Doslovný zápis z rozpráv

Utorok, 7. júna 2022 - Štrasburg

10. Zahraničná, bezpečnostná a obranná politika EÚ po ruskej invázii na Ukrajinu (rozprava)

  Der Präsident. – Als nächster Punkt der Tagesordnung folgt die Aussprache über den Bericht von David McAllister und Nathalie Loiseau im Namen des Ausschusses für auswärtige Angelegenheiten über eine Empfehlung des Europäischen Parlaments an den Rat und den Vizepräsidenten der Kommission und Hohen Vertreter der Union für Außen- und Sicherheitspolitik zu der Außen-, Sicherheits- und Verteidigungspolitik der EU nach der Invasion der Ukraine durch Russland (2022/2039(INI)) (A9 0164/2022).

Ich sollte Ihnen jetzt die gleichen Ankündigungen, was die Sitzordnung betrifft, was die Abstimmungskarte betrifft, was die Wortmeldungen betrifft, und was das Sprechen vom Rednerpult aus betrifft, kundtun; ich erspare Ihnen das, weil ich annehme, dass Sie das alles wissen.

  David McAllister, rapporteur. – Mr President, ladies and gentlemen, the world is going through a period of geopolitical redefinition. The issues raised by Russia’s war of aggression against Ukraine go far beyond the tragic situation we are currently witnessing: Europe as a whole is challenged.

For a very long time, our Parliament has been advocating for a stronger, more effective and more coherent common foreign security and defence policy. Now, Russia’s war against Ukraine shows us that the European Union has to equip itself urgently with the means and tools to respond to global strategic competition and also complex security threats. With our recommendation to the Council and the High Representative of the EU’s Foreign Security and Defence Policy, after the Russian invasion of Ukraine, we as Parliament assessed the recent EU initiatives in this field, and made concrete proposals for the way forward.

For us, eight key points should be taken into account at the meeting of the European Council on 23 and 24 June and at the following NATO summit in Madrid on 29 and 30 June. Namely, first, we recommend to work swiftly on the implementation of a strategic compass, in particular regarding the operational capability of the rapid deployment capacity.

Second, we recommend to review and strengthen CSDP missions and operations in order to adapt to the new geopolitical reality, and promptly as well as efficiently support the Ukrainian and Moldovan authorities.

Third, we recommend to swiftly finalise the work on a substantial third EU-NATO joint declaration and to ensure that the work on the strategic compass and the NATO strategic concept are aligned and lead to increased strategic complementarity.

Fourth, we recommend to review the European neighbourhood policy with the aim of thoroughly assessing the impact of Russia’s war against Ukraine on cooperation with the Eastern Partnership, and to strengthen the EU’s enlargement strategy.

Fifth, we recommend to involve the European Parliament appropriately in the further implementation of the CFSP and CSDP, including the strategic compass and the European Peace Facility.

Number six, we recommend to ensure that the EU security and defence policy is equipped with the necessary financial means in order to be more effective and credible.

Seventh, we recommend to provide Ukraine weapons and materiel in line with the needs expressed by the Ukrainian authorities and to grant the country EU candidate status as a clear political sign of solidarity with the courageous people of Ukraine.

And eighth, we recommend to ensure a comprehensive monitoring of all EU sanctions and to strengthen the Commission’s capacity to implement restrictive measures.

Dear colleagues, let me add a final extra point. The European Council has requested the presentation of a possible European joint defence investment programme at its meeting in two weeks. Clearly the European Parliament should welcome such a programme, and we should be closely involved in the preparations. Finally, allow me to propose a change to the title of this recommendation. Instead of ‘Russian invasion’, I suggest to change the wording to ‘Russia’s war of aggression’ in order to adapt the language of the report to all our recently adopted texts.

To conclude, let me thank the co-rapporteur, Nathalie Loiseau, as well as the shadow rapporteurs from all the groups for a really good, constructive and fruitful cooperation.

  Nathalie Loiseau, rapporteure. – Monsieur le Président, la guerre est de retour en Europe. Cette phrase terrible, nous ne savions pas, il y a encore quelques mois, que nous aurions à la prononcer. Nous ne sommes pas en guerre avec la Russie, mais nous sommes face à la guerre à cause de la Russie.

Qu’est-ce que cela signifie? Que nous aidons l’Ukraine. Qu’il nous faut l’aider davantage. Lui fournir encore plus de soutien militaire, financier, humanitaire, politique, moral. Oui, moral. Mesurons chacune de nos paroles, chacun de nos actes en nous demandant ce qui est moralement acceptable. Moral car, lorsque l’Ukraine demande à rejoindre l’Union européenne, nous devons lui dire fortement et solennellement merci.

L’Ukraine est déjà membre d’honneur de notre Union par le sang versé pour défendre son territoire et pour défendre nos libertés. Qu’elle soit candidate est un honneur qu’elle nous fait. Sa place est parmi nous. Mais il y a une chose que nous ne pouvons pas faire, c’est dire à l’Ukraine ce qu’elle doit ou ce qu’elle ne doit pas accepter. Parce que nous n’avons pas envoyé de troupes aux côtés de l’armée ukrainienne, nous n’avons tout simplement pas le droit de dicter à l’Ukraine sa conduite; ne l’oublions pas.

Nous avons en revanche un devoir: celui de tirer les conséquences du retour de la guerre sur notre continent pour savoir comment mieux protéger nos concitoyens. Et d’abord il nous faut tirer les leçons de nos échecs. Car oui, l’invasion de l’Ukraine est le signe que nous avons échoué. Si nous avions admis l’Ukraine dans l’OTAN, elle n’aurait pas été attaquée. Ceux qui s’y sont opposés ont eu tort. Si nous avions réagi plus fortement à l’agression russe contre la Géorgie, à l’annexion de la Crimée et à la guerre du Donbass, si nous n’avions pas détourné le regard quand 21 000 civils sont morts à Alep sous les bombes russes, la Russie n’aurait pas cru que nous la laisserions attaquer l’Ukraine.

Nous avons réagi: tant mieux. Nous livrons des armes à l’Ukraine: c’est notre devoir. Que ne l’avons nous fait plus tôt! La facilité européenne de paix prouve chaque jour son utilité: que ne l’avons-nous déclenchée avant le début des hostilités, lorsque Kiev était déjà menacé, mais que nous en étions encore à pinailler pour quelques millions d’euros d’équipements non létaux! Aujourd’hui même, les États membres font-ils tout ce qu’il faut? Le font-ils assez vite? J’ai peur que la réponse soit variable, pour le dire poliment.

Pour certains, la question est celle de la reconstitution de leurs stocks: traitons-la. Appliquons-nous à acheter en commun les armements dont nous ou nos partenaires avons besoin. Ce que nous avons fait pour les vaccins – acheter ensemble et produire en Europe –, faisons-le pour les équipements qui vont protéger les Européens. La Commission a fait de premières propositions, elles vont dans le bon sens – même si ce n’est qu’un début.

Personnellement, je propose d’aller plus loin et de nous diriger vers un «Buy European Act» en matière d’équipement militaire. Notre souveraineté passe aussi par-là, notre souveraineté et notre crédibilité.

