Texto íntegro 
Procedimiento : 2014/2627(RSP)
Ciclo de vida en sesión
Ciclos relativos a los documentos :

Textos presentados :


Debates :

PV 12/03/2014 - 6
CRE 12/03/2014 - 6

Votaciones :

PV 13/03/2014 - 14.12
CRE 13/03/2014 - 14.12

Textos aprobados :


Acta literal de los debates
Miércoles 12 de marzo de 2014 - Estrasburgo Edición revisada

6. Invasión de Ucrania por Rusia (debate)
Vídeo de las intervenciones

  El Presidente. - El punto siguiente en el orden del día es el debate a partir de las Declaraciones del Consejo y de la Comisión sobre la invasión de Ucrania por Rusia (2014/2627(RSP)).


Quiero dar la bienvenida al señor Petro Poroshenko, miembro de la Rada Suprema —el Parlamento ucraniano— y copresidente de la Comisión Parlamentaria de Cooperación UE-Ucrania, que, junto con sus colegas, ha tomado asiento en la tribuna oficial del hemiciclo.

En estos tiempos difíciles y complicados, el Parlamento Europeo está ciertamente con el pueblo de Ucrania y apoya plenamente la libertad, la soberanía y la integridad territorial del país.

Hasta aquí, la partitura que me ha preparado la Administración y que he leído porque estoy absolutamente de acuerdo con ella, pero me voy a permitir añadir de mi propia cosecha un pensamiento de quien fuera amigo mío y sigue siendo permanente fuente de inspiración, Willy Brandt, para recordar que «la paz no lo es todo, pero sin la paz nada es posible».


  Dimitrios Kourkoulas, President-in-Office of the Council. - Mr President, the situation in Ukraine is one of the most serious crises in Europe in recent years. What happens in our neighbourhood matters, as it has implications for all European nations. The sovereignty of Ukraine should be safeguarded. The most immediate priority must now be to find a peaceful solution to the current crisis, one which is fully in line with international law.

The Deputy Prime Minister and Minister for Foreign Affairs of Greece, Mr[nbsp ]Venizelos, had the opportunity to visit Kiev and Mariupol on 2[nbsp ]March, to assess the situation on the ground and convey the European Union’s clear message. He thoroughly briefed the Council during the extraordinary session of 3[nbsp ]March[nbsp ]2014 which prepared the European Council on Ukraine that followed.

Last week’s extraordinary meeting of EU Heads of State or Government, as well as the extraordinary meeting of the Foreign Affairs Council, provided important opportunities both to assess the latest developments in Ukraine and to send a clear message on a number of points.

As you know, the Heads of State or Government had a lengthy and productive discussion with the newly-appointed Prime Minister of Ukraine, Arseniy Yatsenyuk. They commended the measured response shown so far by the new Ukrainian government and encouraged the authorities to pursue their efforts to ensure free and fair elections, advance constitutional reform and investigate all acts of violence. The Ukrainian authorities need to ensure inclusiveness at all levels of government. This must involve reaching out to all Ukrainian regions and population groups and ensuring full protection of the rights of people belonging to national minorities, in accordance with Ukraine’s international commitments.

In line with the position taken by the extraordinary Foreign Affairs Council of 3[nbsp ]March, the Heads of State or Government strongly condemned the violation of Ukraine’s sovereignty and territorial integrity by the Russian Federation. They called on the Russian Federation to withdraw its armed forces immediately to the areas of their permanent stationing, in accordance with the relevant agreements and to allow immediate access to international monitors.

The solution to the crisis in Ukraine must be based on the territorial integrity, sovereignty and independence of Ukraine, according to international law. In this connection, leaders agreed that the decision by the Supreme Council of the Autonomous Republic of Crimea to hold a referendum on the future status of this territory is contrary to the Ukrainian Constitution and therefore illegal.

It is now particularly important that the Ukrainian and Russian sides talk to each other without delay, including through possible multilateral mechanisms. These must produce results within a limited timeframe. The Heads of State or Government announced that the European Union would also participate in the multilateral contact or coordination group being set up to de-escalate the situation.

This should have as its objectives, among others, to build confidence between the parties; watch over the territorial integrity and sovereignty of Ukraine; protect all citizens against intimidation from all sides; observe the rights of minorities, including their linguistic rights; help to prepare free and fair elections; and monitor implementation of agreements and commitments.

As regards Russia, the European Union wants a relationship with Russia based on trust, mutual interest and respect for international obligations. It is clear, that at present, there cannot be ‘business as usual’.

The Heads of State or Government therefore decided to take action, including the action envisaged by the Council on 3[nbsp ]March. This includes the suspension of bilateral talks with the Russian Federation on visa matters, as well as on the New Agreement. They also supported the decision of the European Members of the G8 and the EU institutions to suspend their participation in G8 Summit preparations until further notice.

In the absence of results in the framework of negotiations between the Governments of Ukraine and the Russian Federation to resolve the crisis, the European Union will decide on additional measures such as travel bans, freezing of assets and the cancellation of the EU-Russia summit. The Commission and the European External Action Service will be undertaking preparatory work on these measures.

This is not to say that we do not value our relations with Russia, which are important for peace and stability in Europe. Russia is an essential strategic partner. However, the Council was clear: any further destabilisation in Ukraine would seriously affect EU-Russia relations in a broad range of economic areas.

We stand ready to assist Ukraine and provide it with strong financial backing to help stabilise the economic and financial situation. To this end, the European Union has prepared a package of immediate short-term and medium-term measures offering trade, technical, economic and financial assistance. The immediate priority is to achieve Ukraine’s macroeconomic stability through fiscal, monetary and exchange-rate policies.

We also expect Ukraine to take action urgently to launch ambitious structural reform, including the fight against corruption and for transparency. The Council has already decided to freeze and recover the assets of persons identified as being responsible for the misappropriation of state funds.

The EU is committed to signing the Association Agreement, including a Deep and Comprehensive Free Trade Area. This would bring significant opportunities for economic development and increased prosperity for the whole of Ukraine, including Crimea, as well as its neighbours. It was agreed that the EU would sign the political part of the Association Agreement as a matter of priority.

We also intend to adopt unilateral measures which would allow Ukraine to benefit substantially from the advantages offered in the Deep and Comprehensive Free Trade Area, even before the signature of this agreement. Such measures would entail an offer to apply provisions related to the import of goods by reducing tariffs and opening tariff rate quotas by means of so-called autonomous trade measures.

The EU is also committed to enhancing people-to-people contacts between the EU and Ukraine, including through the visa liberalisation process, in line with the agreed conditions in the framework of the Visa Liberalisation Action Plan.

The issue of energy and energy security must not be forgotten. It represents an important part of the Union’s external relations, and we will continue our efforts to ensure a secure energy supply. The EU is prepared to help Ukraine to secure its own energy supply through diversification, better energy efficiency and effective interconnection with the European Union.

The EU must, in addition, seek to strengthen its political association and gradual economic integration with Georgia and the Republic of Moldova. Heads of State or Government confirmed the aim of signing the Association Agreements, including Deep and Comprehensive Free Trade Areas, by the end of August[nbsp ]2014 at the latest.

Let me conclude by underlining that de-escalation of the situation in Ukraine remains the key priority. It is essential now for Russia and Ukraine to talk to each other. The European Union is ready to help, and also to help the Ukrainian people on an economic, financial and technical level. We believe that Russia also believes the objective of peace and stability in the region and on our continent to be of the highest priority and in our clear common interest.


  José Manuel Barroso, President of the Commission. - Mr President, President of the Council, honourable Members, very serious concerns remain over the situation in Ukraine, and I would like to start by saying how grateful we are for the constant attention that this Parliament has been giving to this most important crisis. I know that Parliament as an institution and many of you in this room have been putting considerable energy and time into helping to find a solution, and I hope that we can put all our efforts along the same lines into supporting Ukraine, which is a European country.

Ukraine was also the subject of an extraordinary meeting of Heads of State and Government last week, part of which was also attended by the Ukrainian Prime[nbsp ]Minister Yatsenyuk. Today I want to share with you the results of that meeting, and specifically to tell you what the European Commission has been doing to support Ukraine in these very challenging times. Not only have we been supporting the legitimate aspirations of the Ukrainians, we have also been doing our best for regional and international peace.

The developments, which started with the people of Ukraine expressing a clear wish to take their future into their own hands, call for a robust and united European response. The current situation directly challenges us in many ways and forms. It challenges our conscience as individuals; it challenges our unity as Europeans; it challenges our policies as decision makers; and it challenges some of the values that we hold dear, such as peace and democracy.

This is, in a way, a test of our Union. The outcome of the current situation will have a great impact on the geopolitical configuration of our continent in the years to come. What happened in Crimea was an unprovoked and unacceptable violation of Ukrainian sovereignty and its territorial integrity. In the aftermath of this violation, alongside other G7 leaders, the President of the European Council and I – on behalf of the European Union – have strongly and unequivocally condemned this action.

Today at 12.30 central European time, we will release another statement that will leave no doubts about the determination of G7 countries and the European Union. We call on the Russian Federation to cease all efforts to annex Ukraine’s autonomous republic of Crimea.

Honourable Members, the current situation remains very tense, so we need to take a very principled but also a very responsible approach. The Ukrainian people have already shed too much blood in this process. No more lives should be put at risk. Our immediate goal and objective should be to de-escalate the situation and find a peaceful solution to the current crisis, in full respect of international law. Any attempt to legitimise a referendum in Crimea is contrary to the Ukrainian Constitution and is quite clearly illegal under international law.

We have been offering Russia the possibility of direct talks through the international mechanisms that are available – including a possible contact group – in full respect of the principles of the unity, sovereignty and territorial integrity of Ukraine. So far, unfortunately – and as you know – this has been to no avail. High Representative/Vice-President Catherine Ashton remains very active and is in constant contact with her counterparts, and I would like to praise her role.

Meanwhile, however, the financial and economic situation has already deteriorated dramatically, and we have not lost any time in mobilising a support package to help stem the tide and help Ukraine to stabilise its economic and financial situation. I am proud that the Commission was quickly able to propose an overall support package of at least EUR[nbsp ]11 billion from the European budget and from European Union-based international financial institutions for the short and medium term. This was proof that we can react quickly; that we can show solidarity; that we can rise to the challenge. As you know, this package was welcomed by our Member States in the European Council, and the Prime Minister of Ukraine specifically expressed his gratitude for this initiative.

Some of the measures can be put into practice immediately. Indeed, just yesterday, Commissioner De Gucht and I publicly presented the Commission proposal to frontload unilaterally the trade parts of the Association Agreement, so that Ukraine can benefit from tariff reductions and tariff rate quotas even before the Deep and Comprehensive Free Trade Area is fully applied. This will save the Ukrainian economy around EUR[nbsp ]500 million a year in tariff cuts. I hope we can count on your active commitment and that of the Council to fast-track the approval process.


We also immediately dispatched a mission from our services to identify the economic and financial needs of the Ukrainian authorities. I can announce that next week, on 19[nbsp ]March[nbsp ]2014, the Commission will propose macro-financial assistance of an additional EUR[nbsp ]1 billion.

This amount will bring our total macro-financial assistance to EUR[nbsp ]1.6 billion, and it is a very concrete demonstration of our solidarity to help Ukraine face its short-term difficulties. However, it is crucial that this is part of a wider international effort where other international financial institutions, such as the IMF and the World Bank, as well as our Member States bilaterally and international partners, can also participate.

