Πληρη πρακτικα των συζητησεων

Τρίτη 14 Δεκεμβρίου 2021 - Στρασβούργο

12. Η κατάσταση στα ουκρανικά σύνορα και στα υπό ρωσική κατοχή εδάφη της Ουκρανίας (συζήτηση)

  Der Präsident. – Als nächster Punkt der Tagesordnung folgt die Aussprache über die Erklärung des Vizepräsidenten der Kommission und Hohen Vertreters der Union für Außen- und Sicherheitspolitik zur Lage an der ukrainischen Grenze und in den von Russland besetzten Gebieten in der Ukraine (2021/3010(RSP)).

Ich erinnere die Mitglieder daran, dass es bei allen Aussprachen dieser Tagung keine spontanen Wortmeldungen gibt und dass keine blauen Karten akzeptiert werden.

Außerdem sind, wie auch bei den letzten Tagungen, Zuschaltungen aus den Verbindungsbüros des Parlaments in den Mitgliedstaaten vorgesehen.

Ich weise Sie auch darauf hin, dass Wortmeldungen im Plenarsaal weiterhin vom zentralen Rednerpult aus erfolgen. Ich ersuche Sie daher, die Rednerliste im Blick zu behalten und sich kurz vor Beginn Ihrer Redezeit zum Rednerpult zu begeben.

  Josep Borrell Fontelles, Vice—President of the Commission / High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy. – Mr President, we change the geographical situation, we change the latitude and longitude of the coordinates, but the problem is still very worrying.

Now we are talking about the situation on the Ukrainian border and in the Russian—occupied territories of Ukraine. I’ve been talking a lot about it during this weekend in Liverpool, together with my fellow colleagues of the G7 – as you know the most important, the biggest, democracies in the world. I’ve been talking a lot with Secretary of State Blinken and we will talk a lot about it at the next European Union Council. We talked yesterday about it also, with my fellow Ministers of Foreign Affairs. So I think I have all the information I could have in order to come here to discuss with you the Russian military build—up around Ukraine.

First, facts. Since November, Russia has been massing troops and weapons in an unusual manner around Ukraine’s borders. You know that Ukraine is our close strategic partner, so it’s normal that we are worried about this movement of Russian troops. I had the opportunity also to talk about this with the Russian Foreign Affairs Minister, Sergei Lavrov, during the OSCE meeting in Stockholm, and with the Foreign Affairs Minister of Ukraine. At the OSCE meeting in Stockholm I witnessed a lively exchange of views between Minister Lavrov and Secretary of State Blinken about this issue.

We, the European Union, maintain regular contact with President Zelensky, with Prime Minister Shmyhal, with Foreign Minister Kuleba. We express at all levels our political support to Ukraine. We publicly recall our unwavering support to Ukraine’s sovereignty and territorial integrity within its internationally—recognised border.

According to Russian sources, nothing is happening. They are only moving their troops inside their territory; they are not violating any international law, nor any constitutional internal rule. Certainly they are moving troops inside their borders, but with the precedents, with what has happened between Ukraine and Russia, it is quite justified that the Ukrainians are worried and that we have to express our political support.

But today we are in prevention mode. Today, we are trying to avoid further escalations and to work on all avenues that we can in order to deter further Russian actions. Today we are in deterring mode, prevention mode, dissuasion mode, in order to avoid the crisis escalating and reaching the level of military conflict. We are doing what we can on that.

Yesterday at our Foreign Affairs Council, all members reiterated their support for Ukraine, as I said, and also we have recently adopted a set of assistance measures under the European Peace Facility, a new financial tool which is under my policy implementation authority, in supporting Ukrainian armed forces in areas including the provision of military, medical and engineering equipment, and mobility, logistic and cyberdefence support – not providing lethal arms, but in all the fields that an army requires in order to be operational.

These are tangible ways of showing our support to strengthening Ukrainian resilience, and also our support for the Ukrainian reform agenda since 2014. Because the reforms inside Ukraine are also an important component of Ukrainians’ overall resilience to external challenges. The better the functioning of Ukrainian democracy, the highest quality we have in fighting against internal problems, the stronger they will be to face external challenges.

But today we have to talk about an attempt to undermine further Ukrainian territorial integrity which was jeopardised when Russia took over Crimea. This would come, if it happens again, with severe political consequences and with a high political and economic cost for Russia, if this was the case.

We have to act in unity. We are coordinating closely with our transatlantic and like—minded partners. We did that on Sunday, and our G7 statement was clear on this position. We called on Russia to de—escalate, to pursue diplomatic channels, and to abide by its international commitments on transparency of military activities, as President Biden also did in his call with President Putin on 7 December.

In the meantime, as I said, we are in deterrent, dissuasive, prevention mode, and we will continue to do full diplomatic outreach. We reconfirm our support to France and Germany, in the Normandy format, to achieve full implementation of the Minsk Agreements in order to resolve the conflict in Eastern Ukraine. We are studying the different scenarios that one could imagine could happen in the following days or weeks. We recall Russia’s responsibility in implementing the Minsk Agreements. It remains a key issue, and we will continue demonstrating that we will not hesitate to take actions when needed, as by imposing restrictive measures against the Russia—based Wagner Group.

I want to bring to your attention to the fact that these restrictive measures have already been taken, and the Council approved them yesterday. I know that for the Russian authorities, the Wagner Group is a private company, as private as one that could produce sweets, but in any case we consider that we have to show our strong determination to stand up for our interests and values in our neighbourhood and beyond.

Ukraine has the right to make its own foreign and security policy choices. It is an independent and sovereign country, and it has the right to make its own foreign and security policy choices, and we respect fully these choices. Since the starting point of the conflict almost eight years ago, we have been steadfast, at the Ukrainian side. Furthermore, the Ukrainians’ diplomatic efforts to keep the illegal annexation of Crimea high on the international agenda, including through the launch of this international Crimea platform, are welcome and will be supported.

Tomorrow, at the meeting with the Eastern Partnership Summit, we will have another occasion to stress that there is room for enhanced cooperation between the EU and these countries, as well as for gradual convergence in the area of foreign and security policy, in line with partners’ commitments with the EU. I think that strengthening our partners strategic communication capabilities will also be an important element of building resilience, including the fight against disinformation and information manipulation – and there is a lot of it as you very well know.

So for the time being, once again we are expecting the best and preparing for the worst. Should the situation in Ukraine deteriorate, there should be no doubt that we will be ready to respond. But for the time being, we don’t want to contribute to any kind of escalation. We want to be in this prevention mode – that is in the end the role of diplomacy, the work of diplomacy – to try to study the different scenarios, to have an answer prepared for each one of them, and making clear what our answer will be if any one of them happen. Allow me to finish with these words: expect the best, and be prepared for the worst.

  Michael Gahler, im Namen der PPE-Fraktion. – Herr Präsident, liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Herr Hoher Vertreter, ich bin Ihnen dankbar für Ihre Ausführungen und möchte den Ernst der Lage betonen.

Ja, wir sind jetzt im Abschreckungsmodus. Dieser erneute russische Truppenaufmarsch geschieht unprovoziert, es sei denn, man betrachtet die schlichte Existenz einer unabhängigen Ukraine als Provokation – eines Landes, das sich demokratisch, wirtschaftlich und sozial um Stabilisierung und Entwicklung bemüht.

Putins Mythos der Bedrohung durch die NATO ist hingegen lächerlich. Er weiß das, schon Breschnew wusste das. Die NATO als Bündnis saturierter Demokratien greift niemanden an. Es sind nicht die Waffen der NATO, sondern die Art, wie man sich in Freiheit organisiert, was dann zu einer Provokation wird, wenn das sogar in der Ukraine erfolgreich sein könnte.

Die fortgesetzte Aggression gegen die Ukraine seit 2014 hat die Entschlossenheit der Ukraine, einen funktionierenden demokratischen Staat zu etablieren, nicht beeinträchtigt. Weil hier so eindeutig ist, wer der Aggressor ist, sind Gleichsetzungen von Opfer und Täter auch nicht angezeigt. Deeskalieren muss der Aggressor durch Truppenabzug. Die Ukraine hat alles Recht, sich nach Artikel 51 der UNO-Charta zu verteidigen, und ich bin allen dankbar, die ihr hierbei auch mit Waffen helfen.

Wir werden als EU – koordiniert hoffentlich mit unseren transatlantischen Partnern – zivil auf militärische Aggressionen reagieren, aber effektiv. Und wir sollten die Instrumente dafür schon mal hochhalten. Es wird wehtun, wenn SWIFT abgestellt wird. Den Systemprofiteuren wird es auch wehtun, wenn alle Langzeitvisa abgestellt werden.

Und eins dürfte auch klar sein: Eine Nord-Stream-Pipeline wird nichts liefern, wenn gleichzeitig Krieg geführt wird, denn wir werden nicht den Krieg mit den Einnahmen aus dieser Pipeline finanzieren.

(Der Redner spricht einige Worte auf Ukrainisch.)

  Pedro Marques, on behalf of the S&D Group. – Mr President, just a few years ago, Russia illegally annexed Crimea and backed violent separatists that control parts of eastern Ukraine. These were concrete actions against an independent country, a partner, violating its sovereignty and international law.

Once again, now, Russia is sending strong signals that it may commit yet another violation with a largescale military build-up along the border with Ukraine. Deploying, for the second time this year, about 100 000 soldiers and military equipment at that border, which makes it clear as a threat to Ukraine and a threat to the stability of the region. Whether the intention is a full-scale military invasion or some kind of hybrid attack, or to intimidate and destabilise Ukraine even further, we must not tolerate it.

The European Union, let us be clear, together with its transatlantic partners, must be ready to make full use of severe sanctions that will tell the Russian autocratic regime the price they must pay if they proceed with this line of behaviour.

We therefore call on the European Summit, this Thursday, to prepare a strong package of sanctions, including at least instruments such as the freezing of the European assets of people associated with the Kremlin – and I said, at least.

If Putin and the Russian oligarchy only know the language of power and money, they must know how much they will lose if they do not behave differently from what we have seen these last few weeks and months.

We would like to establish a normal cooperation with Russia. We have sent all the signs in the past, but it would be beneficial for everyone if that could be done with Russia engaging in a completely different path that respects international law and the stability of our neighbourhood. That’s certainly the only condition in which we could establish such a normal cooperation, but we are really far from that at this moment.

  Petras Auštrevičius, on behalf of the Renew Group. – Mr President, the Russian bear angrily roaring on the European borders, tries to scare and impose on us the rules of the jungle. On the other hand, the Russian-speaking bear keeps the permanent member seat at the Security Council of the United Nations, the global forum of international cooperation. Compatible? Shocking? Acceptable?

Continuous Russian Federation actions by the threatening and destabilising situation in Ukraine must be regarded as a threat to overall European stability and security. By violating international laws and bilateral treaties, Russia proves itself to be unpredictable and an untrustworthy member of the international community. Instead of following rules based on good neighbourly relations, it tries to force others with red lines and ultimatum rhetoric.