À propos de crédibilité, quel constat dresser, trois mois après le début de la guerre d’Ukraine? L’Union européenne a adopté six paquets de sanctions vis-à-vis de la Russie: une fermeté sans précédent face à une agression sans antécédent. Il faudra continuer sur la durée et rester unis. Oui, mais précisément? Confondre unité et unanimité nous coûte. Nous avançons au rythme du plus réticent des 27 États membres. L’embargo pétrolier, depuis combien de temps une écrasante majorité d’entre nous le réclamait-elle? Combien de temps a-t-il fallu pour que le Conseil l’adopte à l’unanimité?

Cette règle de l’unanimité doit être abandonnée. C’est ce que pense ce Parlement. C’est ce qu’attendent les citoyens qui se sont exprimés pendant la conférence sur l’avenir de l’Europe. C’est logiquement ce que demande la recommandation que David McAllister et moi-même avons rédigée ensemble.

Un mot, encore, le dernier. Le Danemark vient de rejoindre l’Europe de la défense, et je veux adresser au peuple danois mes remerciements chaleureux pour ce choix. De leur côté, la Finlande et la Suède veulent rejoindre l’OTAN. Je soutiens pleinement cette démarche et j’appelle solennellement le président turc à cesser d’y faire obstacle. D’ici là, Stockholm et Helsinki pourront compter sur la pleine solidarité des autres membres de l’Union européenne au titre de l’article 42, paragraphe 7, de notre traité. S’il fallait une preuve que la défense européenne et l’OTAN ne sont pas contradictoires mais bien complémentaires, la voilà.

  Valdis Dombrovskis, Executive Vice-President of the Commission. – Mr President, first of all, I would like to thank the rapporteurs, Mr McAllister and Ms Loiseau, for their work. We very much share the spirit of this document, the call to continue support Ukraine and to enhance the EU’s security and defence. Indeed, the Russian war of aggression against Ukraine has shown the need for a stronger and more capable European Union in the field of security and defence. Thus, your report is extremely timely.

Honourable Members, the EU strongly stands with Ukraine and supports it politically, militarily, humanitarianly and economically. Our political and military commitment is absolutely clear and reiterated last week by the European Council. Our words are matched by deeds. We adopted the largest set of sanctions in EU history. Only last week, leaders welcomed the sixth package of sanctions against Russia to cover crude oil as well as petroleum products.

The leaders also welcomed the new increase in military assistance to Ukraine. The Europe of tomorrow will emerge from the battlefields of Ukraine. This is why, since the beginning of the war, we have supplied EUR 2 billion in assistance to the Ukrainian armed forces through the European Peace Facility. This is unprecedented.

Second, on EU security and defence, I fully subscribe to the report’s call for making genuine progress in foreign policy and defence cooperation at Union level. Russia’s unprovoked military aggression against Ukraine and wider threats to European and global security made it even more evident. This is an attack also on Europe and the whole democratic world. We need to be more united and more capable to act.

For this, we need first and foremost to strengthen our defence capabilities. This is what EU leaders discussed last week, building on the defence investments gap analysis that the High Representative has presented jointly with the Commission. The message is clear: we need not only to invest more in defence but also invest better, which means together in a coordinated way.

Between 2009 and 2018, the EU has accumulated an under expenditure of around EUR 160 billion, an underinvestment of around EUR 44 billion. Since 2018, figures have gone up and are expected to grow further following recent announcements. Yet, collaborative defence investments are still too low. Only 11% in 2020 and down to 8% in 2021. So, far below the agreed benchmark of 35%. This means fragmentation and waste of resources. We need to reverse this trend and to do more together.

The communication puts forward a number of proposals to do so, starting with joint procurement. The European Council has tasked the Council to take the work forward and, as a chair of the FAC Defence, the High Representative intends to do so without delay. The European Defence Agency will continue to play a central role in supporting Member States in their efforts to strengthen their military capabilities, working closely with the Commission.

This is also part of the broader work in the framework of the Strategic Compass adopted in March, which provides the backbone to our security and defence efforts. As you know, the Compass contains over 80 concrete actions that will allow us to make a quantum leap forward in security and defence. Work is well underway, including on many of the topics mentioned in your report, such as making operational the rapid deployment capacity, the use of Article 44 to increase our flexibility and swiftness of action or to increase the resilience of the EU and our partners. These are just a few examples of areas where much progress is taking place as we speak.

Honourable Members, the war is not over yet, but we can clearly say that Putin’s and the Russian regime’s strategy has failed. Instead of toppling the Ukrainian Government, it strengthened it. Instead of dividing the EU and NATO, it has united them. As rightly pointed out in your report, NATO and the EU have never been so firmly united.

Last week, Danish citizens decided in a referendum to abolish the defence opt-out. Finland and Sweden have applied to join NATO. These are just recent examples of interest in the further progress of EU security and defence and in strengthening NATO as a defence alliance. These decisions will bring additional strength and unity to NATO and our common security defence policy and defence initiatives.

We are doing precisely what the report calls for: enhancing cooperation with partners, in particular with NATO. Since the first day of Russia’s invasion on 24 February, the EU and NATO have demonstrated political unity and complementarity of efforts. We are in very close cooperation with our international partners to respond to Russia’s military aggression against Ukraine and its civilians. It could not be another way because the stakes are too high.

  Rasa Juknevičienė, on behalf of the PPE Group. – Mr President, I would like to thank my colleagues for this report and their efforts.

The future of Europe’s security will depend on the democratic world overcoming the brutal Kremlin regime and Russia becoming a normal, non-aggressive state. This requires, first of all, acknowledging the fundamental mistakes that have been made so that we do not repeat them again. The Western world has not taken seriously Putin’s plan to destroy democracies. The biggest mistake was engagement with Putin’s regime. Lessons must be learnt.

Secondly, those who say that Russia under Putin must not be humiliated as Germany was humiliated after Versailles are misleading. Today we face Hitler’s analogy, who grew out of Stalin’s unacknowledged crimes and evaluated crimes. The situation now is similar to that of Hitler’s and Stalin’s war in Europe. So we must now defeat Putin as Hitler was defeated.

Eliminating the main threat to the security of the entire European continent is our most important task. This requires helping Ukraine to defend its territory and not being afraid to believe that Russia can be different. The war criminal Putin must be isolated. To have a different Russia, the current regime must be defeated. I have a feeling that some countries of Europe are frightened of Ukraine’s victory and intend to repeat the same mistakes. If they continue to save the face of the brutal Kremlin regime our efforts to build up our own security capabilities will never be enough.

  Pedro Marques, on behalf of the S&D Group. – Mr President, Mr Vice—President, dear David, Nathalie, other rapporteurs and colleagues, following the Russian war of aggression, the EU has rapidly adapted its foreign, security and defence policy to support Ukraine and press Russia to end its invasion. But EU policy needs to reflect a new reality for the future, for its strategic and long—term policies. With the adoption of this report, the Parliament makes important recommendations to the HR/VP, to the Council, on the future of the foreign, security and defence policy after the war.

Our Group was able to influence the report, we think, in a holistic approach. Our vision for the foreign, security and defence policy is multi-dimensional, with human rights, human security and respect for international law at its heart. But we did not shy away from the defence dimension. As the Russian invasion of Ukraine shows, we need to be prepared for what we do not desire or deserve.