I would like to thank Olli Rehn and his services for moving quickly on this, and I would like to add a special word of thanks to Štefan Füle for his constant and strong engagement in this file. At the same time, it is equally crucial to underline that this aid package is not a quick fix and that it needs to be complemented by, on the other side, a reform-oriented and inclusive Ukrainian government that is committed to fixing the current state of their financial system and rebuilding the economic foundations of the country both during the current transition phase and in the medium to long term.

At the summit meeting last week, we also decided that we will sign the political chapters of the Association Agreement before the Presidential elections that will take place in May. This will seal the political association of Ukraine with the European Union, as has been wished for by its people in such a clear manner during these past months. This can naturally be followed by the entry into force of the remaining parts of the Association Agreement/DCFTA after the presidential elections. We also reconfirmed our intention to sign association agreements and DCFTAs with Georgia and Moldova before the end of August.

The European Union has been pro-active and united throughout this crisis, and I am sure this will also be the case when the European Council discusses the next steps next week. This is vital for Ukraine’s stability and prosperity, and for our credibility. The ball is currently in Russia’s court and, as we speak, the diplomatic, political and military situation has not yet started moving in the right direction.

Last week’s meeting of Heads of State and Government took a gradual approach to the measures we are ready to take in response to the current situation, so as to send an unambiguous signal that going further down this path will have consequences whilst at the same time preventing further entrenchment of the conflict from our side.

Our dialogue on visa facilitation and liberalisation, the discussions on the new agreement and the preparations for the G8 meeting in Sochi have already been suspended. If meaningful negotiations do not begin within the next few days and produce results within a limited time frame, this will trigger additional measures. A further deterioration of the situation could lead to far-reaching consequences, which I sincerely hope can be avoided.

Honourable Members, I have been working together with the Commission and also with the Member States for the last ten years to build a constructive relationship with Russia, while supporting our neighbours’ efforts and sovereign choices to reform, modernise and build closer relations with the European Union.

Our relationship with our Eastern partners does not have to be an exclusive one. Our model of engagement is that of open regionalism, not of autarchic self-entrenchment. We are not asking nor even suggesting to our partners from the Eastern Neighbourhood to turn their backs on Russia. On the contrary, we encourage them to have good neighbourly relations and enhance their traditional trade ties. But at the same time, Russia needs to accept fully the right of these countries to decide their own future and the nature of the relations they choose to have with Russia.

The pages of last century’s history should be turned and not re-written. I believe in a European continent where the rule of law prevails over the rule of force, sovereignty is shared and not limited, and the logic of cooperation replaces the logic of confrontation. We do not need new cold wars, and we certainly do not want them.

Security does not come from segregation, separating communities, building fences, but by embracing differences and diversity. Ukraine should not be a border between neighbours that do not speak to each other but a bridge where they can meet. Ukraine should not be seen as a problem for Europe but as an asset for a more united European continent. On the basis of these principles, I think we can say that a united, inclusive, stable and prosperous Ukraine can only be of benefit to all its neighbours and partners. The European Union remains committed to that goal: to Ukraine’s unity and to European peace.


  José Ignacio Salafranca Sánchez-Neyra, en nombre del Grupo PPE. – Señor Presidente, señor Presidente de la Comisión, señor Ministro, Señorías, creo que este no es el momento de recrearnos en las insuficiencias de la acción exterior de la Unión Europea, sino de promover una acción coherente y eficaz para tratar de evitar una escalada que provoque un conflicto abierto y movilizar a la comunidad internacional para tratar de que Rusia dé marcha atrás en este disparatado intento de anexionarse Crimea, que realmente nos retrotrae a la década de los años treinta del siglo pasado.

La Resolución del Parlamento Europeo condena estos hechos por considerarlos claramente contrarios a la Carta de las Naciones Unidas, al Acta Final de Helsinki, al Memorando de Budapest y a los acuerdos bilaterales entre Rusia y Ucrania.

Hay que rechazar claramente este referéndum que se va a celebrar el próximo domingo por ilegal e ilegítimo, y hay que apoyar, señor Presidente de la Comisión, al Gobierno de Ucrania. Celebramos este paquete financiero de la Comisión, la rápida firma del acuerdo de asociación o de los capítulos políticos, el avance de las medidas comerciales, y creo que la Unión Europea debería promover también una conferencia de donantes a nivel internacional para paliar esta situación.

Entendemos también que una mediación internacional a través de la OSCE y de las Naciones Unidas sería determinante para garantizar la seguridad, la integridad territorial y la soberanía de Ucrania, y creo, señor Presidente, que tenemos que tomar en consideración las medidas sancionadoras que el Consejo Europeo ha propuesto en caso de que no se produzca esa desescalada de la tensión.

Y, por último, quisiera recordar, señor Presidente, que la señora Timoshenko nos dijo la semana pasada en Dublín que Rusia llegará tan lejos en este asunto como se lo permita la comunidad internacional. Y, como no desarrollemos una acción eficaz y rápida, las consecuencias de este conflicto son absolutamente impredecibles.


  Hannes Swoboda, on behalf of the S&D Group. – Mr President, President Barroso mentioned again the EUR[nbsp ]11 billion, and I want to commend the Commission for having found the money so quickly. When we asked in recent months for money for Syrian refugees or for any other issues that were also urgent, the answer was always: there is no money. So let us hope that what is now promised to the citizens of Ukraine is real money.

Secondly, I think we should also get the money back from the frozen assets, because it is very important to have the frozen asset money going back, including from the oligarchs who are now the new favourite oligarchs in the country. It is good that they are now the new governors, for example, but it is also important that those people in Ukraine who have a lot of money, or have their money outside the country, go back and put the money back into economic development.

Thirdly, I think it is very important to have elections very soon for a new President and a new government – a broad government, I would hope, representing all the different citizen groups in the country – because the long-term engagement of the European Union should only be concluded with a long-term government which has been elected and tried to involve all citizens from whichever majority or minority they come from.

My next point is about Russia. I think what Russia is doing is not at all acceptable – we will come to that in a minute. But how strong are we vis-à-vis Russia? When Commissioner Oettinger said that we have to interrupt negotiations about South Stream, why are we negotiating about South Stream? Why was it possible to kill Nabucco, for example: why did we accept? Why did some Member States agree to bring back Russian gas into it and not gas from other countries? Why, two or three weeks ago, did Mr Orbán sign a nuclear arrangement with Russia?

So we would have been in a much stronger position – as we discussed this morning – if we had had a clear policy of industrial independence. We have the report – I had many disagreements with Mr Saryusz-Wolski, but we wrote a report in the Committee on Foreign Affairs on an independent energy policy. Why was it not accepted by the Council and promoted by the Commission? We would have been in a much better position today vis-à-vis Russia.

Concerning the referendum, it should be very clear that this is not a legitimate referendum. All the referendums we have seen in the past have been totally different. Whether in East Timor, South Sudan or in Scotland in the future, referendums are held on a legal basis with international observers and no military putting pressure on the national assemblies. Russia cannot say that this is about the will of the citizens of the Crimea. No, the referendum is enforced – already now they are saying what the outcome of the referendum will be. There is no doubt about it, because it is under duress. So let us be very clear to Russia. There is no possibility of accepting an ...

(The President cut off the speaker)


  Johannes Cornelis van Baalen, on behalf of the ALDE Group. – Mr President, it is good that the House is united, because we will see that illegal referendum happen on Sunday. It will take place. Both Houses of the Parliament of Russia have made all preparations for an illegal annexation of the Crimea, and the Russian Government has assisted them. I have not seen any movement towards withdrawing this illegal referendum. I think we will see in one week, or maybe two, that Russia has done what it probably has always wanted to do: create ‘facts on the ground’ in the Crimea.

Then we have to have serious economic sanctions that will hurt Russia, unfortunately, and that will also hurt us. We should be prepared to do this because the Russian actions are not only illegal, they also destroy the Helsinki Process in which we in Europe have said that borders are to be accepted and can only be changed through international law. We are in a very serious situation.

I would like to know from the Commission and the Council: are they really united on the financial support package? Is there a difference of opinion between the Council and the Commission? Is the money there, or not? Are they prepared to take, together with Parliament, one line on serious economic sanctions?


  Rebecca Harms, im Namen der Verts/ALE-Fraktion. – Herr Präsident! Die Kollegen haben schon sehr präzise beschrieben, wie systematisch Russland bereit war, internationales Recht – die UN-Charta-Verträge – zu brechen. Es ist trotzdem so, dass man sich gar nicht klar genug machen kann, dass Russland im Moment auch die Macht ist, die bereit ist zu einer militärischen Invasion und zu einer militärischen Eskalation. Keine andere Macht, die da bisher betroffen ist, berührt ist von diesem Konflikt, ist dazu bereit.

Was mich mit am meisten bestürzt, gerade in diesem Jahr – 100 Jahre nach Beginn des Ersten Weltkriegs –, ist, dass Russland auch bereit ist, in diesen wahnsinnigen Propagandamustern des letzten Jahrhunderts ein Volk auf ein anderes zu hetzen, und zwar gnadenlos, wenn man sich die Propaganda von russischen Medien anschaut. Wie geht Europa damit um? Wir haben zu oft, Herr Kollege Swoboda, auch schon in der Auseinandersetzung mit Präsident Janukowytsch suggeriert, dass die Europäische Union irgendwie machtlos ist. Das stimmte nicht gegenüber Janukowytsch. Und das stimmt auch nicht gegenüber dem Russland von Wladimir Putin.

75[nbsp ]% des Außenhandels Russlands werden mit der Europäischen Union abgewickelt. Wir müssen nicht in eine militärische Auseinandersetzung fallen, um Russland deutlich zu machen, dass, wenn es sich isolieren will, diese Isolation auch passiert. Wir müssen diesen Handel, wie Sie es gerade auch zum Gas richtig beschrieben haben, nicht immer weiter intensivieren. Wir haben da andere Möglichkeiten.

Diplomatie, so wie sie von den Staats- und Regierungschefs befürwortet worden ist, ist richtig. Bisher weigert sich die russische Seite, überhaupt an den runden Tisch zu kommen. Es wird sogar verhindert, dass die OSZE auf der Krim zur Beobachtung aktiv wird. Also ein so klares Njet gegenüber allen diplomatischen Bemühungen hat es noch nicht gegeben! Das bedeutet für mich, dass diese Seite der Sanktionen eindeutig vorbereitet werden muss, und die müssen so angelegt sein, dass deutlich wird, wir wollen nicht das russische Volk treffen, sondern wir wollen diejenigen treffen, die für diese Eskalation verantwortlich sind.

Und eines zum Schluss: Dass europäische Länder ohne Ende Waffen nach Russland exportiert haben, das wissen wir. Dass Italien, Deutschland und Frankreich heute bereit sind ...

(Der Präsident entzieht der Rednerin das Wort.)


  Ryszard Antoni Legutko, on behalf of the ECR Group. – Mr President, Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, dear me, what bellicose language not heard in this Chamber for decades. The EU institutions have been notoriously pro-Russian, and stronger words were usually suppressed by the big men in this Parliament and the Commission. The unpleasant fact is that there is not much that the EU can or will do about Russia. The EU has neither instruments, nor the will, nor a common foreign policy for that matter.

