Russian we tend to express concern about the state of democracy and also about the restriction of human rights and the activities of non-governmental organisations. It is only right to remember, however, that a different kind of Russia exists as well. The latter is a country of human rights’ defenders and of politicians ready to face up to the authoritarian political system. It is also a Russia with a flourishing culture and a sensitive civil society that constitutes a genuine link between contemporary Russia and the European Union.

  Hans Winkler, President-in-Office of the Council. (DE) Mr President, honourable Members, we take the concerns and worries expressed during this debate regarding the situation in Chechnya and human rights in Russia very seriously. This morning, the President of the European Council, Chancellor Schüssel, said something that I would like to reiterate here: for us, human rights and basic freedoms are indivisible. They are European values, and I would stress that that obviously also applies to Russia. The European Union – and I am particularly referring here to the activities of the Council – repeatedly discusses these human rights violations in Chechnya with Russia at all levels. Whether or not the language of those discussions is too diplomatic for your taste, it is the language we use with our Russian partners.

It is particularly important to maintain dialogue, because it is the only way that we can raise our concerns about these violations of human rights. That is why the human rights consultations that have been initiated, and which we will be holding on a regular basis, are particularly important. They will be taking place again in March, and the Council is preparing for these consultations very conscientiously.

We also share, of course, the concerns raised here regarding the law on non-governmental organisations. We find it regrettable that this law has been signed. Rest assured, the Council will raise those concerns and we will be monitoring the position of non-governmental organisations in Russia very closely. I also agree, naturally, with the honourable Member who said that we must strengthen those forces in Russia that are committed to democracy and human rights. I can assure you that we are doing exactly that.

  Benita Ferrero-Waldner, Member of the Commission. Mr President, I should like first to come back to the election. It was the Council of Europe which sent an eight-member fact-finding mission; we did not send an election observation mission. The elections were not free or fair, there were deficiencies, but at the same time progress was made, because for the first time they took place without violence in such a difficult environment. A local service, financed by the Commission, said that there were some irregularities, but, generally, voter participation was higher than ever before: there was a 55% turnout. We see that there is some progress, but we know that the situation on the whole certainly is not satisfactory.

Having said that, let me also say what the reasons are for it. There is a political conflict that needs a political solution, but there is also much poverty and therefore the root causes of poverty also have to be addressed. That is what we in the Commission are trying to do currently with our Tacis Programme in three areas: health, education – especially job-creation – and income-generation. We know that the main reason for many people breaking out is because they do not have jobs.

Thirdly, as I mentioned very clearly, as regards the NGOs we will now be taking very careful note of the way the provisions are being implemented, since it was only yesterday or today that President Putin signed this law. We now have to look at it. I agree with the Presidency that it has to be in regular political dialogue with Russia.

You can be sure that we always mention things. As I said before, I have been speaking with Foreign Minister Lavrov on this issue and at least a few amendments have been taken into consideration, but on the whole I agree with those who say that, as regards Russia, we need a coherent policy that encompasses energy security. We know that Russia is an important supplier for us, it is a strategic partner for us, but it is also a partner with whom we sometimes have dialogue where critical remarks are made.

  President. I have received six motions for resolutions⁽¹⁾ tabled in accordance with Rule 103(2) of the Rules of Procedure.

The debate is closed.

The vote will take place tomorrow at 12 noon.

IN THE CHAIR: MRS KAUFMANN
Vice-President

(1) See Minutes.