The recommendations built on the recent developments, including the adoption of the strategic compass, calling for its swift implementation as a starting point for implementing a common EU defence. We call for the introduction of qualified majority, as Nathalie mentioned, for certain foreign policy areas to increase the effectiveness of our EU foreign policy. And we value the cooperation with like—minded partners around the globe, especially NATO allies, to maintain the strongest possible unity in defence of the rules—based international order to promote and to defend peace, democratic principles and the respect for human rights.

We do not forget the importance of the neighbouring policy in the promotion of democracy, stability, peace, economic development and the respect for human rights. We hope this recommendation to be heard by the European Council, even if the Council is no longer represented in this debate. And we certainly hope this recommendation to also reach the NATO summit soon to be held.

  Katalin Cseh, on behalf of the Renew Group. – Mr President, this House has been discussing the need to strengthen our foreign policy for decades. And now here we are in the middle of a war next door, and Europe still struggles to have a credible foreign policy stance. We are still very far away from our desire for strategic autonomy, and we still rely on third parties to provide for our own security. And we are still being held hostage by the ability of a single Member State to veto. Colleagues, Europe is home to some of the most developed democracies in the world where human rights and rule of law reign supreme. So tell me, colleagues, why don’t we have the right tools to defend these values if they are threatened by malicious actors? Of course, this is not to say that there have not been improvements. The EU’s immediate reaction after the Russian invasion of Ukraine was impressively quick. The CSDP, PESCO and the debate around the EU army are very much welcome developments. But honestly, tell me colleagues, are they enough ? When Russia is knocking on our door, openly targeting our Member States, the quickest solution is to scrap the unanimity rule in Council. It really is that simple. We wasted an entire month with sanctions. For one month we put our indecisiveness out on full display. And what was the outcome? The perception that one Member State won and the EU as a collective lost. It’s time to get serious about ending unanimity.

Furthermore, we as the EU, we also must increase our presence in both the Eastern Neighbourhood and in the Western Balkans. The EU must position itself as the only viable alternative for accession or candidate country’s future, and I refuse to believe that these are impossible goals. We have a window of opportunity now. I hope both the Council and Commission recognise this. And, as always, the Parliament is ready to do what it takes to put the EU at the forefront of global foreign policy.

  Viola von Cramon-Taubadel, on behalf of the Verts/ALE Group. – Mr President, dear colleagues, dear rapporteurs, on 24 February, when Putin launched the war of aggression against Ukraine, the world changed, and Europe changed with it.

This brutal invasion reminds us of some obvious facts. The peace we have enjoyed in the EU for almost 80 years should not be taken for granted. This, for European history, unprecedented peace was fought hard. It was earned by brave soldiers fighting the German Nazis. Now the Ukrainians are fighting another fascist regime to make sure that people in Europe live in peace. To succeed, they need a strong, reliable and resilient Europe.

The EU is more than just an economic giant. We need to learn to stand up for ourselves instead of depending mainly on our trans—Atlantic partners. We should unite the efforts of every Member State to guarantee our common security, the security of our closest partners and uphold the international rules—based order.

  Thierry Mariani, au nom du groupe ID. – Monsieur le Président, comme ce fut le cas avec la crise de la COVID, l'Union européenne et madame Loiseau, porte-parole d'Emmanuel Macron dans ce Parlement, sont en train d'utiliser la guerre en Ukraine pour créer un super-État européen.

La solidarité avec le peuple ukrainien ne doit pas faire oublier une autre réalité. Vous êtes en train de sacrifier les nations pour accomplir un projet fédéraliste. Vous le faites sans consulter les peuples, en décidant de sanctions qui ravageront notre économie. Vous le faites en oubliant les autres nations qui, de la Chine à l'Inde, du Sénégal au Mexique, refusent de s'aligner sur notre politique. Vous le faites en cachant vos propositions aux Français.

Après la destruction du corps diplomatique français, vous voulez installer un ministère des affaires étrangères de l'Union européenne. Vous voulez désormais imposer un diktat de Bruxelles à notre industrie de défense. Après la disparition de notre indépendance stratégique aux mains de l'Union européenne, vous voulez que Bruxelles puisse nous embarquer dans des conflits et des politiques de sanctions sans la règle de l'unanimité obligatoire.

Vous pratiquez une véritable stratégie du choc en exploitant l'émotion légitime de la guerre en Ukraine. Vous nous faites courir des risques extrêmes en cédant à toutes les injonctions du président ukrainien, qui vient désormais faire la leçon à Paris ou faire la leçon à Berlin.

Je pense que vous êtes en train de nous entraîner dans une catastrophe économique et géopolitique à travers une politique de sanctions que personne ne veut suivre en dehors de l'Occident. Alors que vous réclamez sans cesse l'application du multilatéralisme, vous construisez un système qui nous isole dans une relation quasi exclusive avec les États-Unis.

  Anna Fotyga, w imieniu grupy ECR. – Panie Przewodniczący! W sierpniu 2008 roku Rosja dokonała nieusprawiedliwionej, niczym nieuzasadnionej agresji na Gruzję. Działo się to za poprzedniej prezydencji, za przewodnictwa francuskiego. Kraje takie jak Stany Zjednoczone i państwa mojego regionu, należące do Unii Europejskiej, pod przewodnictwem polskiego prezydenta Lecha Kaczyńskiego były tymi, które wsparły Gruzję w obronie niepodległości. Przypomnę, że na forum Unii Europejskiej raczej popieraliśmy sprawozdanie Heidi Tagliavini, który tak naprawdę rysował winę po obydwu stronach. To wtedy w Tbilisi padły słowa ostrzegające przed Rosją prezydenta Kaczyńskiego.

Historia się powtarza. Rosja za przewodnictwa francuskiego dokonała inwazji Ukrainy. I znowuż tymi, którzy najbardziej pomagają, są Stany Zjednoczone, jest Wielka Brytania również i są państwa mojego regionu. Z wielką rolą Polski, nie tylko w przyjmowaniu uchodźców, bo jesteśmy też hubem w pomocy we wszystkich sprawach, humanitarnej, ale również militarnej.

Pani Przewodnicząca mówiła o tym, że poruszamy się, Unia się porusza w tempie najsłabszych, tych, którzy są najwolniejsi. Problem polega na tym, że ci najwolniejsi to są też najsilniejsi. I dlatego nie popieram większości kwalifikowanej w podejmowaniu decyzji.

  Manu Pineda, en nombre del Grupo The Left. – Señor presidente, tras más de 100 días de invasión rusa de Ucrania, una agresión que condenamos desde el primer momento, la Unión Europea se encuentra ante una importante decisión. Puede optar por el camino que propone el informe, un camino de confrontación y escalada militar, o por la posición alternativa que nosotros presentamos y que plantea una salida distinta.

Tras décadas de políticas de presión y hostigamiento contra Rusia por parte de los Estados Unidos y la OTAN, usando a la Unión Europea como herramienta al servicio de estos objetivos, hemos llegado a un escenario que todo el mundo dice no querer, pero con el que algunos soñaban.

La política de sanciones de la Unión Europea es hipócrita. Como ejemplo: compramos el mismo petróleo ruso, pero ahora pagamos un sobrecoste porque se lo compramos a la India en vez de a Rusia.