Russia’s military build-up on Ukraine’s borders comes at a time of unsettled, assertive and globally growing authoritarianism, which disregards sovereignty and the democratic choices of others. Creeping hybrid strategy, intimidation and military pressure used by Russia, presents a real threat to Ukraine’s sovereignty. Today, as never before, Ukraine needs not only the EU’s understanding and solidarity, but a joint and resolute deterrence and support action.

I call on the European Union to come up with a timely decision on the Common Security and Defence Policy mission to Ukraine. We have to use to a full extent the Civilian CSDP Compact tools to translate our partnership into something more tangible everybody understands.

  Viola Von Cramon-Taubadel, on behalf of the Verts/ALE Group. – Mr President, we have seen this before. A bully blackmails its weaker neighbours while the rest of the world watches. We have seen this in April, we have seen this countless times in the history of mankind, and history teaches us that appeasing a bully is a very dangerous strategy. It is immoral and counterproductive.

As we speak, 100 000 Russian troops are mobilised on the Ukrainian border. Their number is expected to rise dramatically. Those who know Mr Putin know that the run-up to Christmas is a particularly dangerous period. That’s why we need to remain vigilant and resolute. Ukraine is not targeted because it is a danger, but because its people stand up for European values, because they dare to be free and because they want to decide their own fate. Nothing terrifies the Kremlin more than a free, democratic nation on its own borders.

Meanwhile, how do we react? Some still suggest that Nord Stream 2 should continue. The main export of the Kremlin is not gas, oil or arms, but chaos, as one Russian ideologue has openly stated. By increasing our dependency on Russia, we betray our allies and endanger the future of this continent. It is time for our foreign policy to show teeth and speak with bullies in a language they understand, the language of tough sanctions. Punishment of Russia must be unprecedented if it dares to start another war against Ukraine. Cut off Russia from the SWIFT system, scrap Nord Stream 2 and sanction Putin and his entourage. More importantly, show the Kremlin that bullying is counterproductive by advancing partnership with Ukraine every time the Kremlin tries to intimidate it.

Dear colleagues, let’s practice what we preach and show Russia that, in the world of international law, might does not make right. Stand up for Ukraine.

  Jaak Madison, fraktsiooni ID nimel. – Austatud istungi juhataja, lugupeetud kõrge välisesindaja, head kolleegid! Kindlasti paljudel on küsimus, et mis võiks praegune Venemaa eesmärk olla ja kas nende mittesaavutamisel oldaks valmis ka uuesti sõjaliselt nende nimel tegutsema nagu hiljuti Gruusias, Krimmis või Ida-Ukrainas?

Eesmärkide osas on üpris lihtne: Venemaa on selgelt öelnud, et soovib saada juriidilist garantiid, et NATO ei võta vastu uusi liikmesriike Venemaa naabrusest, ning ei soovita näha enda piiridele liiga lähedal NATO sõjaväelisi üksusi või relvastust. Sellised nõudmised on saanud võimalikuks eelkõige seetõttu, et Venemaa tunnetab nii USA kui Euroopa Liidu nõrkust.

Olgu öeldud, et senini on pea kõik Venemaa etteheited olnud valed ja tegelikkust moonutavad. NATO sõjalised üksused Ida-Euroopas on vaid kaitseks, mitte Venemaa ähvardamiseks. Ainult hull võiks arvata, et Euroopa riikidel või USA-l oleks motivatsiooni sõjaliselt ähvardada Venemaad. Samuti on täiesti absurdsed Venemaa nõuded, et temaga piirnevates riikides ei tohi olla NATO sõjalisi üksusi kaitse eesmärgil või et mõned riigid ei tohiks kunagi saada NATO liikmeks. Kui küsimuse all on Venemaa vägede koondumine Ukraina piiri äärde või agressiivsed sõjaväeõppused Eesti piiri ääres, siis väidab Venemaa, et Venemaa teeb omal territooriumil, mida vaid soovib. Kuid täpselt sama õigus kehtib ka teistele riikidele: kui Ukraina soovib liituda NATO-ga, siis see on tema õigus, kui ka NATO teised liikmed sellega nõus on. Kui Eesti või Poola soovivad oma territooriumil näha liitlasvägesid, siis on see nende õigus ja Venemaal puudub igasugune alus pretensioonideks. Eriti arvestades Venemaa ajaloolist käitumist ja viimase 15 aasta jooksul algatatud sõdu.

Venemaa võiks olla majanduslikult meile väga hea partner ja ka mõnes mõttes liitlane, kui arvestada suhteid Hiinaga. Kuid headeks suheteks peab olema valmidus mõlemal poolel. Venemaa kui kõige suurema territooriumiga riik maailmas peab aru saama, et möödas on eelmine sajand, kui veel kommunistliku terroriga oli võimalik korda saata okupatsioone, massimõrvu või küüditamisi. Venemaa peaks aru saama, et headest suhetest oma naabritega on neil väga palju võita. Kuid selleks, et nad sellest heast võimalusest ka hästi aru saaksid, peaksime meie, see tähendab Euroopa riigid, olema valmis ennast kaitsma ükskõik milliste vahenditega ja praegusel hetkel osutama igakülgset abi Ukrainale. Võtkem siin eeskujuks Soome – riik, mis omab majanduslikult stabiilseid suhteid Venemaaga, kuid samal ajal omab üht parimat armeed Euroopas ja seda kindlasti mitte Rootsi või Norra pärast.

  Anna Fotyga, w imieniu grupy ECR. – Panie Przewodniczący! Czterdzieści lat temu z okładem 10 milionów Polaków tak jak ja zakochanych w Solidarności zadawało sobie pytanie: wejdą, nie wejdą? To było o ówczesnym Kremlu w systemie komunistycznym. Od ośmiu lat, od czasów Majdanu, robią to Ukraińcy. Co chwila muszą się uporać z zagrożeniem, z wzrastającym niebezpieczeństwem – od 2014 roku z aneksją znacznej części swojego terytorium, okupacją wschodu Ukrainy, presją gospodarczą, cybernetyczną, dezinformacyjną, zabronieniem im jakiegokolwiek międzynarodowego wyboru.

Czym się różni tamten świat sprzed 40 lat od tego, z czym mamy do czynienia w tej chwili? Wówczas kolektywny Zachód był w stanie przekazać jasną i jednoznaczną, wyraźną odpowiedź Kremlowi, komunistycznemu Kremlowi Związku Sowieckiego. O tym, że aneksja Polski spotka się z bardzo istotnymi konsekwencjami. Nie było wówczas mowy o artykule piątym. Byliśmy częścią bloku sowieckiego, a jednak ta groźba była na tyle wyraźna i ta niepewność strategiczna, którą narzucono Związkowi Sowieckiemu, na tyle skuteczna, że my byliśmy pewni, że oni nie wejdą. Ta odpowiedź Zachodu wobec Ukraińców, Ukrainy i adresowana do Federacji Rosyjskiej, do dzisiejszego Kremla powinna być równie jasna: wara od Ukrainy.

  Mick Wallace, on behalf of The Left Group. – Mr President, Zelensky came to power on a landslide with a mandate to end the war against the secessionists in the east, which has claimed thousands of lives and has had dire economic repercussions for millions of Ukrainians.

There is, in the form of the 2015 Minsk II agreement, a framework, a pathway to achieve a lasting peace. This solution has been endorsed by the US and the UN and was negotiated between France, Germany, Ukraine and Russia, providing for autonomy for a demilitarised Donbas within Ukraine but guaranteed by international treaty.

This joint motion lays the blame for the lack of progress on Minsk exclusively at Russia’s feet. But this is a fantasy. Russia has engaged seriously with the process, only to have Zelensky’s side repeatedly add extra conditions at the last minute or watch on as ultranationalist militias, who always seem to have a fresh stash of US-made weaponry, repeatedly and blatantly refuse to obey the orders coming from Kiev.

There are serious internal problems in Ukraine, between Ukrainians, about what kind of country they want to build. We cannot simply project all this conflict as somewhat a Russian problem. If we do, we will never understand the dynamics well enough in order to be of any help to the Ukrainian people. In fact, we are more likely to introduce more violence into the region.

If we want peace, we need to support a framework where Russia is part of the solution and not always treated as an enemy. We need to open our minds and open our eyes.

  Κώστας Παπαδάκης (NI). – Κύριε Πρόεδρε, οι εξελίξεις είναι «κίνδυνος-θάνατος» για τους λαούς: Συγκέντρωση στρατιωτικών δυνάμεων του ΝΑΤΟ, των ΗΠΑ και της ΕΕ σε διάταξη σύγκρουσης και περικύκλωσης της ανταγωνίστρια τους Ρωσίας. Πολεμικές απειλές και προειδοποιήσεις με επιδίωξη την ένταξη της Ουκρανίας στο ΝΑΤΟ, και κλιμάκωση της κούρσας των εξοπλισμών. Ένταση στα σύνορα Λευκορωσίας-Πολωνίας με χιλιάδες εγκλωβισμένους πρόσφυγες, θύματα των ιμπεριαλιστικών επεμβάσεων. Στρατιωτικές ασκήσεις, όπως η Atlantic Resolve, κυριολεκτικά πρόβες πολέμου. Νέα αμερικάνικη βάση στην Αλεξανδρούπολη στρατηγικός κόμβος για την υλοποίηση των επικίνδυνων ιμπεριαλιστικών σχεδίων στην ευρύτερη περιοχή. Συνέχιση της στρατηγικής σχέσης της ΕΕ και των ΗΠΑ με την αστική τάξη της Τουρκίας και υποκριτικές κυρώσεις της ΕΕ για το προκλητικό άνοιγμα των Βαρωσίων στη γραμμή διαιώνισης της κατοχής στην Κύπρο.

Απαιτούμε να σταματήσουν οι ευρωατλαντικές ασκήσεις που στρέφονται κατά της Ρωσίας και άλλων κρατών, να τερματιστεί η κατοχή στην Κύπρο, να εξασφαλιστούν τα δικαιώματα των προσφύγων, να κλείσουν οι αμερικανονατοϊκές βάσεις από την Ελλάδα, που έσπειραν οι κυβερνήσεις της ΝΔ, του ΣΥΡΙΖΑ και του ΠΑΣΟΚ. Καμία αποστολή ελληνικών στρατιωτικών δυνάμεων εκτός συνόρων.

  Andrius Kubilius (PPE). – Mr President, what we are discussing today is not just one more instance of the aggressive behaviour of the Kremlin. It is possible that, in the future, this day will be shown as the day when the geopolitical future of the European Union in the 21st century started to be designed.

Putin, who started the war against Georgia in 2008 and against Ukraine in 2014, is now demanding that those countries should not take care of their security, and that the West should abandon them.