During the Ukrainian crisis the EU High Representative did a lot of travelling, but she might just as well have stayed at home and watched television. The job was done by the representatives of national governments. Of course, what they did was too late and too timid, and they were soon overtaken by events. Today it is clear that the belligerent rhetoric is no longer palatable to the powerful European governments and will soon change. Chancellor Merkel is not happy with this war of words and longs for the good old days of business as usual. Other European governments think pretty much the same.

The present outburst of moralistic rhetoric condemning Russia – not the first and not the last in recent history – is one of those episodes that will soon pass into political oblivion. What will most likely happen is a tacit agreement between the major western players and Russia, legitimising her imperialist interest in the Crimea and elsewhere, and it will not take long before this Chamber will be praising Russia for her self-restraint and a generally stabilising role.

The European countries will ultimately side with Russia, not against Russia; with the strong, not with the weak. This is what European politics has been like for centuries. Anyone who expects something entirely different is bound to be disappointed. The Book of Ecclesiastes had it just right: there is nothing new under the sun.


  Nikola Vuljanić, u ime kluba GUE/NGL. – Gospodine predsjedniče, kriza u Ukrajini pokrenuta je opravdanim protestima protiv beskrupuloznog diktatora i njegove sklonosti sličnim istočnim diktatorima.

S druge strane, grube riječi, dobrim dijelom prazna obećanja Europske unije pridonijeli su dizanju temperature. Pred par mjeseci sam u ovom Parlamentu rekao da svaka gruba i prazna riječ košta. Košta novaca, ali ne samo novaca. Račun sad dolazi na naplatu. Danas je vrijeme da budemo sasvim jasni. Nedorečene poruke i poruke iza kojih čvrsto ne stojimo mogu samo doprinijeti daljnjoj eskalaciji krize i sukoba.

Završni račun doći će na naplatu, prije svega građanima Ukrajine, ali i svima nama. Par pitanja treba pojednostaviti i raščistiti do kraja: Europska unija priča, i danas smo to čuli, o ozbiljnim sankcijama, a provode se nježna ograničenja prekogranične suradnje. Trebalo bi čuti i jasan stav zemalja članica jer one su te koje će provoditi eventualne sankcije. Do koje razine će te sankcije ići? Postoje li računica i čvrsta volja da se sankcije provedu do kraja? Pa šta košta da košta.

Drugo pitanje koje treba razjasniti tiče se europske perspektive Ukrajine i njezine teritorijalne cjelovitosti. Vrlo smo glasni po tom pitanju i takvi i trebamo biti. Ukrajinski građani, svi bez izuzetka, trebaju imati mogućnost izjasniti se o budućnosti svoje zemlje. S druge strane, Rusija ima svoje baze u Ukrajini, prvenstveno na Krimu. Nitko razuman ne misli da će Rusija ikada mirno otići s Krima. Da li je moguća situacija u kojoj zemlje članice Europske unije imaju na svom tlu ruske baze? Rusija više nije komunistička zemlja, nije ni demokratska zemlja (barem ne onako kako mi vidimo demokraciju), ali ona je tu. I možda je odgovor na ovo pitanje jedno od rješenja krize.


  Jacek Olgierd Kurski, w imieniu grupy EFD. – Putin słowami, że upadek Związku Radzieckiego był największą katastrofą XX w., przystąpił do odbudowy imperium. Pierwsza była Gruzja, teraz jest Ukraina. Panie komisarzu Barroso, nie byłoby zuchwałości Putina, gdyby nie naiwność Unii Europejskiej! Miliardy na Nord Stream i planowane miliardy na South Stream, to są miliardy euro na ominięcie Ukrainy i Polski po to, aby uzależnić się od Rosji i stać się jeszcze łatwiejszymi ofiarami Putina. Hańbą Europy jest uczestnictwo w tych planach Putina symbolizowane obecnością pana Schrödera we władzach Gazpromu w charakterze pożytecznego idioty w imperialnych planach małego Hitlerka z KGB. Wnioski na przyszłość: Lenin kpił z Zachodu i powiedział, że Zachód dostarczy mu sznur, na którym on powiesi Zachód. Dzisiaj rolę sznura pełnią gazodolary i petrodolary z Zachodu, za którePutin podbija niepodległą Ukrainę. Musi nastąpić zasadnicza reorientacja zasilania energetycznego Europy z kierunku wschodniego na zachodni. NależyNależy odwołać się do własnych surowców, węgla i gazu łupkowego... (Przewodniczący odebrał posłowi głos.)


  Andreas Mölzer (NI). - Herr Präsident! Die Situation in der Ukraine stellt sich aus europäischer Sicht natürlich wie ein gordischer Knoten dar. Egal, in welche Richtung sich Kiew orientiert, es wird immer ein Landesteil unzufrieden sein oder sich sogar majorisiert fühlen. Wir müssen also, wenn wir eine Lösung wollen und wenn wir nicht wollen, dass mit der Ukraine ein permanenter Krisenherd an der östlichen Peripherie der Europäischen Union entsteht, eine Lösung finden, bei der alle Teile mitarbeiten. Es müssen natürlich Europäer und Russen, auch Amerikaner, und die Streitparteien in der Ukraine an einen Tisch.

Wir müssen davon ausgehen, dass alles besser ist als Blutvergießen, alles ist besser als ein Bürgerkrieg, alles ist besser als ein Krieg. Da ist natürlich – wir denken an den Kosovo, wir denken an die Tschechoslowakei – unter Umständen auch eine territoriale Veränderung möglich. Das muss möglich sein, um Krieg oder Bürgerkrieg zu vermeiden.

Es sind natürlich die Interessen der nach Westen orientierten Ukrainer zu bedenken, es sind auch die Interessen der nach Osten orientierten russischen Bevölkerung zu bedenken. Alles ist besser als ein neuer kalter Krieg. Ein Titel wie „Invasion der Ukraine durch Russland“ suggeriert bereits, dass wir uns in einem solchen kalten Krieg befinden. Das sollten wir vermeiden.


  Elmar Brok (PPE). - Herr Präsident, Herr Ratspräsident, Herr Kommissionspräsident, Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Russland hat einen Völkerrechtsbruch begangen. Dafür gibt es keine Entschuldigung. Das muss deutlich zum Ausdruck gebracht werden. Das Referendum auf der Krim ist völkerrechtswidrig und verstößt gegen die ukrainische Verfassung. Deswegen kann es nicht legitim sein. Es gibt auch keine Begründung für das russische Vorgehen, da wir legitime Institutionen in der Ukraine haben, und weil es keine Verfolgung der russischen Minderheit in der Ukraine gegeben hat. Wir sollten sehen, dass der Freiheitswille eines Volkes von entscheidender Bedeutung ist, dass aus diesem Grunde die Souveränität eines Volkes, über das eigene Schicksal zu entscheiden, von größter Bedeutung ist und dass wir nicht mehr – wie Frau Zimmer meint – die großgeostrategische Vorstellung haben, dass Völker bei anderen nachfragen müssen, was sie tun dürfen. Das ist 19. und 20. Jahrhundert!

Wir haben multilaterale Organisationen, die gestützt werden müssen. Die OECD darf dort nicht hineinkommen. Das ist ein Verlust, der dort festzustellen ist. Wir müssen sehen, welchen Willen Russland wirklich hat, um die eigene Macht aufzubauen, und ob es bei der Krim bleibt, oder ob es ein neues Reich aufbauen will.

Lassen Sie mich eine letzte Bemerkung machen: Ich bedanke mich bei der Kommission und beim Europäischen Rat dafür, dass schnell der Assoziierungsvertrag unterzeichnet wird und dass es die einseitige Pro-Ukraine-Umsetzung des Freihandelsvertrags gibt, dass das Unterstützungspaket beschlossen worden ist und dass dies zusammen mit dem Internationalen Währungsfonds und anderen ausgebaut werden soll. Ich begrüße Sanktionen, damit Russland Grenzen aufgezeigt werden …

(Der Präsident entzieht dem Redner das Wort.)


  Libor Rouček (S&D). - Pane předsedající, mír a stabilita jsou postaveny v Evropě na mezinárodním právu – na Chartě OSN, na Závěrečném aktu Konference o bezpečnosti a spolupráci z Helsinek v roce 1975, ale také mimo jiné i na Budapešťském memorandu o bezpečnostních zárukách z roku 1994, kde se nejenom Velká Británie a Spojené státy americké, ale také Rusko zavázalo, že bude dodržovat teritoriální integritu Ukrajiny.

Bohužel bylo mezinárodní právo ruskou vojenskou akcí, ruským nátlakem porušeno. A stejně tak je porušováno ale i ukrajinské právo, které nedovoluje referendum, pokud jde o změny hranic. Jinými slovy, my nechceme novou studenou válku s Ruskem, protože ta by neprospěla nikomu, ale zároveň se nemůžeme chovat, jako když se nic nestalo. Proto podporujeme opatření a rozhodnutí, která byla učiněna Evropskou komisí a Evropskou radou, a my se k nim v našem usnesení plně připojujeme. Ano, Ukrajina potřebuje pomoc. Potřebuje pomoc materiální, ale Ukrajina také potřebuje politickou pomoc a potřebuje konsolidovat svou domácí situaci. Čili podporujeme i tu myšlenku, aby byly co nejdříve uskutečněny nové prezidentské volby, nové parlamentní volby a vytvořena vláda, která bude inkluzivní...

(Předseda řečníkovi odebral slovo.)


  Alexander Graf Lambsdorff (ALDE). - Herr Präsident, liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Die Krim ist ein Teil der Ukraine, die Ukraine ist eine souveräne Nation. Das Vorgehen Russlands ist völkerrechtswidrig. Es ist inakzeptabel.

Meine Fraktion, die Liberalen, wir haben in den letzten Wochen immer darauf gedrängt, Gesprächskanäle offenzuhalten, wir haben uns für Entspannung eingesetzt, für Diplomatie, und wir müssen feststellen, dass Russland dieses Angebot nicht angenommen hat, sondern die Spannung weiter anheizt. Und hier geht es nicht mehr nur um die Krim. Hier geht es um Sicherheit und Stabilität in ganz Europa. Hier geht es um die europäische Sicherheitsordnung der OSZE, dieser Organisation, die von Hans-Dietrich Genscher erfunden wurde. Und ihr Kernprinzip ist, dass Grenzen nur im Konsens geändert werden dürfen. Wenn das jetzt nicht geschieht, dann sind Sanktionen unumgänglich, dann müssen Konten eingefroren werden, dann müssen Immobilien vom Markt genommen werden, und dann muss man auch an den Sport ran. Russland hat die Fußballweltmeisterschaft 2018. Das muss auf den Prüfstand. Und ich fordere von hier aus den FC Schalke 04 auf, am Freitag ohne Gazprom-Logo auf den Trikots in Augsburg aufzulaufen, um ein Signal zu senden, dass es so nicht weitergeht. Wir können nicht business as usual machen.



  Mark Demesmaeker (Verts/ALE). - De crisis, collega's, toont aan dat er nood is aan opwaardering van het Europese buitenlandbeleid, aan een opwaardering van het veiligheids- en defensiebeleid. Zo niet, dan komen we steeds te laat of reageren we te zwak.