Las sanciones no las está pagando Putin, las están pagando nuestros pueblos, con una inflación sin precedentes en los últimos cuarenta años, mientras que el rublo se revaloriza un 35 % respecto al euro. Los sectores industriales y agrícolas ya están sufriendo los efectos de estas sanciones a través del desabastecimiento de, por ejemplo, acero, cereales y fertilizantes.

Proponemos que, ante los conflictos, en vez de alimentar la escalada, la Unión Europea trabaje por resolverlos. Debe colaborar con las Naciones Unidas en la búsqueda de salidas diplomáticas y políticas.

Proponemos que la Unión Europea proteja a los refugiados, independientemente de su pasaporte, y que defienda la libertad de opinión e información.

Proponemos, en definitiva, que la Unión Europea construya paz en vez de alentar guerras.

  Mislav Kolakušić (NI). – Poštovani predsjedavajući, poštovane kolege, poštovani građani, vanjska politika, sigurnosna i obrambena politika Europske unije danas se može opisati svega jednom rečenicom: Europska unija je postala 51. država Sjedinjenih Američkih Država, ali bez ikakvog prava glasa.

  Michael Gahler (PPE). – Herr Präsident, liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Wir haben in der Tat allen Anlass, unsere Außen-, Sicherheits- und Verteidigungspolitik angesichts des völkerrechtswidrigen russischen Angriffskrieges gegen die Ukraine den Notwendigkeiten anzupassen.

Bei genauem Hinsehen entdecke ich mit Horror viele Elemente eines regelrechten faschistischen Vernichtungskrieges. Die USA sind derzeit dankenswerterweise bereit, sich umfänglich zu engagieren, aber wir müssen als Europäer Vorsorge treffen für die Zeit danach, wenn sie nicht mehr dazu bereit sind, so viel für unsere Sicherheit zu tun.

Wenn wir jetzt sehr viel mehr gemeinsam für Verteidigung in den nationalen Haushalten ausgeben, müssen wir die Chancen europäischer Skaleneffekte nutzen, bei der Planung, bei der Beschaffung der Waffen, die wir brauchen. Denn wir werden ja auch immer gemeinsam unterwegs sein. Interoperabilität ist deswegen wichtig.

Aber es geht akut vor allen Dingen darum, alles das, was vertretbar ist, an die Ukraine auch zu liefern. Und deswegen kritisiere ich ausdrücklich die Haltung des deutschen Bundeskanzlers, der alles tut, um zu verzögern und dafür zu sorgen, dass die Ukraine nicht rechtzeitig das bekommt, was sie zu ihrer Verteidigung braucht. Heute in Vilnius haben wir dazu sehr ausweichende Antworten gehört, zum Beispiel auf den spanischen Wunsch, Leopard 2 zu liefern. Das wissen wir alle; Deutschland muss zustimmen. Aber er behauptet, er hätte noch keinen Antrag dazu gesehen. Das ist ein bürokratischer Ansatz. Jeder Tag der Verzögerung in diesem Bereich nutzt Herrn Putin, und das dürfen wir nicht zulassen.

  Sven Mikser (S&D). – Mr President, the implications of the Russian aggression against Ukraine for European security are really profound, and that is very well understood by our people, as best reflected by the Finnish and Swedish Governments’ decision to apply for NATO membership now, but also by the Danish people’s decision at the referendum to lift their opt-out on EU defence. So our people really believe that we need more collective security.

The second implication is that the large-scale conventional war has made a very forceful return to the European continent and we need to prepare for that, because clearly we weren’t sufficiently prepared when this aggression was launched.

Neither when it comes to defending our own countries against such a threat and nor when it comes to delivering assistance to our partners. Even, let’s be honest, our very good strategic compass deals more with the evacuation from Afghanistan than it deals with scenarios such as the conflict we are seeing right now.

And finally, we must be honest. Putin’s Russia is ready to take much more pain as a price for its adventurous effort of restoring an empire than we previously thought. So we need a much more concerted and sustained effort to make sure that we are able to weaken Russia’s economy and military machine.

  Mounir Satouri (Verts/ALE). – Monsieur le Président, chers collègues, la guerre d’agression que Vladimir Poutine mène contre l’Ukraine vient renforcer la nécessité d’une Europe de la sécurité, capable d’assurer la paix.

Pour que les investissements en défense permettent réellement de construire cette défense européenne, nous devons absolument faire en sorte qu’ils soient coordonnés, afin de combler le déficit capacitaire européen. Plus que jamais, les États membres doivent cesser les initiatives dispersées qui aggravent la fragmentation de nos ressources budgétaires au seul bénéfice de l’industrie de l’armement.

Enfin, notre Europe de la paix doit s’investir politiquement et financièrement dans la maîtrise des armements, pour le désarmement et la non-prolifération, aux niveaux régional et mondial. La guerre qui frappe le peuple ukrainien doit mener les États membres à agir de manière plus responsable et à avancer vers une architecture de sécurité commune cohérente et stabilisatrice.

  Bernhard Zimniok (ID). – Herr Präsident! Die EU will im Ukrainekonflikt eine gemeinsame Linie erzwingen, die aber den nationalen Interessen zahlreicher Mitgliedstaaten komplett zuwiderläuft.

Die Sanktionen sind völlig sinnbefreit und schaden eigentlich nur uns selbst. Gerade die massiv gestiegenen Energiepreise sorgen in Deutschland dafür, dass die sowieso schon enorm hohen Kosten der völlig fehlgeleiteten Energiewende noch deutlich höher ausfallen. Gleichzeitig sorgen die Sanktionen nicht nur dafür, dass die Zustimmung für Putin sowohl unter der Bevölkerung als auch unter den Oligarchen so stark wie nie zuvor ist. Und laut CNN und Bloomberg verdient Russland mittlerweile sogar mehr Geld durch Rohstoffe als vor dem Krieg.

Wer diese absurden Sanktionen unterstützt, schadet unseren Bürgern und stärkt Putin. Wir Kritiker der Maßnahmen werden dadurch genauso bestätigt wie durch den Verlauf des Krieges. Was haben die Waffenlieferungen bisher gebracht? Mehr Tod und Zerstörung und sonst nichts. Die ukrainischen Bürger sind die Opfer eines russischen Angriffskrieges, der durch die Maßnahmen des Westens unnötig in die Länge gezogen wurde und eskaliert ist.

Alle diese Fakten auszusprechen, macht einen noch lange nicht zum Putin-Versteher. Ganz sicher nicht.

Die Waffenlieferungen drohen laut Interpol auch für uns zur Gefahr zu werden. Im Darknet werden zwischenzeitlich schon US-Waffen aus der Ukraine verkauft. Die EU täte also gut daran, ihre katastrophale Außen- und Sicherheitspolitik komplett zu überdenken und sie in Zukunft generell wieder den Nationalstaaten zu überlassen.

(Der Redner ist damit einverstanden, eine Frage nach dem Verfahren der „blauen Karte“ zu beantworten.)

  Lukas Mandl (PPE), Wortmeldung nach dem Verfahren der „blauen Karte“. – Herr Kollege, ich habe Sie soeben sagen gehört, dass die Unterstützung der freien Welt für den Staat, der sich selbst verteidigt – die Ukraine –, den Krieg unnötig in die Länge ziehen würde. Die Frage, die sich da anschließt an Sie, Herr Kollege: Welches Ergebnis des Krieges und welches Szenario nach dem Krieg wünschen Sie sich denn? Was ist da Ihre Vorstellung?