Here is the most important question to us, not to Georgians or Ukrainians: are we ready to succumb to the Kremlin’s brutal threats and blackmail on the future of Georgia and Ukraine? Are we ready to take big new steps in the ‘appeasement of Putin strategy’? We know where the appeasement of Hitler brought not only Europe, but the whole world. The appeasement of Hitler came to a culmination when Hitler blackmailed the West on the future of Czechoslovakia and the West succumbed. Now Putin is blackmailing the West on the future of Ukraine. Are we ready to succumb again?

If not, than it is not enough just to say that NATO and the EU will not listen to the Kremlin’s demands. It’s time to move forward with the real Euro—Atlantic integration of Ukraine, Georgia and Moldova, starting from the Eastern Partnership Summit, which will start tomorrow, and moving forward with the MAP for NATO membership.

If that is not done, then it will become clear that the future of those countries is being sacrificed for the appeasement of Putin. For the sake of appeasement, there were no decisions made to invite Georgia and Ukraine for the NATO Bucharest Summit in 2008. Because of that, Putin decided that he could start his wars against Georgia and Ukraine. Now we see that the continuation of that appeasement brings only new threats and blackmail and, if we succumb now, we shall be responsible for the recreation of real aggressive Fascism in the 21st century and for all the future tragedies of the European continent.

(The speaker spoke in Ukrainian)

IN THE CHAIR: KATARINA BARLEY
Vice-President

  Sven Mikser (S&D). – Madam President, the current massing of Russian troops and military equipment on Ukraine’s borders is extremely dangerous and provocative. The situation must be de-escalated quickly in order to avoid catastrophic consequences. I believe that the political solution to this situation is not yet impossible and must be pursued, but the fact that Russia continues to renege on its previous commitments obviously makes it more difficult.

It is clear from the steps of the Russian leaders that they see the aggression they launched in 2014 as an unfinished business. What the EU can and must do is to be firm and consistent in our support for Ukraine’s sovereignty and territorial integrity. We must also be strong and consistent in helping Ukraine to boost its resilience against external pressure and provocations.

On sanctions, I sincerely believe that Russia’s current leaders are ultimately rational players on the international scene. They have shown they will not shy away from using military means to achieve their goals if, but only if, they believe that the benefits are greater than the costs.

So the task of the international community is to tell them very unequivocally that in case of any military adventure, the price Russia will have to pay is going to be far greater than any possible gain. So yes, the threat of new effective countermeasures, including well-targeted sanctions, can change the Kremlin’s calculus and help avert a military escalation.

And finally, we must also be consistent and resolute in reminding Russia’s president that Ukraine’s geostrategic choices are for the Ukrainians to make, and no third party will ever have a veto in this.

  Nathalie Loiseau (Renew). – Madame la Présidente, cela m’attriste de l’entendre et cela m’attriste de le dire, mais en Europe, dans la vie politique française et même dans cet hémicycle, il y a encore, il y a toujours des idiots utiles. Cette expression inventée par Lénine et qui lui a visiblement survécu.

En France, Jean-Luc Mélenchon, comme Éric Zemmour, l’extrême gauche comme l’extrême droite, tous deux candidats à l’élection présidentielle, répètent sur l’Ukraine les éléments de langage du Kremlin. Pour eux, il n’y a pas de troupes russes qui se massent à la frontière. Pour eux, la Russie est en droit d’en vouloir à l’OTAN, qui n’aurait pas tenu ses promesses. Pas un mot sur l’annexion de la Crimée, rien sur le Donbass, silence sur les exactions des mercenaires, sur la désinformation massive, aucun respect des aspirations du peuple ukrainien, rien.

Dans cet hémicycle, le Rassemblement national nous a habitués à débiter les arguments de Vladimir Poutine avec autant d’empressement que d’enthousiasme. La Crimée? Aucun problème pour Thierry Mariani et ses amis, elle est russe, d’ailleurs ils s’y rendent souvent.

Je voudrais donner un conseil à Russia Today: vous pouvez faire des économies et fermer vos bureaux en Europe. Certains politiques européens font parfaitement votre travail à votre place. Un travail de propagande systématique du Kremlin.

Et je voudrais dire à l’Ukraine de ne pas s’inquiéter, en tout cas, tant que ces idiots utiles resteront minoritaires en Europe, et ils doivent absolument rester minoritaires. Car nous, la majorité digne de ce Parlement européen, sommes résolument au côté de Kiev, de son aspiration à la démocratie, à l’indépendance, à l’intégrité territoriale. Le temps des impérialismes et des régimes soumis est révolu.

  Bronis Ropė (Verts/ALE). – Gerbiama Pirmininke, gerbiamas Komisijos nary, kolegos, Putinas kviečia galingiausias pasaulio šalis dalintis įtakos zonomis. Jis inicijuoja naują Molotovo-Ribentropo paktą ir sako, kad Ukraina priklauso jam.

Tai nėra netikėtas manevras. Prie to buvo palaipsniui einama. Kremlius propaganda referendumo Nyderlanduose metu siekė užverti kelius Ukrainai artėti prie Europos Sąjungos. Dabartinis tikslas – neleisti Ukrainai tapti NATO nare.

Nepaisant Putino viražų, mes iki šiol nesugebėjome susitelkti ir jo sustabdyti. Pavyzdžiui, 2020 metais iš Rusijos Europos Sąjungos šalys importavo prekių beveik už 108 milijardus eurų. Tapome dar viena nuo Rusijos žaliavų priklausoma šalimi.

Kviečiu ne kalbomis, o darbais parodyti, kad Ukraina turi teisę pati rinktis savo kelią.

  Thierry Mariani (ID). – Madame la Présidente, j’ai cherché en vain quel territoire ukrainien était aujourd’hui occupé par la Russie, Madame Loiseau. Oui, il y a un territoire, la Crimée, où les habitants ont fait le choix en 2014 de rejoindre la Russie à travers un référendum gagné avec une écrasante majorité. D’ailleurs, avez-vous vu, Madame Loiseau, une vague migratoire massive en provenance de la Crimée déferler sur l’Europe? Non. Et pourquoi? Vous le savez très bien, parce que ce référendum reflétait la volonté de la majorité de la population.

Dans l’est de l’Ukraine, où la population s’est soulevée contre le gouvernement de Kiev, les habitants attendent que les accords de Minsk leur accordant un statut spécial au sein de l’Ukraine soient enfin respectés. Oui, nous savons tous qu’il y avait une solution pour désamorcer ce conflit ukrainien. Cette solution était l’application pure et simple des accords de Minsk négociés par Mme Merkel et M. Hollande. Malheureusement, ils sont toujours restés lettre morte. Chacun sait que le gouvernement ukrainien et la Rada n’avaient pas l’intention de les appliquer et logiquement, la Russie n’a pas montré plus d’empressement, elle aussi, à les appliquer.

Par exemple, le gouvernement ukrainien n’a toujours pas fait le moindre geste pour tenir ses promesses dans le Donbass, à savoir la mise en place d’un statut garantissant plus d’autonomie. Aujourd’hui, pire, l’Ukraine reprend les accents les plus belliqueux contre les Russes. Faut-il vous rappeler que certains soutiens du gouvernement ukrainien ont les mains pleines de sang? Le sang des dizaines de victimes de l’incendie de la Maison des syndicats d’Odessa, en mai 2014, passé sous silence. Le sang des personnes battues à mort par les milices nostalgiques de M. Bandera, sympathisant nazi notoire. Faut-il rappeler que la crise du Donbass doit son déclenchement à la décision du gouvernement de M. Porochenko de supprimer les langues régionales en 2014, le russe, mais aussi le hongrois, le roumain et même le tatar criméen? Aujourd’hui, 13 000 Ukrainiens, quelles que soient leurs idées, ont perdu la vie dans ce conflit.

L’Union européenne doit cesser de se voiler la face en Ukraine. Le dernier rapport de la Cour des comptes de l’Union européenne commence en ces termes, je cite: «L’Ukraine est minée par la grande corruption». Le président Zelensky, qui enchaîne les échecs, joue d’ailleurs sur la montée des tensions pour sauver le peu de popularité qui lui reste. Censure de la presse, dénonciation de faux coups d’État: visiblement, on est prêt à tout pour garantir sa situation.

La seule voie pacifique aujourd’hui, c’est le respect des accords de Minsk. C’est le respect que l’Union européenne devrait exiger de toutes les parties pour éviter une nouvelle guerre. Et c’est ce respect dont vous vous moquez, quels que soient vos propos.

  Witold Jan Waszczykowski (ECR). – Pani Przewodnicząca! Señor Borrell i wszyscy pożyteczny idioci! Kolejny raz debatujemy o rosyjskim imperializmie, a konflikt trwa osiem lat. Na każdą rosyjską eskalację odpowiadamy apelem o dialog, zapominając jednocześnie, iż to Rosja tworzy problemy, a nie rozwiązania. Rosja tworzy te problemy i oczekuje właśnie na dialog, aby uzyskać od nas dalsze koncesje, a nie dojść do kompromisowej sytuacji między nami. Blokuje wszystkie inicjatywy pokojowe Ukrainy. Czy i kiedy zaczniemy rozliczać Rosję, a nie ją wynagradzać?

Chciałbym zwrócić się do naszych niemieckich kolegów i nowego rządu w Berlinie: czy nadal będą brane pod uwagę tylko interesy rosyjskie, jak wspomniał o tym kiedyś pan Heugen, doradca pani Merkel? Czy nadal będzie stosowane embargo na dostawy broni, nawet defensywnej, dla Ukrainy? Czy nadal będzie blokowany proces szybkiego zbliżenia relacji Unii z Ukrainą aż po członkostwo Unii? Czy i kiedy Niemcy zajmą twarde stanowisko w formacie normandzkim i mińskim?

Czy Francja, która zaraz przejmie przewodnictwo, wykorzysta prezydencję również do tego, aby format normandzki i format miński zaczęły działać? Czy będzie to w dalszym ciągu polityka resetu? Nie ma definicji kar i sankcji. Wymieniono dziś tutaj, na tej sali, całą listę tych kar i sankcji. Mamy deficyt woli zastosowania tych kar i sankcji, więc działajmy, apeluję, abyśmy nie spotkali się za miesiąc czy dwa na kolejnej bezradnej debacie.

Chciałbym życzyć przede wszystkim wszystkim Ukraińcom żyjącym na okupowanych i zaanektowanych terytoriach: Merry Christmas and Happy New Year!.

  Fabio Massimo Castaldo (NI). – Signora Presidente, signor Alto rappresentante, onorevoli colleghi, i movimenti di truppe orchestrati da Mosca sono sempre più preoccupanti.

Vorrei ricordare a tutti, cari colleghi, che la minaccia, al pari dell'uso della forza, è una chiara violazione dei principi fondanti delle Nazioni Unite. Sì, ancora è poco probabile un'invasione diretta, ma vedere pressioni militari di questo tipo verso un paese democratico, unite a minacce cibernetiche costanti e disinformazione di massa è inaccettabile e deve indurci ad agire.