Poetin weet dat en hij kan zijn gang gaan. Voor hem is een democratische omwenteling in Oekraïne een nachtmerrie. En dus leidt hij de aandacht daarvoor in eigen land af door een invasie in het buitenland. En het zijn helaas de burgers van Oekraïne die dit voelen. En het gaat van kwaad naar erger. In de Krim verdwijnen journalisten en activisten, worden burgers in de aanloop naar het zogenaamde referendum onder druk gezet, worden Krimtartaren bedreigd. In het oosten van Oekraïne zijn Russische sabotagegroepen aan het werk. Dat verontrust ons enorm.

We steunen de maatregelen van de Raad en de Commissie. De beste maatregel die we kunnen nemen, is investeren in het succes van de Oekraïense democratische omwenteling. In het consolideren van de pro-Europese stemming. Dat is Poetins grootste angst. Alleen dan kunnen de beperkte diplomatieke en sanctiemaatregelen slagen.


  Charles Tannock (ECR). - Mr President, two weeks ago we celebrated the overthrow of an authoritarian kleptocrat, the ousted President of Ukraine, Yanukovych, who does seem to have authorised the shooting of his own people. I spoke then of the need for Russia to honour the 1994 Budapest Assurances to respect Ukraine’s territorial integrity, including the Crimea, but few of us could have predicted at the time that there would be a military land-grab by Putin, justified by a pack of lies and his will and keenness to revive the glories of the disappeared Soviet Union and reabsorb the east of Ukraine, no matter what the costs or the international legal violations by his government are.

The response of the Ukrainian people to the invasion is clear. Russia is not wanted in Ukraine. So Putin is now engineering a phoney and illegal referendum at the point of a gun in Crimea, which offers no real choice. He has even sent a Tatar envoy from Kazan to attempt to bribe the Crimean Tatars into accepting Russian rule, as they remember well their previous ill-treatment by Russia under Stalin. Meanwhile, Crimea has descended into lawlessness, with journalists and opponents beaten up by Russian forces, and the main synagogue has been daubed with swastikas.

The EU must support the interim Ukraine Government financially and politically as it continues its extremely admirable resistance, with self-restraint, to this severe provocation by Russia. The EU must hit Russia hard with tough economic sanctions. Putin must understand that these sorts of aggressive actions have no place in modern Europe and will not go unpunished.


  Rolandas Paksas (EFD). - Situacija Ukrainoje šiandien tokia įtempta, kad bet kurią akimirką gali prasidėti beprotybė, kurią istorikai vėliau pavadins karu.

Ir mes pernelyg daug kalbame ir pernelyg mažai veikiame. Politinis dialogas yra svarbus, tačiau šiuo metu, aš esu įsitikinęs, jis turėtų vykti ir kitame, pačiame aukščiausiame lygyje.

Raginčiau Europos Sąjungos vadovus sušaukti specialią, tik tam skirtą Didžiojo aštuoneto konferenciją. Ir padėtis reikalauja sprendimų, kurie išsaugotų taiką. Dvišalės ar trišalės derybos vargu ar bus rezultatyvios. Delsta ir taip pernelyg ilgai. Pernelyg ilgai buvo reiškiamas tik susirūpinimas.

Kreipiuosi į valstybių lyderius: nuo jūsų sprendimų priklauso pasaulio ateitis. Linkiu, kad tie sprendimai būtų išmintingi.


  Adrian Severin (NI). - Mr President, Ukraine is a geo-strategic battlefield for Russia and the West. To demonise Russia is not a policy but an attempt to hide our lack of policy. In the long run the race of sanctions will be won by the competitor who is able to suffer the pains longer: would it be Russia, as usual? Everybody is keen to have the Ukrainian strategic asset at his disposal, but nobody wants to undertake full responsibility towards Ukraine. What remains, usually, is each side’s attempts to make Ukraine unavailable for the other one. This is evil.

The worst outcome would be the emergence of two Ukraines hijacking each other; of new frozen conflicts which will pass on their evil consequences from one crisis to another, spilling over in the region. Therefore we should negotiate, but not before ensuring equality of arms. Together, with our money, we must send into Ukraine our military peace-keeping forces on the ground. If Crimea is lost – I do not know – let us at least rescue the rest. The EU needs courage, vision and strength to get a clear strategic deal with Russia while defending Ukraine’s legitimate aspirations.


  Jacek Saryusz-Wolski (PPE). - Pamiętajmy o[nbsp ]słowach Churchilla po Monachium w 1938 r.. Nie chcieliśmy konfrontacji z Rosją, wybraliśmy ugłaskiwanie Rosji. Dziś mamy groźbę wojny. Czas na zmianę polityki wobec Rosji. Unia Europejska jest po stronie całej demokratycznej, wolnej i europejskiej Ukrainy. Nie ma zgody na wojnę w[nbsp ]Europie, nie ma zgody na oderwanie Krymu pod lufami rosyjskich karabinów. To nie rosyjsko-ukraiński konflikt, to atak na podstawową i świętą zasadę europejskiego bezpieczeństwa i[nbsp ]pokój w Europie. To atak na zasadę o[nbsp ]niezmienianiu siłą granic w[nbsp ]Europie. Tym samym jest to zagrożenie dla bezpieczeństwa ogólnoeuropejskiego i[nbsp ]pokoju w[nbsp ]Europie. Uznajemy jako Unia europejskie aspiracje Ukrainy i[nbsp ]perspektywę europejską. W[nbsp ]następnym tygodniu podpiszemy umowę stowarzyszeniową, oferujemy duży pakiet pomocy finansowej oraz program liberalizacji wizowej. Uznajemy faktyczną aneksję Krymu za prawnie nieskuteczną i[nbsp ]nielegalną. Domagamy się wycofania wojsk rosyjskich z Krymu.


  Ana Gomes (S&D). - Mr President, provocative actions in Crimea are a violation of a bilateral agreement with Ukraine and a violation of the Budapest Agreement with all of the other P5 countries. The Crimea referendum amounts to Russian aggression and a challenge to the territorial integrity of Ukraine. Mr Putin is playing with fire, fuelling lies and bigotry about the Ukrainian revolution and resorting to the same bogus arguments that were used in the Sudetenland decades ago, with devastating consequences for Europe and the world.

The EU must stand by the people of Ukraine as well as the people of Russia, who are both victims of the irresponsible, vengeful hubris and, indeed, weakness of Vladimir Putin. We do not want war. To press for a diplomatic solution, we must demand that the Council immediately enacts the targeted sanctions against Ukrainian oligarchs and politicians involved in human rights violations and corruption, so that assets stolen are recovered by Ukraine. It must also enact similar asset-stripping measures and visa bans against the Russian leadership and the oligarchs responsible for this dangerous escalation. Support …

(The President cut off the speaker)


  Gerben-Jan Gerbrandy (ALDE). - Voorzitter, het conflict om de toekomst van Oekraïne wordt door velen als een volstrekt ongelijke strijd afgeschilderd. De voorpagina van Der Spiegel spreekt wat dat betreft boekdelen: een reus Poetin en kleine westerse dwergjes. Ja, een ongelijke strijd: de sterke, slimme, snelle, brute Poetin tegenover een zwak, verdeeld, besluiteloos Europa.

En Voorzitter, inderdaad is er sprake van een ongelijke strijd. Aan de ene kant namelijk een land waarvan zowel de economie als het politieke systeem zich op de rand van de afgrond bevinden. Isolatie door het Westen zou het laatste zetje geven om Rusland economisch en politiek failliet te laten gaan. Aan de andere kant, de meest welvarende regio van de wereld, waar de rechtsstaat zorgt voor een in de geschiedenis unieke mate van veiligheid en vrijheid. En dat is inderdaad geen gelijke strijd. En ik begrijp goed dat de Oekraïners die een vrije keuze hebben, zullen kiezen voor het westerse model, maar die vrije keuze moeten ze wel krijgen. Ze hoeven alleen maar naar buurland Polen te kijken. Twintig jaar geleden was het inkomen per hoofd van de bevolking …

(De spreker wordt door de Voorzitter onderbroken.)


  Paweł Robert Kowal (ECR). - Jak się nie zamierza używać broni, to nie należy jej wyjmować. Ta sala słyszała już tyle słownych ataków na Putina, że nic nowego dzisiaj nie powiemy. Putin nie przejmuje się tymi wypowiedziami. Putin przejmie się, kiedy sankcje będą naprawdę. Więc naciśnijcie na swoje rządy i zróbcie tak, aby to było już. I chciałbym Państwu powiedzieć, że 85% mieszkańców Krymu nie było nigdy w Unii Europejskiej. Wiecie dlaczego? Dlatego, że za każdym razem, jak tutaj poruszana jest spraw wiz, jesteście za tym, żeby je utrzymać. Jest bardzo trudno znaleźć większość, żeby było inaczej. Jeżeli nie chcemy mieć drugiego Krymu, musimy dzisiaj pomóc Ukrainie – teraz i bardzo. Powinniśmy znieść wizy, powiedzieć, kiedy to możliwe, podpisać całą umowę stowarzyszeniową, skoordynować ze Stanami Zjednoczonymi pomoc finansową, bo jak nie, to Putin użyje całej machiny propagandowej przeciwko rządowi Jaceniuka. Mówię to w obecności przedstawicieli Ukrainy z Piotrem Poroszenką, którzy tutaj siedzą i słuchają. Oni chcą nie tylko usłyszeć, że pokrzyczymy na Putina. (Przewodniczący odebrał posłowi głos.)


  Ewald Stadler (NI). - Herr Präsident! Herr Minister Kourkoulas, ich darf an Sie eine Frage richten: Was hätte Ihre Regierung gemacht, wenn bei den Protesten der griechischen Bevölkerung gegen die Maßnahmen der Troika russische Politiker aufgetreten wären vor dem Athener Parlament und dort die Bevölkerung gegen die Europäische Union, gegen die Europäische Zentralbank und gegen den IWF aufgehetzt hätten?

(Unverständliche Entgegnung)

Nein! Genau das haben Sie in Kiew gemacht! Sie haben die ukrainische Bevölkerung gegen Russland aufgehetzt! Sie wussten, wie die Krim zusammengesetzt ist, Sie wissen, wie der Osten der Ukraine ethnisch zusammengesetzt ist! Und trotzdem haben Sie dort gegen das Prinzip der Nichteinmischung in die inneren Angelegenheiten eines anderen Landes verstoßen! Auch das ist ein völkerrechtliches Prinzip, auch wenn Sie es nicht gerne hören. Es gibt auch das völkerrechtliche Prinzip der Selbstbestimmung. Was im Kosovo gegolten hat, muss auch für die Krim gelten! Sie kennen die ethnische Zusammensetzung der Krim ganz genau. Wieso Sie das ignorieren, verstehe ich nicht. Und all jene, die heute buh schreien, sind jene, die morgen die Verantwortung für einen Krieg übernehmen wollen! Werden Sie dann die Verantwortung dafür übernehmen? Diese Situation dort kann jederzeit von einem kalten Krieg in einen heißen Krieg wechseln! Wer wird die Verantwortung dafür übernehmen?

(Der Präsident entzieht dem Redner das Wort.)


  Arnaud Danjean (PPE). - Monsieur le Président, j'entends le débat se focaliser, un peu trop je pense, sur la question de la légalité internationale du référendum en Crimée. Je pense que c'est un faux débat, parce que le droit international supporte beaucoup d'interprétations, voire de contradictions.

En revanche, ce qui n'est pas contestable, c'est que ce référendum est illégitime, parce qu'il est organisé dans un contexte d'invasion militaire, un contexte de mensonges de la part de Moscou sur les menaces qui pèseraient sur les populations russes et russophones et aussi de mensonges de Moscou sur la nature de la transition politique qui a lieu en Ukraine et qui ne résulte pas d'un coup d'État par des néo-nazis.