  Bernhard Zimniok (ID), Antwort auf eine Wortmeldung nach dem Verfahren der „blauen Karte“. – Also ich stütze mich jetzt auch auf viele Experten, und viele sind der Meinung, dass dieser Krieg nicht so enden wird, wie Selenskyj es möchte. Das heißt, die Ukraine wird nicht mehr so sein wie vor dem 24. Februar.

Wir müssen den Tatsachen ins Auge sehen: Wir können Russland schlicht und ergreifend als Atommacht nicht besiegen. Wir können es auch nicht so weit in die Enge drängen, dass dadurch unkalkulierbare Maßnahmen passieren und die Situation noch weiter verschärft wird.

Für mich sind Russland und Ukraine zwei Seiten einer Medaille. Da nehme ich die rechte und die linke Hand nicht weg. Das sind beides korrupte Staaten. Schauen Sie den Korruptionsindex an! Und letztes Jahr war die Ukraine, war Selenskyj noch im Stern drin, in der deutschen Zeitung, dass er hier mit Sicherheit nicht in der vordersten Front der Friedensfreunde steht; aber heute ist er der große Friedensheld.

  Witold Jan Waszczykowski (ECR). – Mr President, although we are protected by NATO and US nuclear umbrella, security is not granted forever. There is always a need to discuss, enhance and strengthen security.

Time is good for the report on security. And conclusion of this report is in the time of war inappropriate and somewhat wrong. In time of war it’s a time for unity, a united response to aggression. But what we have instead, we have hesitation in some capitals, like Berlin and Paris, ideas like Strategic Compass, European autonomy, or QMV.

In time of war, there is no time for experiment, no time for emancipation from transatlantic cooperation, and no time for federal experiments with QMV. Just without the QMV, we adopted already six packages of sanctions, but we cannot accept the delivery of weapon to Ukraine.

  Marc Botenga (The Left). – Monsieur le Président, chers collègues, selon vous, les Africains n’ont rien compris, les Indiens sont à la ramasse et les Chinois n’en parlons pas! Ce que vous voulez voter, c'est un texte qui, en fait, infantilise la moitié du monde. Vous constatez qu’une bonne partie du monde n’est pas d’accord avec la politique européenne en matière d’Ukraine et de Russie, et du coup vous dites que vous allez leur expliquer que la guerre russe en Ukraine, c’est vraiment grave. Non, mais… expliquer… comme si c’étaient des enfants.

Non, ils ont bien compris. C’est juste que, sur certains points, ils ne sont pas d’accord. Ils vous reprochent notamment votre manque d’efforts diplomatiques pour arrêter la guerre, ils vous reprochent l’impact négatif des sanctions sur les travailleurs partout dans le monde, et, finalement, ils reprochent à l’Europe le «deux poids, deux mesures».

Quand la Russie attaque l’Ukraine, l’Europe sanctionne, évidemment. Mais quand les États-Unis bombardent l’Irak, pas de sanctions, quand l’Arabie saoudite bombarde le Yémen, pas de sanctions, quand nous-mêmes, l’Union européenne, bombardons et détruisons la Libye, pas de sanctions, et quand Israël colonise la Palestine, pas de sanctions. C’est deux poids, deux mesures.

Cette hypocrisie-là, c’est ce que les peuples du monde vous reprochent. Si, justement, vous voulez leur soutien, écoutez-les, tout simplement. Ça, ce serait une alternative.

  Radosław Sikorski (PPE). – Panie Przewodniczący! Wysoka Izbo! W zeszłym roku z tego miejsca pytałem, jakie nieszczęście musi się zdarzyć, żebyśmy potraktowali sprawy obronności europejskiej poważnie. Putin swoją niesprowokowaną agresją wobec Ukrainy przekroczył nawet moje oczekiwania. Sojusz Północnoatlantycki, Stany Zjednoczone stanęły na wysokości zadania. Unia Europejska zrobiła więcej niż ja osobiście się spodziewałem i chciałbym za to serdecznie podziękować Komisji na ręce Pana Komisarza. Ale potrzebujemy więcej. Potrzebujemy unii obronnej, potrzebujemy sił szybkiego reagowania, wzmocnienia sił obrony konwencjonalnej, cybernetycznej, częściowo wspólnych zakupów, więcej broni dla Ukrainy. Ukraina wywalczyła sobie już status kandydata. Potrzebujemy ukarania zbrodni wojennych w Ukrainie.

Osobiście rozważyłbym większościowe głosowanie w niektórych sprawach, na przykład jeśli chodzi o sankcje osobowe, czy w ogóle sankcje, bo nie sądzę, aby jeden kraj powinien móc blokować na przykład takie sankcje, jakie są, były proponowane na podżegacza wojennego Cyryla. Więc Natalie, Davidzie popieram, gratuluję sprawozdania, ale oczekuję, że przekonacie do niego swoje rządy. A następny polski rząd poprze Unię obronną.

  Tonino Picula (S&D). – Mr President, the Russian invasion of Ukraine caused a reset and tectonic shift in many political attitudes and policy responses. One of the main lessons is that the common foreign, security and defence policies of the Union can no longer be the weakest link in our integration. We all agree to condemn Russian aggression in the strongest possible terms. By defending itself, Ukraine defends us too, and we can no longer avoid responsibility for our security and defence.

Taking more significant responsibility also means larger investments from our side. However, being strategically autonomous means that our focus cannot only be on security and defence spending: foreign policy can’t lag behind too. Enlargement policy, for example, one of the most successful policies, must also be at the centre of our action. The credible perspective of enlargement and the merit-based regatta approach must be our political response already at the next Council meeting in two weeks.

  Francisco José Millán Mon (PPE). – Señor presidente, la invasión rusa en Ucrania ha abierto un nuevo escenario geopolítico. Estamos en un entorno de seguridad más complejo, donde la multipolaridad podría dar paso a una bipolaridad creciente en un contexto de rivalidad y antagonismo.

En este panorama la Unión Europea tiene que ser un actor internacional efectivo, capaz de defender sus intereses y valores. Necesitamos una política exterior y de seguridad, también de defensa, sólida y determinada. Este mensaje clave se encuentra en la recomendación que hoy debatimos. Felicito a los ponentes.

En primer lugar, me parece necesario ir alcanzando los objetivos recogidos en la Brújula Estratégica y garantizar una coordinación estrecha entre la Unión Europea y la OTAN. Nuestra Brújula Estratégica y el concepto estratégico que la OTAN apruebe en la próxima cumbre en Madrid deben estar bien alineados.

Me gustaría, además, destacar los siguientes puntos de la Resolución. Es necesario que el alto representante despliegue una ofensiva diplomática en todos los Estados que se abstuvieron o votaron en contra de las Resoluciones de las Naciones Unidas sobre la agresión a Ucrania. Debemos hacer pedagogía, obtener una respuesta de condena unánime por parte de la comunidad internacional. Hay que conseguir igualmente un mayor respaldo internacional a nuestras sanciones contra Rusia.

Me pareció muy preocupante que este fin de semana el presidente de la Unión Africana pidiese desde Moscú el levantamiento de las sanciones a Rusia. Por último, insistimos en que se establezca un Consejo de Ministros de Defensa de la Unión que se reúna de forma institucionalizada y periódica.