Sarà necessario adottare sanzioni economiche pesanti in caso di aggressione. Ma queste inquietudini rispetto alla possibilità di un'escalation devono farci comprendere i limiti delle nostre attuali capacità di risposta e l'importanza di procedere speditamente verso l'Unione della difesa, poiché solo con essa potremo sfruttare appieno le nostre capacità di mediazione e di peacemaking, solo con essa saremmo credibili se decidessimo di dispiegare, anche lì, una missione CSDP sul terreno.

Non è il momento di farci trovare indecisi, divisi o ancora impreparati. I decisori politici a Mosca devono sapere che un'aggressione militare avrebbe durissime conseguenze e altissimi costi. Solo in questo modo avremo quella credibilità ai tavoli negoziali che talvolta ci è mancata. Solo in questo modo la nostra voce sarà veramente ascoltata per proteggere un'Ucraina democratica.

  Andrzej Halicki (PPE). – Szanowni Państwo! Wysoka Izbo! Putin zaatakował Ukrainę w ostatnich dwóch latach już dwa razy. Szykuje się do trzeciego ataku i to naprawdę realna groźba. To szantaż wobec Ukrainy, ale także szantaż wobec Europy. Chce być ważny, chce żeby do niego dzwonić, chce żeby rozmawiać. Nie tędy droga, Panie Putin. Europa musi być silna i solidarna, musi działać razem i aktywnie od razu reagować sankcjami, pakietem sankcji, który będzie bolesny gospodarczo. Musimy również aktywnie pomagać Ukrainie, bo Ukraina wymaga gospodarczej pomocy, a także nowoczesnej armii. Powinniśmy jej to gwarantować.

Partnerstwo Wschodnie, Mołdawia, Gruzja także wymagają naszego natychmiastowego wsparcia. Musimy być solidarni i wszyscy, którzy temu zaprzeczają i przeciwdziałają, są pomagierami Putina. I na takie kłamstwa, jak słyszeliśmy przed chwilą, musimy reagować stanowczo. Wszyscy przyjaciele Putina są agentami Kremla. Trzeba to sobie jasno powiedzieć i musimy ich marginalizować, jeżeli chodzi o naszą wspólnotę. Nie macie prawa nazywać siebie patriotami. Działacie przeciwko interesowi narodowemu własnych społeczeństw, bo wasze społeczeństwa chcą być bezpieczne, chcą bezpieczeństwa energetycznego, chcą bezpieczeństwa finansowego.

I na koniec niech Pan posłucha: jeżeli Pan jest przyjacielem Putina, to jest Pan przeciwnikiem Europy, przeciwnikiem także swoich obywateli.

  Tonino Picula (S&D). – Madam President, it’s with great concern that we follow the increased military presence of Russia at the Ukrainian border. We can speculate about its reasons, whether they are economic, political or both.

Possible interpretations that link Russia’s actions with the Nord Stream 2 approval reflect how complex the relation we, as the EU, have with Russia since the interests of our Member States are not always aligned. We need to work together to coordinate our efforts concerning the Normandy Format cooperation with NATO in defence—related aspects. We have to address the economic dimension of our cooperation and foreign interference into our democratic processes, and lend once more our univocal support and commitment to Ukraine’s independence, sovereignty and territorial integrity within its internationally recognised borders. Ukraine has sovereign right to make its own foreign and security policy choices.

As the Council will discuss this topic next week, we expect a swift agreement on further joint action, namely severe economic and financial sanctions that should be closely coordinated with our transatlantic partners. From Belarus and Ukraine to Republika Srpska, many of the challenges at our external borders have a common denominator in Moscow. This is why the Council meeting next week will be a good opportunity to discuss a long called for and much—needed comprehensive EU strategy towards Russia.

  Michal Šimečka (Renew). – Madam President, Ukraine is once again threatened by Russian aggression and renewed war and the reason is still the same. The simple reason is that Ukrainians dared to choose a path of democracy and association with Europe. Therefore, the situation is no longer just about Ukraine – it is about Europe as a whole. Because if Mr Putin is allowed to dictate the choices of democratic and sovereign European nations or to hold a veto over what alliances they may or may not form, then really, our continent’s security order is not worth much.

And if Mr Putin is allowed to blackmail NATO and the EU into some sort of a bargain that would compromise the sovereignty of Ukraine or the security of some Member States, then our principles and commitments are not worth much either.

We have talked a lot in the past months about strategic autonomy, about the EU’s role in the world and its security policy and now this is the moment for the EU to prove that it can back up its ambitions in cooperation with NATO. That is with a united message, with practical and economic support to Ukraine, and of course with a credible threat of further and massive sanctions against Russia, including the suspension of Nord Stream 2.

So, this is indeed a moment for the EU to step up for the sake of Ukraine but also for the sake of our own security.

  Markéta Gregorová (Verts/ALE). – Madam President, unfortunately we are sitting here again while sensing another war in Europe. The Russian unprecedented military activities and build-up in the proximity of the Ukrainian borders are clear evidence that Russia is willing to escalate the crisis.

The US promised unprecedented sanctions in case of Moscow’s escalation. What will the EU promise – a direct neighbour and partner of Ukraine? They got away with it in Georgia. They got away with it in Crimea. Has the time when we leave the ambiguity and be clear that we won’t stand idly by finally come? Will we impose strong, targeted sanctions, notably in the bank, gas and oil sectors, and make sure that the price for a war is not one that Russia wants to pay?

It is up to you, Mr Borrell, it is up to you, Council. Set the price really high, otherwise the one who will have to pay will be Ukraine, closely followed by us.

  Maximilian Krah (ID). – Frau Präsidentin, meine sehr verehrten Damen und Herren Kollegen! Wenn wir über das Problem der Ostukraine reden, sollten wir nicht verschweigen, dass es eine Regelung gibt, nämlich das Minsker Abkommen, Minsk II genannt. Und die Frage, die sich diejenigen gefallen lassen müssen, die hier nach neuen Sanktionen gegen Russland rufen, ist: Akzeptieren Sie dieses Abkommen oder akzeptieren Sie es nicht?

Selbst die neue deutsche Außenministerin, deren Kurs ich für falsch halte, erklärt, sie steht zu Minsk II. Minsk II hat 13 Punkte, die kann man nachlesen. Und es sind derzeit die Regierung und das Parlament in Kiew, die allein mindestens vier dieser Punkte sabotieren, und zwar seit 2015. Machen Sie Druck auf Kiew, das von uns wirtschaftlich abhängig ist, ein Abkommen so umzusetzen, das Frankreich, Deutschland, die Vereinigten Staaten gemeinsam vermittelt haben und unterstützen? Habe ich noch nie gehört von Ihnen. Sie geben lieber Militärhilfe.

Insofern: Sie wollen Frieden? Sehr wohl. Setzen Sie sich für das Minsker Abkommen ein. Das ist regelbasierte Außenpolitik, aber nicht dieses Sanktions- und Kriegsgeschrei, das wir hier teilweise zu hören haben.

Und das Zweite, worum es geht, ist, dass man sich natürlich überlegen muss: Wie denkt mein Gegenüber? Man nennt das Empathie. Russland hat historische Erfahrungen gemacht, die anders sind als unsere. Hätten Hitler und Napoleon ihre Feldzüge an der heutigen ukrainisch-russischen Grenze begonnen, hätten sie gewonnen. Und genau deshalb wird Russland es nie erlauben, dass ein ihm gegenüber skeptisches, gar feindliches Militärbündnis an dieser Grenze steht.

Wer also die Ukraine in die NATO aufnimmt, der provoziert, ob uns das gefällt oder nicht – mir gefällt es auch nicht –, den russischen Angriff. Und jetzt stellen Sie sich die Frage, ob Sie bereit sind, für die NATO-Mitgliedschaft der Ukraine Krieg in Kauf zu nehmen. Wenn Sie es wollen, dann führen Sie den Krieg. Ich werde Wahlwerbung dafür machen, dass es keinen Krieg gibt. Und ich bin bereit, in Kauf zu nehmen, dass die Ukraine nicht Mitglied der NATO wird.

  Alexandr Vondra (ECR). – Madam President, Theodore Roosevelt once famously said you speak softly but keep a hammer in your hand, and our problem is that occasionally we are behaving otherwise. We have nice speeches, yes, we should support Ukraine independence, we should support their right to decide about their future. We also rightly criticise Putin and his aggressive behaviour, but we do nothing to deter him from action.

This is our problem. We should be able to deploy strategic weapons in the Eastern theatre. We should be able to declare sanctions that would hurt him, not sanctions which produce just his laugh. But our problem is that occasionally we are rather putting our heads right into Putin’s throat, with our increasing dependence on Russian gas, with our inability to support nuclear energy. This is our problem and until we change that, nothing will happen.

  Milan Uhrík (NI). – Vážená pani predsedajúca, z toho, čo tu počúvam, má vyslovene až mrazí. Vy fakt chcete vojnu s Ruskom? Pretože presne k tomu táto konfliktná politika smeruje. Žiadate od Ruskej federácie, aby stiahla svoju vlastnú armádu zo svojich vlastných hraníc. Povedzte mi, kam majú ísť. Veď oni sú na svojom vlastnom území. Americká armáda je osemtisíc kilometrov ďaleko od Washingtonu, tak mi, prosím vás, povedzte, kto tu provokuje koho, kto tu provokuje koho? Američania tvrdia, že Rusov treba nejakým spôsobom zatlačiť, pretože sú hrozbou, že pripravujú inváziu. To počúvame posledných sedem rokov. To sme počúvali pri Iraku, že Saddám má zbrane hromadného ničenia. A kde boli? Nakoniec sa ukázalo, že to bolo obyčajné klamstvo, obyčajná lož na ďalší americký útok. Tieto provokácie, ktoré sa tu predvádzajú, sú naozaj čisté bláznovstvo. Veď vy si neuvedomujete, že toto všetko môže reálne viesť k vojne? K reálnej vojne, kde budú zomierať ľudia aj na území strednej Európy a kde sa aj my Slováci budeme musieť starať o obete pokryté krvou? To je na hlavu, prepáčte.

  Paulo Rangel (PPE). – Senhora Presidente, Senhor Comissário, comecemos pelo princípio: a Rússia, liderada por Putin, começou por pôr em causa a integridade territorial da Geórgia, depois da Ucrânia, designadamente com a anexação ilegal e não reconhecida da Crimeia e depois avançando para a guerra na Ucrânia no leste da Ucrânia. Neste momento Putin tem vindo a concentrar dezenas de milhares de soldados, dezenas de milhares de efetivos, na fronteira entre a Rússia e a Ucrânia, justamente criando uma ameaça efetiva, uma ameaça real sobre a integridade da Ucrânia e sobre uma escalada do conflito que persiste.