Nous devons donc condamner l'action et les paroles de Moscou. Cela nécessite une réponse unanime, extrêmement ferme et déterminée de l'Union européenne. Après les hésitations diplomatiques de ces dernières semaines, je pense qu'il est temps de passer à l'action et l'action, ce sont des sanctions fermes et déterminées.


  Knut Fleckenstein (S&D). - Herr Präsident! Unser Verhältnis zu Russland kann nicht weiterlaufen mit business as usual – das ist schon gesagt worden. Deshalb ist es auch richtig, dass wir heute Nachmittag beschließen werden, unsere nächste Sitzung des Partnerschafts- und Kooperationsabkommens nicht in vierzehn Tagen in Perm durchzuführen, über Kultur zu reden, als ob gar nichts passiert wäre. Aber wir müssen weiter miteinander sprechen. Es ist unsere Aufgabe, gerade in diesen Zeiten, unseren Standpunkt auch unseren russischen Kollegen gegenüber deutlich zu machen und nach Gemeinsamkeiten zu suchen. Wann, wenn nicht in solchen Zeiten, ist eine solche parlamentarische Kooperation oder zumindest ein solcher Austausch sinnvoll?

Als Zweites will ich dazu sagen: Die Menschen in der Ukraine müssen sich auf uns verlassen können, und das werden sie auch können. Aber wir müssen uns auch in diesem Prozess darauf verlassen können, dass die Übergangsregierung alles tun wird, um alle Teile der Ukraine und alle Bevölkerungsgruppen der Ukraine an diesem nun zu gehenden Weg zu beteiligen.

(Der Präsident entzieht dem Redner das Wort.)


  Ria Oomen-Ruijten (PPE). - Voorzitter, de Russische invasie en bezetting van de Krim is illegaal. En daarop is een gepast antwoord van de Europese Gemeenschap aan Rusland nodig. Rusland speelt met vuur en het antwoord dat wij moeten geven is tweeërlei. Eén: niet uitsluiten van sancties, die moeten we nu al voorbereiden. Twee: ook een antwoord dat de Commissie en de Raad gegeven hebben – kijken waar we de bevolking van de Oekraïne kunnen ondersteunen. Voor de acties die op dat punt worden genomen moeten wij als Parlement heel snel onze goedkeuring geven.


  Vilija Blinkevičiūtė (S&D). - Noriu akcentuoti tris momentus.

Pirma, Rusijos veiksmai Kryme – tai aiškiai pažeistos tarptautinės teisės normos dėl teritorinio šalių vientisumo ir suvereniteto. Ir mes dar kartą turime tai aiškiai pasakyti Ukrainos žmonėms, ir pasauliui.

Antra, taip, mes turime elgtis protingai, rimtai, koordinuotai, ieškoti galimybių deryboms, tačiau atėjo laikas imtis efektyvesnių diplomatinių, ekonominių bei politinių priemonių ir net sankcijų prieš Rusiją tam, kad regione būtų taika. Turime savęs paklausti, ar derybų dėl ES su Rusija prekybos sutarties bei vizų režimo sustabdymas yra tikrai efektyvi ir adekvati priemonė, turint omenyje, kad šios derybos praktiškai ir šiaip jau kuri laiką nevyko. Gaila, tačiau turim sau pripažinti, kad energetinė priklausomybė nuo Rusijos ir ekonominiai interesai neretai paima viršų prieš taiką.

Trečia, būtina greita finansinė Europos Sąjungos parama Ukrainos žmonėms.


  Krzysztof Lisek (PPE). - Jest takie polskie przysłowie: Lepiej późno niż wcale. Bardzo dobrze, że dzisiaj spotkaliśmy się tutaj i że rozmawiamy o Ukrainie. Cieszę się, że był obecny przewodniczący Barroso, ale musimy się wszyscy jako Unia Europejska, jako państwa członkowskie, uderzyć w piersi. Kiedy w[nbsp ]2008 roku czołgi rosyjskie najechały na Gruzję, nie zareagowaliśmy wystarczająco mocno. Nie reagowaliśmy przez kilka lat, kiedy rosyjskie wojska okupowały i[nbsp ]okupują Abchazję i[nbsp ]Osetię Południową. Nie reagowaliśmy wystarczająco mocno na działania wobec Mołdowy. Więc dzisiaj wszyscy musimy sobie zadać kilka pytań: czy wolno nam sprzedawać nowoczesne okręty wojenne Rosji? Czy wolno nam uzależniać nasze gospodarki wyłącznie od rosyjskiego gazu i[nbsp ]Gazpromu? To są pytania, na które musimy dzisiaj odpowiedzieć.


  Emine Bozkurt (S&D). - Mr President, Commissioner Füle, Minister Kourkoulas, the only acceptable solution to the crisis in Crimea is a diplomatic one. Until this moment, there have been no signs that this will happen, while every new development suggests the opposite. We need a de-escalation of tensions. Ukrainian and Tatar minorities in Crimea have taken big risks: they have gone out to the streets to demonstrate peacefully for the territorial integrity of their country.

Now they have to resist provocations from the pro-Russian troops and armed men invading military posts, government buildings and the regional parliament. Houses of the Tatar minority have been marked. In a few days’ time there will be an illegitimate referendum in Crimea. We should not forget about the Ukrainian and Tatar people of Crimea, who have been very restrained and brave. All parties involved should take their responsibility and do their utmost to prevent this crisis from turning into a disaster. This is not a threat to the security of Crimea or Ukraine alone. This concerns the stability of our continent.


  Michael Gahler (PPE). - Herr Präsident! Geschlossenheit, Entschlossenheit und Dialogbereitschaft in allen internationalen Gremien – das sind die klaren Botschaften, die wir von der Europäischen Union an die russische Führung erwarten. Das erwarten auch die Menschen in der Ukraine, deren Regierung ausschließlich friedlich auf die Besetzung der Krim reagiert. Das erwarten vor allem auch unsere Bürger an der Ostgrenze der Union, die ziemlich frische Erfahrungen mit Sowjet-Russland haben.

Im Unterschied zur alten Sowjetunion sind Putin und Co. an zwei Stellen sehr verwundbar. Erstens: Wenn Rubel und Aktien an der Börse abstürzen, wird Herr Putin täglich auch persönlich ärmer. Zweitens haben sie vieles, was sie sich angeeignet haben, sicherheitshalber in den Westen geschafft. Hier müssen die Sanktionen ansetzen. Wenn wir den relevanten Entscheidungsträgern inklusive Ehepartnern ihre Dauervisa in den Westen entziehen, auf die es auch keinen Rechtsanspruch gibt, wenn wir die Konten mit Geldern dubioser Herkunft sperren, wenn es kein Shopping in Baden-Baden, Nizza oder in London mehr gibt, wenn selbst die Datscha in Jūrmala bei Riga out of reach ist, dann wird da binnen kürzester Zeit ein enormer Druck entstehen, der zu einem Umdenken führt.

Völkerrechtswidriges Handeln darf sich nicht auszahlen!


  Francisco José Millán Mon (PPE). - Señor Presidente, este domingo está previsto un referéndum en Crimea, un referéndum totalmente ilegal. Se deriva de una previa ocupación rusa, en clara violación del Derecho internacional. Además, la región de Crimea, conforme a la Constitución ucraniana, no tiene derecho a convocar este tipo de referéndum. Por cierto, la declaración de ayer de la Asamblea de Crimea también es ilegal. Con estas actuaciones, Rusia podrá apoderarse de Crimea, pero desde luego no puede normalizar sus relaciones con la Unión. Más bien, lo contrario: la Unión Europea no puede reconocer ni ese referéndum ni sus resultados.

El referéndum debe ser desconvocado y Rusia debe entablar un diálogo con las autoridades de Kiev en busca de fórmulas de relación respetuosas con la integridad territorial del país —de Ucrania— y el Derecho internacional. La Unión Europea está dispuesta a contribuir a ese diálogo.

Por cierto, ¿qué papel está desempeñando —si es que desempeña alguno— el Presidente del Consejo Europeo, el señor Van Rompuy, en esta crisis? Nosotros, la Unión Europea, no podemos quedarnos indiferentes ante lo que está ocurriendo. Me temo que, desgraciadamente, Rusia y la Unión Europea tienen una visión muy distinta del Derecho internacional y del uso de la fuerza.

Es lamentable que en el siglo XXI subsistan estas diferencias entre países del continente europeo. Deberíamos tener valores, principios e intereses...

(El Presidente retira la palabra al orador)


  Eduard Kukan (PPE). - Invázia Ruska na Krym je pozostatkom sovietskej mentality. Ukrajina a Krym sú európskou záležitosťou a my nesieme za[nbsp ]ňu zodpovednosť. Došlo k narušeniu suverenity Ukrajiny a na Kryme postupuje agresívna ruská invázia. Takzvané referendum je zúfalým pokusom túto situáciu zacementovať.

Musíme využiť všetky dostupné politické a diplomatické prostriedky a využiť naše vlastné prostriedky, všetky, smelo a nebojácne. Treba, aby sme naozaj ukázali, že sme po boku Ukrajiny a že vieme zabrániť ďalšej eskalácii napätia. Treba tiež oceniť Jaceňukovu vládu, ktorá zaujala rozumný postoj a[nbsp ]na[nbsp ]provokácie nereaguje. Takisto ich treba jasne ubezpečiť, že plne stojíme za[nbsp ]demokratickou a slobodnou Ukrajinou.


  Cristian Dan Preda (PPE). - Domnule președinte, discutăm despre invadarea Ucrainei de către Rusia, dar Moscova nu se uită doar spre Crimeea, iar metodele folosite sunt cam aceleași. În februarie, denunțam aici referendumul ilegal organizat, la încurajarea Rusiei, în regiunea Găgăuzia din Republica Moldova. În Crimeea, se va organiza peste câteva zile ceva similar, ce-i drept, după ce soldații ruși au ajuns deja acolo. Folosirea consultării plebiscitare, în afara unui cadru constituțional pentru a marca voința unei puteri străine este o maimuțărire a democrației. Nu cred, în aceste condiții, că mai putem considera Rusia un partener strategic al Uniunii. Consiliul trebuie să adopte sancțiuni foarte dure la adresa lui Putin. Avem datoria de a-l opri pe agresorul rus de la Kremlin, înainte ca el să trimită soldații la vest de Crimeea.


  Davor Ivo Stier (PPE). - Gospodine predsjedniče, jedna od važnih uloga ove rasprave je razotkriti laži propagande koja dolazi iz Kremlja. I doista je laž da je ruska invazija na Krim bila zbog zaštite manjina. Istina je da je to bila manipulacija manjine kao alibi za agresiju, isto kao što je 90-ih Slobodan Milošević koristio manjine kao alibi za agresiju na Hrvatsku, Bosnu i Hercegovinu te Kosovo.

I da, laž je što se trenutno koristi kao dio propagande iz Kremlja, da je Kosovo neki presedan za referendum na Krimu. Nije. I Međunarodni sud pravde u Haagu je potvrdio da nezavisnost Kosova nije ilegalna, jer je Kosovo imao elemente federalne sastavnice bivše jugoslavenske federacije i kao takav, naravno, kad se federacija raspala postao je nezavisna država. Stoga ovdje moramo reći kakve su stvari. Da će referendum u nedjelju biti ilegalan, da je ruska invazija zapravo ilegalna, da je to zapravo agresija na Ukrajinu i na teritorijalnu cjelovitost Ukrajine.