En la situación actual, más que nunca es necesario un diálogo político permanente para coordinarnos en materia de política exterior y de defensa con los Estados Unidos. Si hubiera existido este diálogo, muchas de las disparidades entre los análisis de inteligencia y las evaluaciones de estos análisis ante la invasión rusa de Ucrania podrían haberse evitado.

  Włodzimierz Cimoszewicz (S&D). – Panie Przewodniczący! Trzy krótkie uwagi. Po pierwsze, demokratyczny Zachód musi kontynuować obecną pomoc dla Ukrainy będącej ofiarą agresji ze strony Rosji i nakładać na agresora kolejne sankcje. Dzisiejsze poparcie ze strony naszych społeczeństw może erodować zarówno w wyniku zmęczenia wojną, jak i rosyjskiej manipulacji opinią publiczną.

Po drugie, kiedyś nieuchronnie nastąpi koniec tej tragedii. Rosja – jej sprawca – nie może uzyskać żadnej nagrody. Nie wolno nigdy zgodzić się na jakiekolwiek naruszenie integralności terytorialnej Ukrainy.

Po trzecie, po raz kolejny po wojnie na Bałkanach okazuje się, że bez udziału USA Europa nie jest w stanie skutecznie bronić siebie i swojego najbliższego otoczenia. Wymaga to ponownego przemyślenia projektów strategicznej autonomii. W obecnych warunkach nic nie może zastąpić sojuszu transatlantyckiego.

  Lukas Mandl (PPE). – Mr President, with this plenary week and this vote, the European Parliament, on behalf of the people of Europe, will send a clear signal for the security of the Europeans, of this generation and for generations to come.

Security means that we have to invest more in defence. Security means that we have to use structures and to strengthen these structures like the European Defence Fund, like the Strategic Compass, in order to contribute to our strategic autonomy. Security means that we have to unify the free world, the so-called political West. We have to align with our partners, our largest partner, the United States, and all the partners around the globe. Because contributing to the free world means to contribute to freedom of people.

Security does not mean to militarise society. Security means to have proper armed forces in order to make proper dwelling possible, proper studying, learning, education, work and everything else. It’s about our societies which we like so much and we defend. Unifying the political West also means to contribute to recognition of Kosovo, for example, unifying the political base means to confront also domestically Hungary in our European Union. Within Europe, also to confront Serbia with its obstacles, sending to the process of unifying the political West. Unifying the political West and contributing to security also means to solve our issues within our societies.

We have heard today one of our colleagues mentioning it would be two sides of the same medal when it comes to Russia and Ukraine. No, that’s not true. There is one aggressor and there’s one victim. And we are on the side of the victim, on the side of freedom of human dignity, democracy and rule of law. This is what we have to do.

We welcome Denmark in the Common Security and Defence Policy this very week after this great referendum there, and we will continue contributing to unifying the free world.

  Miapetra Kumpula-Natri (S&D). – Mr President, Commissioner, colleagues, the security environment in Europe fundamentally changed when Russia started the illegal and brutal attack against Ukraine. We stand with Ukraine.

But facing situations like this, we need to make progress on the EU foreign security and defence policy as well. We need cohesion and effectiveness of EU external actions and we need European Union and solidarity also among the Member States. The solidarity and mutual assistance clauses in the Treaties, and at the very heart of the Union’s security policy, must not be empty letters.

Also, the strategic compass adopted earlier this year provides a very good basis for developing the EU security and defence policy. The consequences have been very profound. It has led Finland and Sweden to seek NATO membership, and in May the two countries submitted applications.

I hope you can support the amendment calling for a swift adoption of these memberships in the EU countries that are NATO members, as we did already in the vote today.

  Antonio Tajani (PPE). – Signor Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, l'invasione dell'Ucraina da parte della Russia ha rafforzato certamente la coesione occidentale, ma ha messo in risalto anche i ritardi in politica estera, in politica di difesa e in politica di sicurezza della nostra Unione. Bisogna avere il coraggio di fare di più.

Il mondo dopo questa guerra cambierà. La Cina sarà la grande regista di un'operazione politica per invadere con i suoi prodotti mezzo mondo e avrà al suo fianco, se le cose andranno avanti così, anche la Federazione russa. Attenzione a quello che succede, certo, alla nostra frontiera orientale, ma anche a quello che succede in Africa, a quello che sta succedendo in Sud America. Russia e Cina saranno sempre più forti.

Ecco perché serve reagire con la politica. Ma la politica estera ha bisogno anche di uno strumento della difesa. La bussola strategica, un regolare Consiglio dei ministri della Difesa dell'Unione, una maggiore cooperazione in materia di intelligence sono certamente un passo nella giusta direzione, ma serve più coraggio. Dobbiamo accelerare la costruzione di un esercito comune, di forze armate comuni, che dovranno collaborare certamente con la NATO e rafforzare però, nello stesso tempo, la presenza europea all'interno dell'Alleanza atlantica.

Va finanziato, con una nuova emissione di titoli di debito comune, di eurobond, anche il Fondo europeo per la difesa. Serve un Commissario europeo per la difesa, per coordinare le politiche e ottimizzare gli investimenti anche nella ricerca e nella sanità militari.

Insomma, l'Unione europea è a un bivio: solo con più solidarietà in tutte le nostre politiche sapremo contrastare le minacce alla sicurezza dei nostri cittadini, compresa la lotta al terrorismo e la cybersecurity.

VORSITZ: NICOLA BEER
Vizepräsidentin

  Evin Incir (S&D). – Madam President, I have myself experienced war and have seen the brutal consequences of its indiscriminate violence against civilians, which has brought me to the EU.

In European history there is and always will be a before and after of 24 February 2022. The after is the time when the EU must stand up to preserve peace and international security. Never bow to the imperialist Putin Russia. The after is the time when the EU must step up its struggle in defence of the rule-based international order and the principle of multilateral cooperation.

I therefore welcome the Parliament’s new recommendations on the EU Foreign Security and Defence Policy, because in this new world order created by Putin and his men, our main responsibility is to stick together. I am therefore ashamed of the Orbán government in Hungary that is acting disgracefully. The EU has an important global role to play. For that, we need a stronger strategic autonomy and we need to act with allies.

I also would like to join the call of our Finnish colleague for a swift approval of the Swedish and Finnish NATO membership.

And finally, for me, the EU is synonymous with peace. I was once forced to flee to the EU for its peace. We can and we must stand up for it globally.

  Riho Terras (PPE). – Madam President, Russia’s war against Ukraine has been going on for more than eight years now. The full-scale military offensive that Putin launched on 24 February has lasted more than 100 days. The lessons identified from the ongoing war must make the European Union move faster and start delivering in the security and defence field. The report that we are discussing tonight brings up many vital issues. They must be dealt with if we want the EU to become more serious. Defence must get the attention it deserves. Defence ministers should be meeting at Council level on a regular basis. The EU must cooperate more closely with NATO and find the necessary resources for the flagship projects such as military mobility.

I would also like to emphasise the need for the EU to foster closer cooperation between the private sector, academia and governments in the field of defence technologies. What we have witnessed from the war in Ukraine is that high-end military technologies can make a huge difference in fighting the enemy and saving our own soldiers’ lives. We need more solutions and they can only be implemented in close cooperation with the private – and research and technology – sector from Europe.