Por isso mesmo, nós, países ocidentais, nós União Europeia, em conjunto com os Estados Unidos e com o Reino Unido não podemos, em caso nenhum, tolerar que a Rússia possa criar mais uma situação de guerra e de violação da ordem internacional na Ucrânia. Claro que é fundamental manter o diálogo dos acordos de Minsk e manter o diálogo através da Alemanha e da França naquela estrutura de quadrilátero com a Rússia e com a Ucrânia, mas sendo isso muito importante para o diálogo é fundamental manter firme a posição face à Rússia.

Isso significa, desde logo, que sejam claras as sanções aplicadas ao regime russo e, em particular, as sanções que podem vir a ser aplicadas no caso de haver algum desenvolvimento negativo nas relações entre a Rússia e a Ucrânia.

Aqui, a União Europeia, os Estados Unidos e o Reino Unido têm de estar em total sintonia, de uma forma firme, dura e clara, que mostre também solidariedade para com a Parceria Oriental e para com os Estados do Leste Europeu que integram a União Europeia.

Sem essa garantia a paz na Europa e a paz no mundo está em perigo. Putin tem de ser travado, Putin tem de ser detido.

  Isabel Santos (S&D). – Senhora Presidente, a crescente pressão provocada pelo aumento da presença militar russa na fronteira com a Ucrânia às portas da União Europeia desafia todos os limites. O respeito pela integridade territorial e a inviolabilidade das fronteiras são princípios inscritos na Ata Final de Helsínquia que a Rússia violou clamorosamente quando anexou a Crimeia.

Não podemos admitir mais provocações. A Ucrânia tem o direito soberano de tomar as suas decisões em matéria de defesa e relações externas sem temer que as suas escolhas possam colocar em causa a sua autonomia.

Para que haja diálogo são necessários sempre dois e o senhor Putin tem vindo a destruir todas as hipóteses de diálogo. Chegou o tempo de encararmos a aplicação de medidas sancionatórias mais duras, em conjunto com os Estados Unidos e o Reino Unido, e de passarmos a uma reflexão profunda sobre a instituição de uma efetiva política de defesa comum.

  Bernard Guetta (Renew). – Madame la Présidente, chers collègues, je ne vais pas revenir sur ce que tant d’entre vous ont déjà dit, bien dit et légitimement dit sur les gesticulations militaires russes à la frontière de l’Ukraine.

Je voudrais attirer plutôt votre attention sur la négociation qui se cherche entre l’Alliance atlantique et la Russie. Il se cherche une négociation entre l’Alliance et la Russie. Alors si cette négociation s’ouvre, ou même ces discussions, qu’aurions-nous à dire à M. Poutine? Eh bien, nous aurions à lui dire: vous avez des préoccupations de sécurité ? Oui, peut-être, très bien, mais nous aussi et nous en avons parce que c’est vous qui avez annexé la Crimée. Parce que c’est vous qui avez porté la guerre en Ukraine orientale. Parce que c’est vous qui avez de facto annexé deux parties de la Géorgie. Parce que c’est vous qui semez l’instabilité sur le continent Europe.

Alors Monsieur Poutine, vous voulez parler de garanties de sécurité? Très bien, parlons-en. Mais quelles garanties de non-agression et de non-ingérence dans leurs affaires intérieures offrez-vous à vos voisins immédiats comme l’Ukraine, la Géorgie, la Moldavie, le Bélarus, Monsieur Poutine, le Bélarus? Alors oui, ces négociations vont s’ouvrir. Tant mieux, nous devons nous en féliciter. Mais rappelons-en les termes et rappelons-les à M. Poutine.

  Sergey Lagodinsky (Verts/ALE). – Frau Präsidentin! Ich habe eine Rede vorbereitet, aber die werde ich jetzt gar nicht benutzen, ich werde reagieren auf den Zirkus, der hier stattgefunden hat.

Es wurde jongliert, es wurde mit Fake-Facts jongliert. Der große Demokratieverteidiger Mariani von unserer „lieben“ Fraktion spricht über Referenda auf der Krim. Wie demokratisch waren denn die grünen Männchen und die russischen Söldner in der Ukraine? Der große Friedensstifter Mariani spricht von der Minsker Vereinbarung. Entschuldigung, aber in der Minsker Vereinbarung steht: Das schwere Waffengerät muss zurückgezogen werden. Das hat Russland nicht gemacht. Da steht, dass die OSZE-Beobachter rein sollen. Das hat Russland nicht zugelassen.

Also bitte nicht mit Fake-Facts hier jonglieren. Der große Internationalist Mariani spricht über die Sprache, die ukrainische Sprache, die verfolgt wird. Aber was passiert jetzt auf der Krim mit den Krimtataren unter der russischen Herrschaft? Und der Korruptionsbekämpfer Mariani spricht über die Korruption in Kiew. Er soll lieber nach Putins Russland schauen und darüber sprechen.

Über die Empathie von Herrn Krah will ich gar nicht reden. Wo ist Ihre Empathie gegenüber dem ukrainischen Volk? Die sehe ich nicht.

  Alessandro Panza (ID). – Signora Presidente, signor Alto rappresentante, onorevoli colleghi, condividiamo le preoccupazioni per quanto sta accadendo tra Ucraina e Russia e serve il massimo impegno di tutti per scongiurare qualsiasi tipo di escalation che possa sfociare in un conflitto armato, minaccia che per ora sembra solo tale ma che, se disgraziatamente dovesse concretizzarsi, porterebbe a conseguenze drammatiche per un'Europa già duramente provata dalla pandemia.

Ampliando però un po' il campo visivo sullo scacchiere internazionale non possiamo fingere che non ci sia un convitato di pietra in tutta questa situazione, che nessuno ha citato. Desta infatti particolare preoccupazione la notizia secondo cui il Presidente della Turchia Erdoğan si sia proposto come mediatore nella disputa tra Ucraina e Russia.

Caro Alto rappresentante, qual è la posizione dell'Europa su questo tema? Ma soprattutto, quando usciremo da questa situazione di imbarazzo? Dico imbarazzo perché siamo in una situazione in cui sembra si continui a ignorare i fatti. Vogliamo continuare a ignorare che la Turchia acquisti sistemi antimissilistici dalla Russia pur essendo membro della NATO? Vogliamo continuare a ignorare il fatto che la Turchia vende droni all'Ucraina?

Vogliamo continuare a fingere che il comportamento della Turchia non abbia come scopo quello di impedire un conflitto, ma solo quello di consolidare la propria egemonia geopolitica su tutto il confine orientale e meridionale dell'Europa, partendo proprio dall'Ucraina e arrivando fino alla Libia? Vogliamo continuare a sottostare al ricatto dei migranti portato avanti dal regime turco, che poi abbiamo visto trovare anche degli emulatori come accaduto sul confine polacco-bielorusso solo poche settimane fa?

Solo perché l'Europa non è in grado di fare una seria politica di frontiera lasciandola solo agli Stati membri. Se la politica estera europea vuole finalmente battere un colpo e smettere di essere in balia degli eventi, oltre ad annunciare le solite sanzioni, inizi a prendere delle decisioni serie e smetta di finanziare il dittatore turco.

Smettiamo di raccontarci la favola che i miliardi di euro che l'Europa dà alla Turchia servono per le minoranze e per favorire un processo di democratizzazione, mentre sappiamo benissimo che sono solo soldi dei cittadini europei che vengono usati da Erdoğan per consolidare il proprio potere geopolitico.

  Kosma Złotowski (ECR). – Pani Przewodnicząca! Nieustanna presja polityczna i militarna, jakiej poddawana jest Ukraina w ostatnich miesiącach, to także sprawdzian dla Unii Europejskiej i test wiarygodności naszej rzekomo stanowczej polityki wobec Moskwy. Ale jak się bronić bez broni? Niestety, decyzja o blokowaniu zakupów uzbrojenia dla ukraińskiej armii przez Niemcy i Niderlandy to dowód na to, że już sama groźba gazowego szantażu wystarcza, by paraliżować jakiekolwiek skuteczne działania. A co będzie, gdy Nord Stream 2 będzie gotowy, pompując miliony euro do kieszeni rosyjskich oligarchów?

Prorosyjskości nie mierzy się słowami, ale działaniami! Lekceważenie zagrożenia, jakie dla bezpieczeństwa Europy, a zwłaszcza Polski i państw bałtyckich, stanowi agresywna polityka Rosji, to ten sam, powtarzany od lat, błąd Zachodu, o którym już w 2008 r. w Tbilisi mówił prezydent Lech Kaczyński.

  Andrea Bocskor (NI). – Elnök Asszony! Aggodalommal figyelem a történéseket az ukrán-orosz határon. Borellel egyetértve, mindent meg kell tenni a helyzet deeszkalálódása érdekében, a válság elmélyülése ellen. Ezért minden olyan kezdeményezést támogatnunk kell, amely a konfliktus békés megoldásának irányába, a minszki megállapodások teljesítése felé halad. Remélem, hogy a normandiai formáció is feléleszthető még. Magyarország – ahogy eddig is – határozottan kiáll Ukrajna területi integritása és szuverenitása mellett. Ukrajna lakossága évek óta nehéz helyzetben van, ezért fontos lenne számukra a béke és a stabilitás, hiszen több ezer ember vesztette már életét, köztük kárpátaljai magyarok is, a haza védelmében.

Magyarország számtalanszor bizonyította, hogy Ukrajna számíthat a támogatására. Ugyanakkor elfogadhatatlan a nemzeti kisebbségek, köztük az országban élő magyar közösség szerzett jogainak szűkítése. Hiszen a kisebbségi jogok emberi jogok. Az alapvető emberi jogok nem lehetnek a kelet-ukrajnai konfliktus járulékos veszteségei. Remélem, hogy mielőbb helyreáll a béke és a biztonság a térségben, hiszen ez mindannyiunk érdeke.

  Sandra Kalniete (PPE). – Madam President, Vladimir Putin is deliberately escalating his aggression against Ukraine, amassing 175 000 troops near Ukraine’s borders. Yet, this is a war he is bound to lose. He will lose this war because today’s Ukraine is not the Ukraine of 2014, which was weakened and unprepared under the corrupt Yanukovych regime. Today, the Ukrainian army is battle-tested, reformed, and equipped for modern warfare. It has benefitted from training by the Western partners and it has high morale and readiness to defend the homeland.

Putin will also lose the war because more than 56% of Ukrainians now support closer integration with NATO and the EU. He has failed to win over the hearts and minds of Ukrainians.

Finally, Putin will lose the war because further aggression will be met with powerful Western retaliation – severe restrictions of imports of Russian gas, freezing of the bank accounts of Putin’s cronies, the permanent halt of certification of Nord Stream 2, and disconnecting Russia from the SWIFT system.

All of these measures should also be applicable in the case of unconventional aggression – the use by the Kremlin of hybrid warfare instruments, including cyberattacks and artificial mass migration.