  György Schöpflin (PPE). - Mr President, I want to look beyond the immediate issues, as the Ukraine crisis is not free from the law of unintended consequences. To put it mildly, hitherto the Ukrainian identity has been loose, but the events of the last few months are something else. The unexpected withdrawal from the Association Agreement with the EU by Yanukovych, the subsequent Maidan demonstrations, the revolution that followed the violence, the occupation of the Crimea by stealth, the threat to carve up Ukraine by Russia and, finally, the fear of invasion have combined to cement a new Ukrainian identity.

If ever there was irony history, it is the thought that Yanukovych and Putin should be the new founding fathers of Ukrainian nationhood. But this can be the basis of a new, inclusive Ukrainian citizenship concept – the best guarantee of political stability, of democracy and of hope.


Intervenciones con arreglo al procedimiento de solicitud incidental de uso de la palabra («catch the eye»)


  Sandra Kalniete (PPE). - Priekšsēdētāja kungs! 21. martā Krievijas Dome anektēs Krimu. To Krievija pamato ar tiesībām aizstāvēt savus tautiešus ārvalstīs. Tas ir bīstams koncepts, kas apdraud Eiropas stabilitāti un pastāvošās valstu robežas. Līdz ar šo aneksijas aktu Krievija no neērta Eiropas partnera kļūst par draudu mūsu kontinenta stabilitātei.

Pēc Krimas aneksijas apdraudēti ir Ukrainas austrumu reģioni, tad Moldova, un arī Baltijas valstīm ir pamats uztraukumam. Tāpēc Krievija ir jāaptur tagad. Eiropai ir jāpārskata savas attiecības ar Krieviju, strauji jāmazina atkarība no Krievijas enerģijas resursiem, un tas ir izdarāms pāris gados. Eiropai nekavējoties ir jāvienojas par iedarbīgām sankcijām, kas trāpa Krievijai vissāpīgākajās vietās. Tāpat ir jāaptur Krievijas dalība EDSO un Eiropas Padomē, kuru statūtus Krievija ir rupji pārkāpusi.

Ukrainas krīze apliecina, cik liela nozīme ir transatlantiskajām attiecībām.

(Sēdes vadītājs pārtrauc runātāju.)


  Ioan Mircea Paşcu (S&D). - Mr President, the real test in the Ukrainian case is whether Russia keeps Crimea or not. In 1994, Ukraine voluntarily gave up its nuclear status against a guarantee of territorial integrity provided by three nuclear states, Russia included. In the event that Russia keeps Crimea, other states will think twice when asked to give up their nuclear status. This will impact negatively on nuclear non-proliferation.

Secondly, European politics will be plunged into the 18th and 19th centuries, when Turkey agreed to cede Crimea to Russia under specific conditions, and when Russia had to give up the Danube following defeat in the Crimean war. Consequently, while Turkey could reclaim Crimea, Russia could again get access to the mouth of the Danube, which would alter the status of the river. Thirdly, and most importantly, it would mean that the European security system had failed and that a new one had to be re-negotiated with a more aggressive Russia.


  Phil Bennion (ALDE). - Mr President, separatism, violence, repression or indeed having to make a choice between Europe and Russia will never be in the interests of the people of Ukraine. However, Ukraine needs to remain at the core of our foreign policy and certainly not be part of our fight against Russia. The interim government of Ukraine was terribly wrong to remove Russian as a national language. I wonder whether they were hoping for reconciliation or for more protests.

However, there was equally no justification whatsoever for the mobilisation of Russian forces, and there can be no fair referendum on the future of Crimea at the point of a Russian gun. Therefore, economic sanctions against Russia must be put into effect if Russia does not stand down, even if this means negative economic consequences for the EU. Whilst we must put pressure on Russia, what is the High Representative doing to ensure that the people of Ukraine ...

(The President cut off the speaker.)


  Tarja Cronberg (Verts/ALE). - Mr President, Mr Kerry has proposed that there be direct talks between Russia and Ukraine. This seems to be impossible, as Russia is saying that the government is illegal and there has been a coup d’état. Therefore, I think multinational frameworks are the only possibility. Our OSCE would be the best solution. Taking the trouble of going to Crimea is, I think, important, and the EU should exert very great pressure so that the OSCE delegation can actually travel to Crimea and multinational negotiations within this framework can take place.


  Ruža Tomašić (ECR). - Gospodine predsjedniče, razvoj događaja u Ukrajini Hrvatima budi teške uspomene, jer previše podsjeća na sukob nastao raspadom bivše Jugoslavije.

Takozvane obrambene snage okupiraju institucije na teritoriju koje kontrolira jedna etnička skupina, dok Ukrajince nazivaju fašistima i ultranacionalistima. Sve je to davno viđeno u Hrvatskoj i po istom se obrascu blatilo hrvatski narod. Sličnosti jesu zapanjujuće, ali još imamo vremena učiniti razliku. Sukob u Hrvatskoj bio bi vrlo brzo razriješen da se nije dopustila intervencija Jugoslavenske narodne armije i da se Jugoslaviji jasno dalo do znanja da su suverenitet i teritorijalni integritet Hrvatske i Slovenije, a nešto kasnije i Bosne i Hercegovine nepovredivi.

Sada imamo priliku takvu poruku poslati Rusiji. Moramo pomoći Ukrajini u jačanju njezinog unutrašnjeg kapaciteta, kako bi ubuduće ovakve ustavne i političke krize mogla rješavati sama. To ćemo biti u prilici učiniti samo ako Moskvi jasno i glasno poručimo (predsjednik je oduzeo riječ govornici.)


  Χαράλαμπος Αγγουράκης (GUE/NGL). - Κύριε Πρόεδρε, δεκαπέντε χρόνια μετά τον πόλεμο στη Γιουγκοσλαβία, ΝΑΤΟ, Ευρωπαϊκή Ένωση και Ηνωμένες Πολιτείες στην αντιπαράθεσή τους με την καπιταλιστική Ρωσία απειλούν με νέο αιματοκύλισμα τους λαούς στην Ευρώπη. Η σύγκρουση γίνεται για τον έλεγχο των αγορών και των δρόμων μεταφοράς ενέργειας και την κυριαρχία των μονοπωλίων της Ευρωπαϊκής Ένωσης σε βάρος των ανταγωνιστών τους, για την επιβολή μιας μερίδας αστικής τάξης της Ουκρανίας σε βάρος της άλλης.

Με τη στήριξη Ευρωπαϊκής Ένωσης και ΗΠΑ αναρριχήθηκαν στην κυβέρνηση και φασιστικές δυνάμεις, το οπλισμένο χέρι του κεφαλαίου, για να φέρουν ακόμα μεγαλύτερη εκμετάλλευση, φτώχεια και εξαθλίωση. Αυτή είναι η Ουκρανία που θέλει η Ευρωπαϊκή Ένωση και οι Ηνωμένες Πολιτείες Αμερικής. Αυτό έφερε η ανατροπή του σοσιαλισμού, η επικράτηση των ιμπεριαλιστικών συμμαχιών του κεφαλαίου, η επιβολή άγριων αντιλαϊκών μέτρων εδώ και είκοσι χρόνια. Χρεοκόπησαν τα ψέματα ότι η Ευρωπαϊκή Ένωση θα φέρει την ειρήνη και την ευημερία στην Ευρώπη.

Καλούμε τους εργαζόμενους στην Ουκρανία να οργανώσουν την πάλη τους για τη δική τους εξουσία ενάντια σε κάθε ιμπεριαλιστή, ενάντια στα μονοπώλια που γεννούν τον πόλεμο και τον φασισμό.


  Andrew Henry William Brons (NI). - Mr President, the present crisis in Ukraine did not start with a Russian invasion. It started with the EU’s reaction to Ukraine’s rejection of the EU-Ukrainian trade deal. This reaction took the form of the EU’s friends in that country exploiting Ukrainian nationalists to provide paramilitary assistance on the streets. I am no supporter of Mr Yanukovych, of his political or personal background or his tactics against demonstrators. However, the Ukrainian Parliament does not have the power simply to remove the president under Article 108, and it does not appear that the impeachment procedures under Article 111 were followed.

The EU is determined to ensnare Ukraine by bribery and intimidation. I certainly do not view the presence of Russian troops in the Ukraine with equanimity; I would like them to withdraw. However, Russia is reacting to extreme acts of provocation, not just by the EU but also the US. We know this …

(The President cut off the speaker)


  Kinga Gál (PPE). - Mi, mindnyájan itt, ahogy a kárpátaljai magyar közösség Ukrajnában is, azok közé tartozik, akik elítélik az erőszakot, és egy szuverén Ukrajna európai integrációjában bíznak. De ez semmiképp nem érhető el a közösség nyelvi jogainak, a kisebbségi nyelvi jogoknak az eltörlésén keresztül.

Érthetetlen, hogy az új ukrán parlament első döntései között miért is vonta vissza a kisebbségek nyelvi jogait szabályozó törvényt, amely az Ukrajnában élő összes kisebbségre, így a százötvenezres kárpátaljai magyar közösségre is vonatkozott.

Az Európai Unió irányába vezető úton a kisebbségi jogok tiszteletben tartása megkérdőjelezhetetlen. Ugyanúgy, mint emlékműveik tiszteletben tartása. Tegnap újra felgyújtottak egy magyar emlékművet ukrán szélsőségesek. Tehát az ukrán helyzet rendezéséhez elengedhetetlen az erőszakmentesség, a párbeszéd, de ugyanúgy a nemzeti kisebbségek jogainak teljes körű tiszteletben tartása is.


  Csaba Sándor Tabajdi (S&D). - Ukrajna csak egy módon tartható egyben, regionalizációval, egy valódi föderalizmussal. Hiszen akkora a különbség az ország nyugati és keleti fele között.

Mindenekelőtt törvényben kellene széles körűen biztosítani a kisebbségi jogokat. Ezt eddig egyetlen ukrán vezetés sem szavatolta az elmúlt évtizedben. Elítélendő, hogy tegnap ukrán nacionalisták magyar történelmi emlékhelyet rongáltak meg a Vereckei-hágón. Vissza kellene Ukrajnában állítani az orosz nyelv államnyelvi státuszát, a Krímben pedig az ukrán nyelv státuszát. Krím elszakadása, visszatérése Oroszországhoz nemcsak az orosz területszerző politika eredménye, hanem mögötte milliós orosz tömegek önrendelkezési igénye van. Legfőbb gond jelen pillanatban, hogy egymásnak feszül az orosz és az ukrán nacionalizmus, veszélyeztetve a két nép... (az elnök megvonta a szót a képviselőtől)


  Graham Watson (ALDE). - Mr President, when Russia moved into Georgia in 2008, the European Union acted. Mr[nbsp ]Sarkozy went straight to Moscow and secured the withdrawal of troops.

This time Mrs[nbsp ]Merkel should have gone to Moscow, but the EU blinked – and now, despite our demands, Russia is not talking directly to Ukraine and it is not pulling troops back to their bases. So, in line with last week’s Council conclusions, we must target sanctions at Russia’s policymakers. If Russia continues to back the referendum in the Crimea, to destabilise Ukraine, we will need wider economic sanctions.