  Carmen Avram (S&D). – Doamna președintă, războiul lui Putin e un război împotriva valorilor noastre. E timpul deci ca Uniunea Europeană să riposteze cu un salt decisiv spre o nouă paradigmă, cea de jucător activ, să treacă de la a petici relații care se rup, la rolul de creator de politică externă, să devină capabilă și să rezolve conflicte, dar și să anticipeze pericole.

Noua politică externă a Uniunii nu trebuie să înceapă după încheierea războiului, ci acum, imediat, de exemplu, cu mesaje ferme prin care să ne aducem mai aproape vecinii și partenerii, cărora le-am tot promis dar nu le-am livrat, o mână întinsă, o mână puternică către acele state care și-au arătat disponibilitatea de a adera la valorile noastre, cărora le este greu să evolueze spre democrație cu un vecin ca Rusia și a căror unică dorință e azi să scape de această noapte siberiană care se apropie periculos de mult.

Și nu trebuie să uităm niciodată lecția pe care ne-o dau aceste vremuri, că de parteneri nu trebuie să ne aducem aminte doar în perioada de conflict, ci mai ales în vremuri de pace, cu mai puține vorbe și mai multe promisiuni, respectate la timp.

  Ivan Štefanec (PPE). – Pani predsedajúca, už viac ako sto dní sme svedkami zločineckej ruskej agresie na Ukrajine. Už viac ako sto dní sa statoční Ukrajinci bránia. Bránia svoju vlasť, bránia slobodu a celú Európu.

Dnes sa rozhoduje o budúcej podobe Európy, či v nej bude vyhrávať brutalita, nesloboda a bezprávie alebo vyhrá dodržiavanie práva, sloboda a odvaha.

Som si istý, že mier je dosiahnuteľný. Som si istý, že odvaha a sloboda a právo vyhrá. Preto naša pomoc Ukrajine nesmie zovšednieť, pokiaľ nebude mať pod kontrolou celé svoje územie. Naša pomoc nesmie zovšednieť aj preto, lebo Ukrajinci bojujú za slobodu a demokraciu, a nikto si viac nezaslúži európsku perspektívu viac ako oni.

Práve preto som si istý, že im máme povinnosť ponúknuť plnoprávnu stoličku v rodine európskych národov. Plnoprávne členstvo v Európskej únii. Musíme hovoriť aj o obnove tejto krajiny, pretože sloboda a demokracia priamo súvisí s prosperitou. Preto je dôležité, aby sme pomáhali aj hospodársky pri obnove Ukrajiny.

A som rád, že táto rezolúcia osobitne ustanovuje aj zmienku o medzinárodnom tribunáli, pretože táto genocída teroristického Ruska musí byť nielen vyšetrená, ale aj potrestaná.

A na záver mi dovoľte poďakovať všetkým, ktorí pomáhajú ľuďom v núdzi.

  Janina Ochojska (PPE). – Pani Przewodnicząca! Unia Europejska zdecydowanie potwierdziła wsparcie dla integralności terytorialnej, suwerenności i niepodległości Ukrainy w granicach uznanych na arenie międzynarodowej. W deklaracji wersalskiej uznaliśmy aspiracje Ukrainy i jej wniosek o członkostwo w Unii Europejskiej oraz przyznanie jej statusu kraju kandydującego jako wyraźnego politycznego znaku solidarności z narodem ukraińskim. Nie możemy jednak poprzestać tylko na deklaracjach, ponieważ demokracja i wolność zależą między innymi od dobrobytu i stabilności gospodarczej.

Popieram projekt utworzenia grupy zadaniowej do spraw wspólnych zamówień, który będzie służył zwiększeniu potencjału obronności. Mam jednak nadzieję, że nigdy ta broń nie zostanie użyta. Jestem przekonana, że tworzenie lepszej przyszłości dla Europy i dla całego świata jest możliwe tylko w warunkach pokoju. Ukraina potrzebuje pomocy materialnej, wojskowej, finansowej i humanitarnej oraz wkładu w odbudowę po wojnie, który może zapewnić ustanowienie instrumentu prawnego umożliwiającego konfiskatę zamrożonych rosyjskich aktywów i funduszy. Wolna i silna Ukraina oznacza bezpieczną Unię Europejską.

Obecnie na świecie toczy się 40 znaczących konfliktów i wojen. Europa może poprzez misje wojskowe pomóc w stabilizowaniu sytuacji na obszarach dotkniętych wojną. Razem mamy możliwość i zdolność, aby sprawić, by świat był sprawiedliwszy, by przestrzegano w nim prawa i szanowano prawa człowieka.

  Željana Zovko (PPE). – Madam President, I would like to commend the follow—up report of Mr McAllister and Madam Nathalie Loiseau on the common foreign, security and defence policy after the Russian invasion of Ukraine.

There’s nothing much to say. We have the strategic compass that really clarifies our position, the European Union position, on how we should form our future security and defence policy, we have the Althea operation and we have the consequences of the war.

In this Parliament, I would like also to raise awareness that what we are lacking really is preventive diplomacy. Preventive diplomacy is the key to resolve the issue. Preventive diplomacy is the key to stop the crisis. For example, today we had a position on election financing in Bosnia and Herzegovina, for the future election. Twenty—five years after the Dayton Peace Agreement we still have half a sovereign country. There is no preventive diplomacy, as is happening with other frozen conflict areas. So please, dear colleagues, try to do preventive diplomacy. As somebody who has gone through war, I know that war does not resolve anything.

Spontane Wortmeldungen

  Liudas Mažylis (PPE). – Madam President, honourable Commissioner, colleagues, I would like to stress three essential things we have mentioned throughout 100 days of war already.

First, Ukraine needs effective, modern weapons – ‘needs’ today; better would be yesterday. Postponing means losing the lives of Ukrainian soldiers and of peaceful people. Second, sanctions towards Russia: we need a full embargo for coal, oil and gas. And third, Ukraine is a part of Europe and the frontline defending democracy. So, candidate status is to be granted for it.

Finally, about wording, we should not be afraid to use the term ‘genocide’ because all the signs of it are evident and I agree that the title should be changed. It is aggression of Russia towards Ukraine. It is clear for all the people of goodwill around the world.

  Costas Mavrides (S&D). – Madam President, the Russian invasion of Ukraine is an act of aggression to forcefully revise the European security order. Our response should continue to be united and firm against the specific aggressor, but also a time to move faster with the common foreign security and defence policy based on common rules and a common defence mechanism, as stated in the Strategic Compass – common rules, including international law, such as respect for UNCLOS and the powers of the International Criminal Court charter. With common rules whether the criminal and the aggressors are Russian troops in Ukraine or Turkish occupying troops in Cyprus, it is a gross violation of international law and a crime against humanity requiring the same treatment and the same punishment.

  Clare Daly (The Left). – Madam President, the Head of the African Union calls for an end to sanctions because people in Africa are dying and an MEP comes in here and bemoans it. I have to say, the arrogance is striking!

Russia’s invasion was a godsend to the worst elements in European politics. NATO’s dodged being obsolete, the arms manufacturers are getting blank checks and the Eastern European far right got to bully the rest of Europe into prolonging an unwinnable war against a nuclear-armed neighbour.