The EU and NATO Member States must support reinforcing Ukraine’s military capabilities through arms and technology transfers. It is completely unacceptable for any single Member State to prop up Moscow’s interests by blocking such support.

In the end, we must finally discard any ideas of appeasing Putin. Ukraine is not Chamberlain’s ‘far away land’ – it is our neighbour, close partner and friend. The EU and Ukraine must stand united against Putin’s blackmail.

  Juozas Olekas (S&D). – Madam President, it seems that history tends to repeat itself. Unfortunately, the current situation on the border with Ukraine for me looks very similar to the situation on the borders with Georgia in 2007, when Europe tried to appease Russia’s regime.

Let us not fool ourselves. It did not happen then, and it will not happen now. A glass bullet will never stop his actions just because everyone around him is acting nicely. Well, unfortunately, a bully stops misbehaving only if he has the appropriate response. Yes, the EU and our transatlantic partners have to declare that the first thing we want is a real de-escalation of the situation. But we also have to make clear that the EU will swiftly act against any violation to the sovereignty of the borders of Ukraine and this reaction will include, but not necessarily be limited to, the usual financial and economic response.

  Dacian Cioloş (Renew). – Doamna președintă, este sfârșitul unui an complicat. Suntem cu toții uzați de măsurile luate pentru combaterea pandemiei de Covid, de lungul proces de aprobare a planurilor de redresare și reziliență sau de problemele referitoare la nerespectarea unor libertăți fundamentale în unele părți ale Europei.

Cu toate acestea, evoluțiile de la granița Ucrainei cu Rusia nu trebuie ignorate, pentru că acea problemă nu e doar o problemă a Ucrainei, ci una care privește întreaga Europă. Faptul că Federația Rusă și-a sporit substanțial prezența militară în ultimele luni la granița de est și de nord cu Ucraina, în Crimeea ocupată și în regiunea Mării Negre, unde Rusia este foarte activă în ultima perioadă, la care se adaugă și declarațiile belicoase ale liderilor ruși, este o provocare și pentru securitatea Uniunii Europene și cu siguranță a statelor de la vecinătatea estică și sud-estică a Uniunii Europene, printre care și România.

Comparații cu 1939 au devenit în ultima vreme banale însă nu trebuie să uităm principala lecție a acelei perioade: că nu trebuie să abdicăm de la solidaritate. Singura modalitate prin care putem să convingem Rusia lui Putin că trebuie să dea înapoi este solidaritatea Uniunii Europene în fața acestui fenomen.

  Jakop G. Dalunde (Verts/ALE). – Fru talman! De senaste veckorna har hundratusentals ryska soldater mobiliserats vid Ukrainas östra gräns. Detta är inte den första provokationen, utan den väcker oroande minnen. För snart åtta år sedan slutade en liknande upptrappning med den illegala och folkrättsvidriga annekteringen av Krimhalvön. Enligt Helsingforsavtalet har länder rätt till självbestämmande, och konflikter kring gränser ska lösas med diplomati. Trots det har Ryssland tidigare inte tvekat att kränka andra länders suveränitet och ändra gränser med militärmakt, och de verkar nu vara villiga att göra det igen. Agerandet är ett angrepp på Helsingforsavtalet, och det är i strid med den europeiska säkerhetsordningen.

Det ukrainska folket ska veta att vi i Europa står på deras sida, att vi står upp för deras rätt till självbestämmande och för de avtal och principer på vilka vi har byggt ett fredligt och demokratiskt Europa.

  Adam Bielan (ECR). – Pani Przewodnicząca! W czasie olbrzymiego kryzysu granicznego Unii Europejskiej z Białorusią, za który z całą pewnością współodpowiedzialność ponosi również Putin, Rosja zgromadziła na granicy z Ukrainą ponad 100 tysięcy żołnierzy, najwięcej od czasów inwazji ZSRR na Afganistan, nasilając jednocześnie taktykę wojny hybrydowej oraz kampanii desinformacyjnej. Dlatego obawy przed potencjalną drugą inwazją na Ukrainę wydają się więcej niż uzasadnione. Nikt nie może mieć już wątpliwości, iż obecny reżim rosyjski zagraża pokojowi i bezpieczeństwu w całej Europie, dążąc po raz kolejny do zmiany granic i odebrania suwerenności kolejnym państwom.

W tym kontekście widać, jak wielkim błędem było przyjęcie przez niektóre państwa europejskie – z Niemcami na czele – polityki apeasmentu i pozwolenie Putinowi na budowę gazociągu Nord Stream 2, znacznie zwiększając zależność Europy od rosyjskiego gazu. Uważam, że żądania Rosji dotyczące euroatlantyckiej przyszłości Ukrainy oraz szantaż energetyczny wobec Unii Europejskiej i krajów partnerskich są niedopuszczalne. Ukraina nie może być traktowana jako karta przetargowa w grze politycznej Putina. Dlatego domagam się rozważenia znacznego zaostrzenia sankcji łącznie z proponowanym już tutaj wcześniej wykluczeniem Rosji z systemu SWIFT.

  Radosław Sikorski (PPE). – Madam President, President Putin is promising not to invade Ukraine if we promise that Ukraine will never be admitted to NATO. But President Putin, we were at the same NATO summit in Bucharest in 2008 at which we, NATO, did not grant Ukraine a membership action plan, and we have actually stuck to our decision. Whereas you, President Putin, have since then, invaded Georgia, invaded Crimea, invaded Donbas, shot down MH17 and deployed Iskandar missiles into the Kaliningrad Oblast. Before that, you broke the Budapest Memorandum of 1994, which promised Ukraine independence and inviolability of borders in return for Ukraine’s nuclear arsenal.

Mr Putin, your invasion manifesto of July this year is based on a lie. Russian speakers in Ukraine are not Russian, and if you don’t believe me, ask Irish Members of this House whether they want to be ruled from London again just because they speak English. If you invade again, your kleptocratic regime might come unstuck, and I know for sure if you invade again, the solidarity of this House should not be with the invaders, but with the invaded, with the victims, and that victims of aggression deserve our help in defending themselves.

  Leszek Miller (S&D). – Pani Przewodnicząca! Unia Europejska stoi na wspólnym stanowisku (i jest ono niepodważalne), że suwerenność państwowa, nienaruszalność granic i brak zgody na zmianę granic siłą jest podstawą bezpieczeństwa w Europie i na świecie. Stąd też jasne stanowisko dotyczące suwerenności Ukrainy i jej terytorium.

Z prawdziwym zaniepokojeniem odnotowujemy wzrost napięcia w relacjach Ukrainy i Rosji oraz budowę potencjału wojennego na granicy. Jesteśmy zwolennikami założenia, że dialog polityczny stanowi jedyny sposób trwałego rozwiązania aktualnego kryzysu. Wszelkie pomysły ze strony Rosji dotyczące rozwiązania obecnego kryzysu metodami siłowymi powinny spotkać się z naszym zdecydowanym sprzeciwem.

Gdyby atak jednak nastąpił, Rosja musi spotkać się z niespotykaną dotąd odpowiedzią w postaci sankcji ekonomicznych i politycznych. Ewentualna agresja nie może przynieść żadnych korzyści agresorowi.

  Ilhan Kyuchyuk (Renew). – Madam President, we have imposed a series of sanctions, but the truth is that those measures have failed to deliver results, and the current situation shows that we have failed to learn the lessons.

We cannot underestimate this threat, because the number of Russian troops and equipment being brought to the border is huge. Six years after the Minsk II Peace Plan was signed to stop the fighting in Ukraine’s Donbas region, it is clear that the Minsk Protocol has reached a dead end.

Yes, words do not have much meaning unless followed by actions. The European Union and the United States must agree on further joint actions and be ready for all possible scenarios. This is the only way to prevent the worst case scenario. Changing European borders by force would have political and economic consequences. Therefore, I call for a peaceful solution and Russian re—engagement in the Normandy format.

  Cristian Terheş (ECR). – Madam President, in 1991, when the Soviet Union collapsed, Ukraine ended up having, at that time, over 3000 atomic bombs, making Ukraine the third nuclear power in the world. In 1994, Ukraine trusted the guarantees received from Russia, as well as the West, and agreed to denuclearise so it signed the so-called Budapest Memorandum. In exchange for denuclearisation, Russia affirmed in that memorandum its obligation to refrain from the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of Ukraine. Ukraine and the West has kept their end of the bargain, but Russia has not.

In 2014, Russia illegally occupied Crimea and then occupied parts of eastern Ukraine. Now, Russia under Vladimir Putin is threatening to invade Ukraine and start a war unseen in Europe since the Second World War, which is unacceptable. Ukraine is a sovereign country and it has every right to pursue its desired direction. I call on you, therefore, to support the national sovereignty, independence and internationally recognised borders of Ukraine and use all the necessary means to help Ukraine defend itself.

  Traian Băsescu (PPE). – Doamna președintă, Moscova solicită garanții de securitate din partea SUA și a NATO, precum că alianța nord-atlantică nu se va extinde spre est, în condițiile în care state independente și suverane, Ucraina și Georgia, doresc acest lucru. Declarația ministrului adjunct de externe, Serghei Riabkov, este edificatoare, citez: „Lipsa de progrese în soluționarea politico-diplomatică a acestei probleme va face ca răspunsul nostru să fie militar și tehnico-militar”, am încheiat citatul.

Trupele armatei ruse mobilizate la frontiera estică a Ucrainei au semnificația unei pregătiri pentru invazie, ca răspuns militar al Rusiei. Obiectivul este ocuparea estului și sudului Ucrainei, până la gurile Dunării, realizându-se astfel legătura teritorială cu Crimeea ocupată, dar și accesul direct la Dunăre. Uniunea amenință Rusia cu sancțiuni, iar Putin ar putea închide robinetul Gazprom. În loc să căutăm surse alternative de aprovizionare cu energie, am cumpărat cantități de gaze tot mai mari de la Gazprom, bani cu care Putin a modernizat armata care astăzi se află la frontierele Ucrainei.

Trebuie să trimitem Ucrainei echipamente militare defensive. Trebuie să consolidăm militar flancul estic al Uniunii Europene și al NATO. Trebuie să găsim treptat alternative la Gazprom. Trebuie să nu punem în funcțiune Nord Stream 2.

  Raphaël Glucksmann (S&D). – Madame la Présidente, Monsieur le Commissaire, mes chers collègues, j’avais prévu un discours, mais il ne sert plus à rien parce qu’après avoir entendu M. Mariani et M. Krah, l’extrême droite française et l’extrême droite allemande, il est temps de venir dire ici à quel point on en a marre.

On en a marre de voir ces idiots utiles du Kremlin venir débiter les éléments de propagande de la Russie à chaque fois. Poutine envahit la Géorgie, c’est de la faute des Géorgiens. Poutine annexe la Crimée, c’est de la faute des Ukrainiens. Poutine menace à nouveau l’Ukraine, c’est encore de la faute des Ukrainiens. Ce n’est jamais de la faute de Vladimir Poutine.