But since we insist on dialogue, Europe’s leaders should still go to Moscow: directly, not through a contact group. Europe must face down Russia. We must not leave the leadership to the USA.


  Tatjana Ždanoka (Verts/ALE). - Mr President, we can call on our draft resolution for as inclusive as possible a government in Ukraine in order to minimise the risk of renewed violence, but how do you hope to minimise such a risk if you do not call for an investigation into the violence which has already taken place? In one recent TV discussion I supposed that in 10 years we will discover who really was behind the snipers in Kiev, the way it was with the snipers in Riga and Vilnius in January 1991.

But today all secrets become open much more quickly. A week ago a record of telephone conversations between Estonian Foreign Minister Paet and Vice-President/High Representative Catherine Ashton appeared on the internet. The Minister told her that there was now an increasingly powerful suspicion that behind the snipers it was not Yanukovych, but somebody from the new coalition.

How can people all over Ukraine – including Crimea – not be afraid of new provocations and murders if Catherine Ashton did not react in any way to this shocking …

(The President cut off the speaker)


  Paul Murphy (GUE/NGL). - Mr President, reality is turned on its head by all the contending imperialist forces active in Ukraine. So John Kerry can proclaim, without irony, that you just do not invade another country on a completely trumped-up pretext. Tell that to the people of Iraq or Afghanistan. The EU, which oversees brutal violence against asylum seekers and protestors, becomes a proponent of a so-called democratic revolution, and the homophobic and anti-worker Putin is transformed into an aggressive defender of the rights of minorities.

Look at the character of the new government promoted by the European establishment as a paragon of democracy. There are seven ministers with links to the extreme right, and the interim President has already accepted more IMF austerity measures. It is the oligarchs who still rule Ukraine. Working-class and poor people across Ukraine need to build their own political force. US, NATO, EU: hands off Ukraine. Russian troops out of Ukraine for workers’ rule, not oligarch rule with full…

(The President cut off the speaker.)


(Fin de las intervenciones con arreglo al procedimiento de solicitud incidental de uso de la palabra («catch the eye»))


  Štefan Füle, Member of the Commission. - Mr President, I am pleased that we also have among us Mr Poroshenko and his delegation. Let me share with you four points which reflect the very important and significant debate you have just had.

Under the first point, let me recall that the referendum organised in Crimea on Sunday infringes the very essence of international law as regards state sovereignty and the inviolability of territorial integrity, as well as the Ukrainian Constitution. It poses a major threat to the stability of borders in Europe.

The European Union condemns the circumstances and the questions proposed for the referendum, which it considers illegal, illegitimate and its outcome invalid. Furthermore, the proposed Russian bill that provides for even easier annexation of foreign territories – on the basis of an alleged threat to a Russian minority there and without a corresponding Treaty with the relevant neighbouring state – would likewise go against international laws and principles.

But this is not only about Crimea. It is the most serious challenge to the Helsinki Process we have seen so far. That is why what is going on in Crimea is happening much closer to us than many of us – many of you – are ready to accept.

Secondly, let us do everything in our power to help the Russian leader not to make yet another grave mistake for which his successors – since history teaches us certain lessons – would have to apologise, as they have already done in the past. Such a mistake would turn the multipolar world into a zero-polar world, where the only rule that applies is that there are no rules.

My third point is that we must help and support Ukraine, not only in its measured reaction so far but also in assisting that country to become a democratic country with an accountable government free of corruption, with justice for all and the active involvement of civil society – a state which guarantees the rights of all citizens and all minorities.

My fourth point is that we should not forget the citizens of Moldova and Georgia – and many others in eastern European regions – who aspire to the values and principles on which the European Union is based.

In conclusion, the Council, the Commission – and, following this debate, I also strongly believe this House – are not only principled, responsible and united in their readiness to adopt concrete measures, but also principled, responsible and united in offering, at the same time, political dialogue to de-escalate the situation and find a peaceful solution, because that is the way forward.


  Dimitrios Kourkoulas, President-in-Office of the Council. - Mr President, we insist on the need for Russia to engage in a dialogue with Ukraine in order to find a negotiated way out of the crisis, in full respect of international law and the sovereignty, independence and territorial integrity of Ukraine. There are a number of bilateral or multilateral mechanisms available. The objectives of this dialogue should be to rebuild confidence between the parties, to respect the territorial integrity and sovereignty of Ukraine, to protect all citizens against intimidation, and to respect the rights of all minorities.

We remain worried by the lack of any de-escalation on the ground. The referendum organised in Crimea on Sunday infringes international law as regards state sovereignty and the inviolability of territorial integrity, as well as the Ukrainian Constitution. We will not recognise the outcome. The statement of the Heads of State or Government on 6[nbsp ]March[nbsp ]2014 was very clear on this point.

The European Union and the Russian Federation share an important strategic relationship. Some of the Members referred to the energy relationship – to the South Stream. Let me remind you that there is also the North Stream. But, as stated in the statement of the Heads of States of 6[nbsp ]March, the European Union is ready to engage in a frank and open dialogue with the Russian Federation. The EU has a special responsibility for peace, stability and prosperity in Europe. The European Union’s and Russia’s common objective of a relationship based on mutual interest and respect for international obligations needs to be promptly restored.

It would be a matter of great regret if Russia failed to work in that direction. When it comes to measures against Russia, the Heads of State and Government have decided to take a gradual approach. The measures already taken are known. Additional measures are under preparation, including targeted sanctions if there are no signs of de-escalation. Equally, or even more importantly, there are measures to help Ukraine – the President of the Commission has already referred to the economic package. Regarding visa liberalisation for Ukrainian citizens, the European Union supports this objective. In its conclusions of 20[nbsp ]February[nbsp ]2014, the Council encouraged Member States to make optimal use of the flexibilities of the visa code and of the visa facilitation agreement.

Let me conclude by thanking Parliament for organising this debate. It has been valuable for all of us to share our very serious concerns about these developments. I take away from this debate some of the very strong feelings which have been expressed by many Members, and I will relay them to the Council and to the President of the European Council. As I said in my opening remarks, what happens in Ukraine affects us all. We have to work to find a peaceful solution to this crisis in full respect of international law.


  El Presidente. - Para cerrar el debate se han presentado seis propuestas de resolución de conformidad con el artículo 110, apartado 2 del Reglamento.

Se cierra el debate.

La votación tendrá lugar el jueves, a las 12.00 horas.

Declaraciones por escrito (artículo 149 del Reglamento)


  João Ferreira (GUE/NGL), por escrito. O título deste debate - adotando uma formulação que não vingou no Conselho Europeu - é sobremaneira elucidativo sobre a abordagem da maioria deste Parlamento da situação na Ucrânia. Nem uma palavra sobre o golpe de Estado levado a cabo pelos sectores mais reacionários da oligarquia ucraniana (com o apoio externo), após meses de desestabilização e violência, após o anúncio da suspensão da assinatura do acordo de associação com a UE e instrumentalizando o profundo e justo descontentamento de amplas camadas da população, resultante do desastre social e económico da restauração do capitalismo na Ucrânia nas últimas duas décadas.

Nem uma palavra sobre a brutal ingerência e desestabilização dos EUA, da UE e da NATO na situação interna da Ucrânia que – promovendo e apoiando forças de extrema-direita, neonazis e xenófobas e fomentando o exacerbar de tensões, de divisões e clivagens –, visa assegurar o domínio político, económico e militar deste imenso país. Este é um caminho perigoso, que representa uma acrescida ameaça à segurança e à paz na Europa e no mundo. Denunciamos aqui vivamente a promoção das forças de extrema-direita, de cariz fascista e neonazi, do anticomunismo na Ucrânia – no que constitui uma séria ameaça à democracia, aos direitos e liberdades e à própria integridade e soberania do país.


  Filip Kaczmarek (PPE), na piśmie. Dobrze, że wielu osobom na Zachodzie otworzyły się oczy. Źle, że stało się to w tak dramatycznych okolicznościach. Źle, że cenę za to otrzeźwienie światowej opinii publicznej płaci niezależna Ukraina. Powinniśmy utrzymywać ten stan „otwartych oczu” i wyciągnąć głębokie wnioski z sytuacji, do której doprowadziła polityka Rosji. To my – między innymi Polacy – mieliśmy rację, mówiąc dużo wcześniej o otwartości na europejskie aspiracje Ukrainy, mówiąc o konieczności zbudowania wspólnej europejskiej polityki energetycznej, o strategicznym znaczeniu dywersyfikacji źródeł energii. Na szczęście nie jest za późno na zmianę polityki UE. Doraźnie trzeba wpierać Ukrainę, chronić jej terytorialną integralność, podpisać umowę stowarzyszeniową, zapewnić skuteczną pomoc finansową. W dłuższym okresie trzeba zmienić orientację europejskiej polityki wobec Rosji. Sankcje oczywiście nie wystarczą. Mogą one mieć znaczenie polityczne i zniechęcić Rosję do nielegalnych działań wobec Ukrainy. Docelowo trzeba jednak zmienić naturę relacji gospodarczych między Rosją a UE w taki sposób, by nie były one wykorzystywane jako narzędzie nacisków politycznych.


  Tunne Kelam (PPE), in writing. Let us face reality - strategic partnership under Putin is not viable. The current leader of our partner has been exposed of aggression and blatant lying. Mr. Putin can be stopped. As Yulia Tymoshenko stated, he will go as far as he is allowed to go. Putin should be placed first on the list of asset freezes. Arms deals with Russia should be stopped immediately and unconditionally. It is an absolute disgrace that France is about to deliver Russia two supermodern Mistral attack warships, one of them named Sevastopol. Condemning Russian aggression and delivering the aggressor modern arms will destroy all moral credibility of EU. We have to condemn unequovically Russia's self-styled racist doctrine of intervening abroad to defend compatriots there. It carries a shocking similarity to Hitler's aggressive "defence" of German minorities in 1930s. It is a crucial moment for retaining the European system of security and cooperation. There is no room for tiptoeing. We need to cause agressor real pain.


  Маруся Любчева (S&D), в писмена форма. Задълбочаването на проблемите в Украйна ни задължава да направим широк ситуационен анализ, за да дадем на страната нужната подкрепа по пътя на евроинтеграцията и да й окажем необходимата политическа и финансова помощ. На първо място е необходимо да се задълбочи диалогът с украинския парламент и да бъдат изготвени спешни мерки за туширане на етническото напрежение и съхраняване на етническия мир, като основа за гарантиране на стабилността и териториалната цялост на Украйна. Относно икономическата помощ за Украйна, считам за необходимо отпускането й да бъде дискутирано на по-широка основа в ЕП, като това обсъждане включва и направленията, в които украинската държава следва да усвоява отпуснатите средства. Един открит диалог ще гарантира в по-голяма степен защитата на интересите на европейските граждани и ще даде увереност на украинското общество в сериозността на намеренията на ЕС. Ние трябва да работим за прекратяване на военната окупация на Крим и в защита на териториалната цялост на Украйна, но това минава през диалог и сътрудничество с Русия, а не през нов замразен конфликт. Една открита конфронтация с Русия ще се отрази негативно на всички бъдещи перспективи пред отношенията на ЕС със страните от Източното партньорство.


  Antonio Masip Hidalgo (S&D), por escrito. En Ucrania, ha brotado en la plaza de Kiev, en pleno invierno, la primaveral utopía europea con la que tanto hemos soñado siempre los que padecimos una dictadura. Tenemos que apoyar esa lucha de Ucrania por la libertad y la soberanía territorial.