But the 100 days of hysteria are dying down. Fractures are emerging. Slowly, too slowly, Western Europe is coming to its senses. Scholz and Draghi want to build peace. Macron is against humiliating Russia – he wants exit ramps. But the extremists in Eastern Europe, backed up by the United States, are happy to see Europe wrecked in order to undermine Russia.

We don’t need more of this lunacy. We need a change of tack, not to deepen it. We need to end this death-drive. We need diplomacy, de-escalation and multilateralism.

  Александър Александров Йорданов (PPE). – Г-жо Председател, режимът в Кремъл възприе европейската култура на мира като нерешителност. И започна агресията. А нашият отговор дълго време бе неадекватен. Ако Украйна бе получила по-рано статут на кандидат-член, ако от НАТО бяха заявили, че тази страна ще стане член на НАТО, може би Русия не би започнала войната. Но сега най-важна е победата. Мирът винаги идва след победата, а за победата е необходимо оръжие и твърди санкции. Необходимо е, както отбеляза и г-н Макалистър, да засилим стратегията за разширяване на Европейския съюз. Но трябва много да внимаваме да не прибързваме с приемането в Европейския съюз на държави, които могат да се окажат троянски коне на Москва. И едно извинение. За съжаление българското правителство отказа да предостави оръжие на Украйна.

  Juozas Olekas (S&D). – Gerbiama Pirmininke, aš noriu pasakyti, kad Afrikoje šiuo metu miršta žmonės ne dėl to, kad įvestos sankcijos, o dėl to, kad Rusija griauna Ukrainos uostus, blokuoja juos ir vagia ukrainiečių užaugintus grūdus. Dėkoju ponui McAllister ir poniai Loiseau už subalansuotą pranešimą. Man atrodo, mes galime labai aiškiai matyti tris svarbiausius dalykus. Šiandieninė diplomatija, tinkamiausia Ukrainai ir pasiekti pergalę, yra pagalba sunkiąja karine ginkluote ir finansais. Antra, tarptautinė bendrija gali pripažinti taiką Ukrainoje tik tada, kada Ukrainos žemę paliks paskutinis rusų okupantų karys Ukrainos tarptautinės bendruomenės pripažintos teritorijos ribose. Ir, trečia, kad grobikam, užpuolikam, Putino klikai turėtų būti surengtas tarptautinis teismas ir Ukraina būtų pakviesta narystei Europos Sąjungoje.

  Eugen Tomac (PPE). – Doamna președintă, domnule comisar, felicit raportorii. Cred că este un document vizionar care trasează câteva obiective precise pe care trebuie să le aibă Uniunea Europeană în relația noastră cu Ucraina, cel puțin în această etapă.

Cetățenii ucraineni au decis din clipa în care au semnat Acordul de asociere că își doresc o apropiere de Uniunea Europeană. Răspunsul Rusiei a fost anexarea Crimeii. Acum când cetățenii ucraineni au decis că vor o apropiere reală de Uniunea Europeană și de NATO Putin ne-a sancționat și a invadat. Pentru Kremlin niciodată nu a existat un respect față de această țară.

Tocmai de aceea răspunsul Uniunii Europene față de așteptările pe care le au cetățenii din Ucraina trebuie să fie o integrare cât mai rapidă. Nu putem găsi soluții pe termen mediu și pe termen lung. Ele necesită răspunsuri acum, pentru că această țară este invadată astăzi.

(Ende der spontanen Wortmeldungen)

  Valdis Dombrovskis, Executive Vice-President of the Commission. – Madam President, honourable Members, we take note of and very much welcome your continuous support for the development of the EU’s security and defence. We will continue to strongly support Ukraine, including significant military and political support to end this war. We share your sense of urgency. With a war at our borders, we need to be more determined and more united in our efforts than ever.

Many of you referred to the importance of bringing forward EU security and defence. Let me assure you that this progress is well underway, as is the work on the Strategic Compass, but also across many policy areas, including missions and operations, rapid deployment capacity, EU-NATO and industry. Again, [inaudible] has political priority for the High Representative and for Member States.

Thank you again for your report and recommendations. They will certainly provide useful input in the debates held in the Council. We remain at your disposal for the exchanges with you on progress on a regular basis.

  David McAllister, rapporteur. – Mr President, since Natalie Loiseau is not in the plenary I guess it’s up to me to sum up this debate. I would, first of all, like to thank all of you for an open, constructive and fruitful debate. We heard a lot of support and praise from the centre of the European Parliament and some criticism from the very far left and the very far right. I would like to share the observation of many MEPs, and I listened carefully, that we as a European Parliament are sending a strong message with this recommendation.

The European Union indeed has to make genuine progress in the foreign policy and defence cooperation at the EU level, and this should include establishing a defence union with more ambitious, short, medium and long term objectives. As several colleagues mentioned in tonight’s debate, the European Union needs to implement the concrete actions laid down in the strategic compass, which would serve as a starting point for implementing common EU defence.

Finally, the European Union needs to achieve strategic sovereignty and increase its ability to act in today’s moment of geopolitical redefinition. Colleagues, Russia’s war against Ukraine is not only attack on Ukraine, it is indeed an attack on the entire peace and security architecture and order in Europe. For this reason, for this reason, it is high time that we enhance the healing and the effectiveness of our foreign security and defence policy. Let us do this with determination substantially and in close cooperation with our partners.

  Die Präsidentin. – Die Aussprache ist damit geschlossen.

Die Abstimmung findet morgen, Mittwoch, 8. Juni 2022, statt.

Schriftliche Erklärungen (Artikel 171)

  Sandra Kalniete (PPE), in writing. – Ukraine asks for Europe’s backing in Russia’s unprovoked and unjustified military aggression against Ukraine. That includes repeated calls for the June 24 European Council to grant Ukraine the status of EU candidate country. Indeed, this has to be done, particularly as rumours continue to grow about the secret consultations of certain Member States aimed at avoiding such a decision.

Therefore, Latvia along with the Baltic States must work arduously to build a powerful EU Member State coalition that can pressure the sceptics and convince them that such a course of action is the EU’s moral responsibility. It is the least we can do, considering that the EU continues to transfer EUR 40 billion monthly to Putin’s war machine in exchange for energy resources. In essence, we are still financing Putin’s war. Even the promised transfers of heavy artillery are being inexcusably delayed, while Ukrainian soldiers and civilians are slaughtered and bombs and shells ravage Ukrainian lands.

  Eva Maydell (PPE), in writing. – EU’s security and defence policy should start outside its borders. To increase the security of the EU and our member-states, we must focus on rebuilding Ukraine first. Special and urgent arrangements are needed to allow coordinated and sustainable aid for Ukraine, corresponding to the actual needs.

EU and NATO must work towards a system where responsibility is allocated for different regions or big cities as regards the aid delivery or reconstruction. Besides such immediate needs, the EU should develop an EU recovery plan for Ukraine focusing on longer-term investments into Ukraine’s economy, which will encourage recovery and modernization aligned to the country’s EU membership perspective.

EU must also focus on Africa. Engaging more strategically with the authorities and civil society there will allow us to have better control on migration flows and potential threats for our security.

However, in order to become a serious global player, the EU will have to improve its decision-making process. It will have to strengthen and integrate the tools enabling it to intervene beyond its borders, whether civilian or military.