En fait, l’extrême droite européenne n’en a strictement rien à faire du droit des nations. Elle se prétend souverainiste et nationaliste, mais cette extrême droite, elle n’est en fait qu’au service de l’internationale financée et parrainée par Vladimir Poutine. Vous n’avez plus le droit de vous définir comme des patriotes: même lorsque Poutine s’ingère dans nos affaires, menace nos démocraties, attaque nos hôpitaux, vous le défendez.

Vous préférez finalement les intérêts de la Russie à ceux de l’Europe. Un jour, les électeurs comprendront et vous le feront payer.

  Bart Groothuis (Renew). – Madam President, whether the aggression in Ukraine remains below the threshold of military violence is all up to Vladimir Putin and his cronies. But if he decides to use military force, I say he has to know the cost will be sky-high. Now, the added value of our European Union is that we are extremely well positioned to communicate credibly such sky-high costs, also up front and as a deterrent, and I therefore call for the setting up of a ready-to-impose interdisciplinary set of countermeasures, economic sanctions, use agricultural certificates, but also migration visa. Show Russia’s elite what freezing assets would actually mean, blocking access to the European market, financial banking limitations, energy and trade instruments and so forth. Si vis pacem, para bellum. He wants peace, prepare for battle, and for the European Union in this moment means prepare to impose maximal costs in order to deter any stupid move towards new military escalation by Russia.

  Ryszard Czarnecki (ECR). – Pani Przewodnicząca! Panie Komisarzu! Możemy jeszcze wygłosić tysiąc przemówień, które będą słusznie krytykować pana Putina, ale zastanówmy się nad naszą reakcją nie tyle werbalną (ona jest potrzebna), ale polityczną. Otóż myślę, że powinniśmy wyciągnąć wnioski z przeszłości, z tego co stało się na szczycie NATO w Bukareszcie w 2008 roku, kiedy to brak jedności Zachodu i zablokowanie przez trzy państwa mapy drogowej dla Gruzji spowodowały parę miesięcy później interwencję Rosji w tym kraju.

Powinniśmy dzisiaj za wszelką cenę zachować jedność. Dobrze, że przegłosowujemy co pół roku sankcje wobec Federacji Rosyjskiej. Trzeba jednak wyraźnie powiedzieć, że wszelkie próby dogadywania się niektórych państw z Rosją szkodzą całej Unii Europejskiej, a nie tylko krajom, które tak jak mój kraj, Polska, z Rosją graniczą. Uważam, że trzeba być solidarnym, bo to jest dzisiaj podstawowa europejska wartość. Solidarność w kontekście Nord Streamu brzmi może dziwnie, ale musimy być solidarni.

  Miriam Lexmann (PPE). – Madam President, the escalation at the Ukrainian border and in Russian—occupied territories of Ukraine is but the latest of a series of actions undertaken by the Kremlin which seriously undermine peace and democracy in Europe. It is indeed the biggest challenge to European security since the end of the Cold War.

Dear colleagues, we can no longer afford to stand by and watch this crisis unfold. In doing so, we may sleepwalk into a potential conflict over which we will have no control.

I welcome the current resolution of this House, and its consistent position. But what we need now is unity among the EU leaders as a cornerstone of any meaningful response. It is time for EU leaders to use the upcoming Council meeting to set aside narrow interests and work, united with our allies, to address the current crisis. Because united we have the leverage and the right tools to deter the Kremlin from any further deterioration and destabilisation.

Dear colleagues, the current crisis is serious, but it is still not beyond our control. Only united and resolute will we be able to send a clear message to the Kremlin that we will use all our means to protect peace and security, and that we reject a return to spheres of influence and any attempts to undermine our democracies.

  Engin Eroglu (Renew). – Frau Präsidentin, sehr geehrte Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Was wir derzeit an der ukrainischen Grenze erleben, ist eine aktive Kriegsdrohung von der russischen Regierung.

Weit über 100 000 Soldaten an der Grenze zur Ukraine, schweres Kriegswaffengerät, und auch die medizinische Infrastruktur zur Behandlung von Soldaten wird auf russischer Seite aufgebaut. Es kann jederzeit passieren, dass die Ukraine erneut angegriffen wird. Schon 2014 gab es eine Grenzverschiebung auf dem europäischen Kontinent. Das gefährdet schon jetzt unseren Frieden und unsere Sicherheitsinfrastruktur auf dem europäischen Kontinent.

Daher müssen wir schnellstmöglich mit aller Kraft, mit entschlossenem Willen, gemeinsam mit unseren NATO-Partnern eine diplomatische Lösung finden. Wir müssen jetzt – so schnell es geht – diplomatische Beziehungen und Gesprächskanäle aufbauen, um dieses Problem zu lösen.

Es scheint, dass die russische Regierung verhindern will, dass die Ukraine ihr Selbstbestimmungsrecht ausüben kann, vielleicht in der NATO Mitglied zu werden oder auch nicht. Wir brauchen keine weitere Spirale der Sanktionen, sondern jetzt – ganz schnell – das größtmögliche Abschreckungspotenzial mit wirtschaftlichen und politischen Mitteln gegenüber der russischen Regierung.

  Anna Zalewska (ECR). – Pani Przewodnicząca! Następne tygodnie i miesiące to wielki sprawdzian dla dwóch wielkich światowych projektów: dla tego, czym jest Unia Europejska i czym jest NATO. Czy jest to siła, gracz na globalnym rynku, w międzynarodowej polityce, czy też zbiór – nie chcę mówić zlepek – różnych interesów, które rozgrywane są przez szantażystę?

Agresja na Ukrainę to również agresja na granicy polsko-białoruskiej, to wspólne projekty Putina, po to by dokończyć budowę Nord Stream 2 i zasilać się miliardami euro, by prowadzić swoją imperialistyczną politykę, jak również to polityka Putina, która ma prowadzić do destabilizacji Unii Europejskiej i NATO.

Jedność, siła, konsekwencje, a nie indywidualne interesy. To daje nam szansę na to, by powiedzieć „nie”.

  Riho Terras (PPE). – Madam President, the tensions around Ukraine are escalating day by day. In addition to the build-up of a large military presence on the borders of Ukraine, Russia has switched into full information warfare mode. This is meant to target the home audience, ordinary Russian people, and to create a symbol of the enemy. This is meant to establish casus belli, so to speak.

Following the Biden-Putin meeting last week, Russia has increased demands and repeated ultimatums. According to these claims, the West is to blame, Ukraine is guilty of genocide in the Donetsk region, Russia is being encircled by hostile countries, and the list goes on. Altogether, this is extremely dangerous and requires the strongest possible response from the European Union.

Ukraine is part of Europe. The EU must stay united and resolute behind Ukraine. The upcoming European Council must address the crisis with the full seriousness that it deserves. The sanctions that Russia will get if it attacks Ukraine must be clearly articulated, effective immediately upon military aggression and cut deeply.

  Karin Karlsbro (Renew). – Fru talman! Ukraina är en nära granne, en handelspartner, en viktig aktör för Europas säkerhet. Ukrainas medborgare har modigt visat att de vill vara en del av det europeiska samarbetet. Just nu, när omvärldens ögon riktas mot Lukasjenkas humanitära haveri i Belarus och vid landets gräns mot EU, passar Putin på att skramla vapen, mobilisera, hota Ukraina igen.

Låt oss dock slå fast en gång för alla: Det är inte Putin som ska diktera Ukrainas framtid. Ukraina har rätt till sin fulla politiska och territoriella integritet. Vi accepterar inga ryska hot, varken i ord eller i handling. På den punkten måste ett enat EU vara kristallklart. Ryssland måste acceptera andra länders integritet och politiska vägval. Hot och aggression måste mötas med sanktioner. EU måste göra sig av med beroendet av rysk gas, och Nord Stream 2 måste stoppas.

  Vladimír Bilčík (PPE). – Vážená pani predsedajúca, v roku 2013 si len málokto vedel predstaviť vojnu na území Ukrajiny. Prišla však rýchla anexia Krymu a dodnes trvajúci horúci konflikt na východe Ukrajiny. Dnes napriek posledným rozhovorom Bidena s Putinom pokračuje koncentrácia ruských jednotiek pri hraniciach. Musíme sa preto pripraviť na každý scenár konfliktu s Ruskom. Bezpečnosť a územná celistvosť Ukrajiny sú v životnom záujme Európskej únie. Sú v životnom záujme bezprostredných susedov Ukrajiny vrátane Slovenska. Ukrajina musí rozhodovať o svojej budúcnosti slobodne, bez hrozby útoku a invázie z Moskvy. V posledných rokoch sme, dámy a páni, reaktívni a defenzívni voči jednostranným vojenským aktivitám z Ruska. Je najvyšší čas to zmeniť. Inak bude Rusko naďalej dávať najavo, že panuje v priestore bývalých sovietskych republík a nedá dýchať proeurópskym a demokratickým silám v regióne. Ani tridsať rokov po rozpade Sovietskeho zväzu Moskva nemení svoje správanie na európskom kontinente. V Bielorusku, okupáciou Krymu, Gruzínska či Podnesterska, ale aj hybridnými aktivitami priamo v Európskej únii, v muničných skladoch v Českej republike. Európska únia musí byť jednotná a rozhodná, kolegyne, kolegovia. Putin rozumie sile a musí mu byť jasné, že útok na Ukrajinu či prekreslenie hraníc by Moskve priniesli obrovské hospodárske a finančné škody. Európska únia má páky na zmrazenie účtov ruských oligarchov. Môže zastaviť projekt Nord Stream 2 a uvaliť dlhodobé sankcie na predstaviteľov ruskej moci. Je najvyšší čas plne využiť európsku silu, aby sme spoločne predišli veľkej vojne v Európe.

  Liudas Mažylis (PPE). – Gerbiama Pirmininke, gerbiamieji, Rusija vis labiau eskaluoja situaciją: jos karinių pajėgų telkimas prie Ukrainos sienų yra tiesioginis konvencinio karo provokavimas.

Po Krymo aneksijos, separatizmo eskalavimo, o ir taip jau seniai vykstančio tikro karo suverenios valstybės teritorijoje, Rusija pakartotinai sutelkė didžiules pajėgas prie Šiaurės Rytų Ukrainos sienos. Tai – ir ES, ir NATO budrumo testavimas. Bet ne tik.

Narystės ES ir NATO perspektyva turi būti įvardinta kaip natūralūs eventualūs procesai. Ukraina nėra objektas – ji yra subjektas ir turi elementarią teisę į teritorinį vientisumą, demokratinį pasirinkimą, taip pat teisę gravituoti link Vakarų.

Rusija gi vis grubiau kišasi į tos valstybės vidaus reikalus, vykdo šantažą, naudoja ne tik hibridinio, bet ir konvencinio karo elementus.