La invasión rusa es intolerable e ilegítima como lo fue en Praga en 1968 o, antes, en Budapest. Ya Napoleón invadió mi país diciendo que era llamado por el rey y el pueblo. Y, salvando las distancias, intolerable es siempre la ocupación militar de parte de Chipre, o la no menos ilegítima del Sáhara Occidental por Marruecos.

Estemos, sin ambigüedades, con estos hermanos europeos de Ucrania, de tanta vocación europeísta, que no es la de los corruptos y evasores de capital de la City londinense, ni la de la extrema derecha, que aquí es tan euroescéptica.


  Radvilė Morkūnaitė-Mikulėnienė (PPE), raštu. – Putino Rusija tapo tarptautinės teisės pažeidėja, laužanti savo prisiimtus susitarimus ir įsipareigojimus. Negalime leisti, kad kažkieno imperinės ambicijos būtų aukščiau taikos, demokratijos ir valstybių suverenumo. Putinas V. Janukovyčiumi naudojasi kaip marionete – galbūt taip, kaip svajoja kontroliuoti Ukrainą. Viešai iš šio asmens tyčiojamasi, bet tuo pačiu teigiama, kad jis tebėra legitimus. Tuo tarpu naujoji Krymo valdžia, kuri buvo „išrinkta“ Krymo parlamentą užėmus ginkluotiems asmenims, Rusijos pusei jokių legitimumo abejonių nekelia. Manau, atitinkamos tarptautinės institucijos turi pateikti savo vertinimą dėl Dūmoje rengiamo įstatymo dėl teritorijų prijungimo prie Rusijos Federacijos. Siekiama kontroliuoti Krymo informacinę erdvę. Putinistinei propagandai yra pajungtos visos įmanomos priemonės. Skleidžiamos melagystės, esą Lietuvoje ir Lenkijoje buvo ruošiami „Euromaidano kovotojai“. Tiek ES, tiek ir žiniasklaidos laisvę ginančios organizacijos turi veiksmingai prisidėti prie žiniasklaidos laisvės visoje Ukrainoje stiprinimo. Reikalingos sankcijos tiems, kurie veikia prieš Ukrainos teritorinį vientisumą ir suverenumą. O tie, kurie tęsia prekiavimą karinėmis technologijomis privalo susimąstyti, ar neveikia prieš pačius save ir savo sąjungininkus. Sveikinu finansines-ekonomines priemones, prisidedant prie Ukrainos vyriausybės reformų bei ekonomikos gelbėjimo, taip pat naujausią Komisijos sprendimą pasiūlyti 500 mln. eurų vertės ekonomines paskatas. Manau, panašias specialiai pritaikytas priemones turime ruošti Moldovai ir Gruzijai.


  Vojtěch Mynář (S&D), písemně. – Sdílím hluboké znepokojení všech kolegů nad vývojem událostí na Ukrajině, zejména pak v souvislosti s událostmi na Krymu. Naše společné obavy rostou a máme k tomu vážný důvod – touto otázkou se zabýváme za posledních pár měsíců poněkolikáté a věci se nezlepšují. Naopak eskalují. 25 let po pádu komunismu se nacházíme zcela nečekaně uprostřed nové studené války. Války, s níž máme historickou zkušenost trvající bezmála půl století. Války, která ve svém dnešním novém vydání jen posunula dělící linie dále na východ. Války, jejíž vznik nikdo z nás ještě zcela nedávno vůbec nepředvídal. A konečně války, která může v krátké době snad přerůst i v něco donedávna nemyslitelného, ve válku horkou. Evropský parlament již poněkolikáté jmenoval příčiny této krize. Vidí je v chování a politice Ruska. Rusko má na věc pohled zcela opačný. Jsme dnes v[nbsp ]situaci, kdy všichni – na Západě i na Východě – máme odpovědnost za to, že v roce stého výročí vypuknutí 1. světové války předejdeme tak nezodpovědnému rozpoutání podobné tragédie, jak tomu bylo tenkrát. Věřím v moudrost a rozvahu nás všech, tady na Západě i tam na Východě. Věřím ve sdílený pocit odpovědnosti nás všech za mír na našem kontinentě.


  Katarína Neveďalová (S&D), písomne. Súčasná situácia na Ukrajine by nám iba pred pár mesiacmi prišla ako scenár pre nový hollywoodsky thriller. Dianie naberá na obrátkach každú minútu, to, čo nám teraz pripadá ako nepredstaviteľné, môže byť zajtra krutou realitou. Ukrajina je krajina, ktorú vystihuje termín „demokratická tranzícia“, avšak po najaktuálnejších správach sa na tento termín budem pozerať už navždy inak. To všetko sa pritom deje Európskej únii pred dverami. Ukrajinci sa ani nestihli spamätať z jednej revolúcie a teraz majú ďalšiu, aby toho nebolo málo, pridali sa k tomu aj občianske nepokoje, ktoré v posledných dňoch Majdanu pripomínali občiansku vojnu. Zlatým klincom programu, samozrejme, zostáva vyostrenie sporu o Ruskom, ktoré si pod zámienkou ochrany ruského obyvateľstva žijúceho v južnej časti Ukrajiny dovolilo obsadiť polostrov Krym. Krajinu naďalej zmietajú tak protiruské, ako aj proruské protesty. Protiruskí demonštranti na juhovýchode krajiny požadujú samostatnosť, takže je v hre aj rozdelenie Ukrajiny. Kroky Ruska sú odsúdeniahodné ako zo strany samotnej Ukrajiny, tak aj zo strany medzinárodného spoločenstva, kríza preto výrazne ovplyvní aj vzťahy EÚ a Ruska. Jediné čo nám preto zostáva, je dúfať v skoré a diplomatické riešenie konfliktu, ktorému môže dopomôcť pevné, ale hlavne jednotné stanovisko EÚ.


  Tonino Picula (S&D), napisan. – Mislim da smo dobili odgovore na često postavljeno pitanje kako će teći postsovjetska tranzicija ne samo u Rusiji nego u njezinom geopolitičkom okruženju. Ali dobivamo i odgovore na pitanja koliko je danas djelotvoran globalni sigurnosni sustav postavljen u San Franciscu 1944. (UN) i prilagođen u Helsinkiju 1975. (OESS). Taj je sustav primarno zamišljen da sprječava sukobe između država, a ne unutar država. Ukoliko ne reagiraju na adekvatan način, SAD i EU riskiraju da će ih pregaziti događaji koji su izvan njihove kontrole, jer jedna od lekcija koja se pokazala nakon tromjesečne krize je da Putin Ukrajinu želi više nego što je želi Zapad. Putin zna da bi ulazak Ukrajine u EU doveo do strateškog povlačenja ovakve Rusije u azijsku dubinu. Najprije je upozoravao Ukrajince da se ne zavaravaju obećanjima Zapada o bržem ulasku u EU jer će imati, poput Turske, tek status „vječnog kandidata”. Kada je već ukrajinski narod odbacio ta uvjeravanja, EU nikako ne smije odbaciti europska nastojanja ukrajinskog naroda.


  Franck Proust (PPE), par écrit. Sur le dossier ukrainien, nous devons rappeler qu'il faut une réponse ferme pour s'opposer à l'ingérence russe. Mais je le dis sans détour: nous, Européens, manquons de répondant. Notre diplomatie commune est muette. Et ne parlons pas de notre défense...Dans ce genre de situations, nous devons justement nous exprimer d'une seule voix.


  Algirdas Saudargas (PPE), raštu. – Rusija pažeidė tarptautinę teisę, sulaužė savo pačios pasirašytus įsipareigojimus. Visi kalbantieji Europos Parlamente dėl to sutaria. ES vadovai ir jos valstybių narių vyriausybės ėmėsi priemonių, numatė finansinę paramą Ukrainai. Šiandien, deja, neužtenka sugriežtinti vizų išdavimą ar užšaldyti bankų sąskaitas užsienyje. Europos Sąjunga turi iš esmės persvarstyti savo politiką Rusijos atžvilgiu. Žinoma, kad abiems pusėms yra nenaudinga keisti nusistovėjusius ES ir Rusijos ekonominius santykius, tačiau turime kažką paaukoti norėdami realių pokyčių, antraip, pasekmės ES kainuos dar daugiau. Reikia ryžtingų ir efektyvių sprendimų ES santykiuose su Rusija energetikoje ir ypač ginklų prekyboje. Ukraina yra ant realaus karo slenksčio ir jos saugumas turi būti mūsų visų prioritetas, todėl šiandien reikia greitų ir griežtų sprendimų valstybių vadovų lygmeniu.


  Boris Zala (S&D), písomne. Kolegovia, to, čo sa dnes deje v[nbsp ]Ukrajine, je pokus zmeniť geopolitický pomer síl v Európe. A nielen to: aj princípy povojnového usporiadania. Nie je prípustné, aby sa zas začali používať a zneužívať menšiny na zmenu hraníc medzi štátmi. Tieto metódy viedli k druhej svetovej vojne a my ich dnes nesmieme pripustiť za žiadnu cenu. Áno, je našou chybou, že sme Rusku v[nbsp ]90-tych rokoch neposkytli garancie bezpečnosti pri bezhlavom rozširovaní NATO. Dnes sa Rusko snaží o svoju bezpečnosť vytváraním sfér vplyvu a anexiou rôznych teritórií. Je to imperiálna expanzia a to práve zneužívaním vlastných menšín v[nbsp ]susedných štátoch. V prípade Ukrajiny nás to priviedlo na okraj vojenskej konfrontácie. Ale tu nesmie Európa ukázať slabosť, opačne, musí ukázať silu. Slabosť EÚ nepovedie k de-eskalácií konfliktu, ako si niektorí myslia, ale práve k[nbsp ]ruskému pocitu sily a pokusom o ďalšie expanzie. Musíme tak vo vnútri EÚ dať jasne najavo, že žiadna menšinová politika susedných štátov nesmie viesť ku zmene hraníc a že EÚ nikde v Európe takýto postup nepodporí, opačne, musí byť odhodlaná mu zabrániť všetkými prostriedkami. Inak nám hrozí vojnový chaos v celej Európe.


  Milan Zver (PPE), pisno. – Evropska unija in Nato sta v primeru ruske invazije na Ukrajino za zdaj izgubila bitko. Trdno pa verjamem, da vojne ne bomo izgubili, da končni izid ne bo takšen. Ruskemu predsedniku Putinu je uspelo uresničiti prvi diplomatski cilj, t.i. "zamrznjen konflikt", s čimer lahko oteži evro-atlantske integracije Ukrajine. Evropska unija je rusko invazijo pričakala nepripravljena. Kako je to sploh mogoče glede na špekulacije nekaterih posameznikov iz levega pola parlamenta, ki radi govorijo o vsemogočnosti Zahoda, ko gre za prisluškovanje? Ruski geostrateški cilji gredo seveda dlje od Ukrajine, vse do Jadrana. Kaj narediti, kako jih zaustaviti? Menim, da si moramo prizadevati za uvedbo takojšnjih sankcij proti Rusiji, poskrbeti za to, da EU pripravi sporazume še z drugimi državami v regiji, kot sta na primer Moldavija in Gruzija ter pospešiti širitveni proces, vključno z Balkanom.



Aviso jurídico - Política de privacidad