O aš galvoju ne tik apie šiandieninį Rusijos režimą. Režimai keičiasi, o ką apie tai manys Rusijos tauta? Manau, kad sukelti naują karą Europoje Rusijos tautai turėtų būti istorinė gėda.

O mes turime pasiųsti aiškų atgrasymo signalą dabartinei Rusijos valdžiai. Palaikau siūlymus stabdyti naftos ir dujų importą iš Rusijos į ES, pašalinimą iš SWIFT mokėjimo sistemos bei valdžios institucijoms artimų oligarchų ir jų šeimų turto įšaldymą bei jų vizų panaikinimą, jeigu Rusija išdrįstų imtis tiesioginių karinių veiksmų.

Aš matau tik vieną deeskalacijos galimybę – sutelkti, konkretūs ir griežti Europos Sąjungos šalių ir jos Vakarų partnerių veiksmai.

  Eugen Tomac (PPE). – Doamna președintă, domnule Înalt Reprezentant, ceea ce se întâmplă acum la frontiera de est a Ucrainei, prin comasarea celor peste 100 000 de militari de către Rusia, reprezintă una dintre cele mai mari provocări la adresa Uniunii Europene.

Să nu uităm că după ce Ucraina a decis politic apropierea de Uniunea Europeană, răspunsul lui Putin a fost anexarea Crimeii. Kremlinul privește cu multă ostilitate orice stat din imediata noastră vecinătate, care dorește să împărtășească același atașament, împreună cu noi, față de democrație, drepturile omului și libertatea de exprimare, valori care îi sunt străine lui Putin. El astăzi întruchipează omul perfect, cu un profil al dictatorului care sfidează pe oricine și este dispus să-și trimită armata pentru a crea un conflict fără precedent în Europa. Rusia nu mai are de ce să fie membru în Consiliul de Securitate al ONU, membru permanent, deoarece a devenit o țară care pune în pericol pacea și stabilitatea în Europa.

Eventuala invadare a Ucrainei va deschide un nou capitol, plin de evenimente cu deznodământ tragic. Tocmai de aceea Rusia trebuie să știe că va fi complet izolată și va plăti un preț scump pentru această ambiție stalinistă. Putin trebuie oprit. Nimic nu justifică declanșarea unui conflict militar, decât dorința unui om ce pare tot mai ridicol în ambițiile sale geostrategice.

  Tom Vandenkendelaere (PPE). – Voorzitter, collega’s, mijnheer de hoge vertegenwoordiger, de ontwikkelingen aan de grens tussen Rusland en Oekraïne bevestigen eigenlijk wat we allang weten: we hebben nood aan een eendrachtig en effectief optreden in ons buitenlands beleid en ons veiligheids- en defensiebeleid gaat over veel meer dan het militaire aspect alleen. Hoe verontrustend deze ontwikkelingen ook zijn, we mogen nooit toegeven aan hen die geen respect hebben voor de soevereiniteit van een soeverein land.

Oekraïne is een belangrijke partner van de EU en van de NAVO en het is ondenkbaar dat de EU of de NAVO een latere toetreding van Oekraïne a priori afwijst, omdat Rusland de soevereiniteit van dit land niet wil respecteren. Met deze houding zijn we aan onszelf verplicht om effectieve sancties in stelling te brengen en bijzondere zorg daarbij te besteden aan de vertrouwde trans-Atlantische samenwerking in de aanpak van deze crisis.

Maar deze crisis is ook een crisis die zich kenmerkt door een totaal gebrek aan vertrouwen tussen rivalen. Zolang wederzijds begrip en vertrouwen enige relevantie hebben in onze relatie met Rusland, moeten we daarin blijven investeren en blijven inzetten op een of andere vorm van dialoog die we kunnen hebben. Praten met elkaar kan – zonder dat we onze principes verloochenen – hopelijk bijdragen tot de-escalatie en wie weet tot wat nog meer. Maar dat is alleen zinvol als Poetin in onze kracht gelooft en als wij geloofwaardig zijn. Daar moeten we echter zelf voor zorgen.

  Tomislav Sokol (PPE). – Poštovana predsjedavajuća, povjereniče, kolegice i kolege, i nakon više od deset godina izvršno partnerstvo ostalo je bitna sastavnica europske vanjske politike.

U kontekstu tog partnerstva Ukrajina je naš važan gospodarski, sigurnosni i energetski partner. Sigurnost istočnog dijela Europske unije izravno ovisi o sigurnosti i stabilnosti Ukrajine i zato moramo aktivno raditi na njenom jačanju. Kulturološki Ukrajina je oduvijek bila dio Europe, stoga je važno da Europska unija uz podupiranje njezine teritorijalne cjelovitosti i suvereniteta, nastavi i gospodarski pomagati Ukrajini, pogotovo u vidu investicija koje će omogućiti građanima Ukrajine da žive kvalitetnijim životom. Ta pomoć je danas, ako uzmemo u obzir veličinu ove zemlje i njene potrebe, apsolutno premala.

Europska unija mora aktivnije početi pomagati Ukrajini u gospodarskom, socijalnom, vojnom i kulturnom smislu ukoliko je želi očuvati dijelom zapadnog kulturnog kruga. Vi ste povjereniče najavili određene mjere koje pozdravljam ali potrebno je poduzeti puno, puno više od toga. Hrvatska možda najbolje od svih država članica može razumijeti zbivanja u Ukrajini jer smo sami, ne tako davno, bili žrtvama agresije te smo morali reintegrirati dio svojeg teritorija. Tada smo se osjećali ostavljenima od svih a tako nešto ne smije se ponoviti u Ukrajini. Ne možemo očekivati od Ukrajine da bude nekakav europski graničar a pogotovo ne bez da joj damo nešto zauzvrat.

Ukrajini ne trebaju riječi, rezolucije već konkretna djela a tu je Europska unija nažalost previše puta podbacila u prošlosti. Zato ne smije podbaciti i sada.

  Josep Borrell Fontelles, Vice-President of the Commission / High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy. – Madam President, I’m sorry for having been unable to follow the whole debate, as I had to attend to Ghana’s President. But my friend and colleague Janez Lenarčič has been representing the Commission and attending as you participate in this debate.

From what I heard, it’s enough for me to take stock of this discussion, and I can tell you that, based on this discussion, we will continue taking steps to increase our deterrence, as I said at the beginning of my intervention, and avoid any kind of military action starting to happen: to be prepared for the worst and to expect the best, as I said in my previous intervention.

Well, what does it mean, after listening to all of you? It means first that we – Parliament, the Commission, the High Representative, the European Union Council, the European Council and the governments of all the Member States – will send a united and strong message to the Russian leadership, indicating that we are ready to respond decidedly to any kind of military action against Ukraine, should it happen. And we will send an equally clear message of commitment to Ukraine’s sovereignty and territorial integrity. We should also reconfirm our support to achieve full implementation of the Minsk agreements in order to resolve the conflict in Eastern Ukraine. Third, we will continue working in close coordination and cooperation with our transatlantic and like—minded partners, as we did in Liverpool at the G7 meeting.

Allow me to stress the fact that the challenges that Ukraine is facing go well beyond the military dimension, not least the classical military dimension. They are part of a wider hybrid concerted aggression, which involves also energy, disinformation and cyberattacks – to mention just some of the new characteristics of these new challenges. Therefore, we will not spare efforts to help to further strengthen the resilience of Ukrainians, of Ukraine, its people and government, across all sectors such as democracy, human rights, rule of law, people to people contact, trade, energy, cybersecurity, environment, public health and countering disinformation.

This is our commitment, and I am very happy to see that, in this Parliament, everybody – or almost everybody, with very few exceptions – is closely supporting this approach.

  Die Präsidentin. – Gemäß Artikel 132 Absatz 2 der Geschäftsordnung wurden sechs Entschließungsanträge eingereicht.

Die Aussprache ist geschlossen.

Die Abstimmung findet am Donnerstag, 16. Dezember 2021, statt.

Schriftliche Erklärungen (Artikel 171)

  Robert Hajšel (S&D), písomne. – Pravdepodobne čelíme najväčšej hrozbe rozpútania ničivej vojny len pár stoviek kilometrov od východnej hranice Slovenska a celej Európskej únie a musíme urobiť všetko pre to, aby sme jej zabránili. Absolútnou prioritou musí byť deeskalácia napätia nielen na ukrajinsko-ruských hraniciach, ale aj v oblasti medzinárodnej diplomacie. Stále je čas na to, aby sme predišli eventuálnemu ničivému ozbrojenému konfliktu na východných hraniciach susedného štátu, a máme na to všetky politické a diplomatické prostriedky, len ich treba využiť. Európska únia plne podporuje územnú integritu Ukrajiny, ale na druhej strane musí pri riešení tohto problému považovať aj Moskvu za partnera, a nie za nepriateľa, ak chceme naozaj nájsť úspešné politické riešenie. Je poľutovaniahodné, že už sa vôbec nehovorí o potrebe plniť Minské dohody, ktoré boli základom férovejšieho riešenia situácie v odštiepených separatistických republikách na východe Ukrajiny. Znepokojivým je aj fakt, že už sa prestalo rokovať aj v rámci tzv. normandského formátu, čím aj EÚ stráca schopnosť ovplyvňovať pozitívne vývoj napätej situácie vo svojom východnom susedstve. Akokoľvek sa nám nepáčia ultimáta, ktoré najnovšie predložila Moskva, musíme rokovať a musíme sa snažiť chápať aj bezpečnostné obavy druhej strany, a to bez toho, aby sme nejakým spôsobom zradili naše demokratické princípy.

  Sandra Pereira (The Left), por escrito. – Não podemos, nem devemos, acompanhar uma resolução que escamoteia: a existência do golpe de Estado na Ucrânia (2014), apoiado pelos EUA,NATO e UE, que instaurou um poder xenófobo, fascizante e impôs profundas fraturas no país; uma brutal guerra contra o povo ucraniano, que perdura há 7anos; os pontos do acordo de Minsk que o regime ucraniano deliberadamente não cumpre, como a aprovação de: uma lei de descentralização do poder; uma lei de amnistia que proíba perseguições em Donetsk/Luhansk; uma nova constituição, a entrar em vigor final 2015, focada na descentralização, atendendo às particularidades dos distritos de Donetsk/Luhansk e acordada com os seus representantes; ou uma lei permanente sobre o estatuto especial desses distritos, até final 2015; outras medidas, incluindo o cessar-fogo, nunca respeitado pelo regime ucraniano, responsável pela morte de inúmeros civis.

A escalada de confrontação da NATO contra a Rússia e a instrumentalização da Ucrânia nessa estratégia agressiva atentam contra a paz. Apelamos ao fim: da escalada de agressão do regime ucraniano no Donbass, encetando-se o diálogo para a resolução pacífica do conflito, respeitando os acordos e compromissos assumidos; da escalada de confrontação da NATO contra a Rússia; dos planos de instalação na Europa de sistemas de mísseis e de outros armamentos dos EUA; do alargamento da NATO.