Thijs REUTEN

Policy topics Thijs REUTEN is active on

What Thijs REUTEN has said (29)

• 2026-06-17 “(10:51:33 – 10:52:51): Thank you, president. I want to talk about 2 points on your agenda, Ukraine and defense, and they are connected by the lack in sense of urgency. I'm sorry to say that, in particular with the member states. There are many good things in the draft conclusions, and you will say to me, yeah, look what we are doing. But condemnations of Russia's attacks don't save lives. Air defense, deep strike capability, and integrated air protection zone do save lives. So how many heads of state and government have been called by von der Leyen, Kalas, and Kosta in the past 10 days? Because we've sent letters about it. We asked, call them, send these air defense systems to Ukraine. And the 2nd point on defense. Also, no lack of good words in the conclusions. But where is the sense of urgency? Member states continue to spend money with nationalist reflexes. No internal market on defense. No collective procurement wasting tens of billions tens of billions per year. I want now sense of urgency. The member states are holding us back out of fear for what? Thank you very much. Are endangering our security. Thank you. Very much.”
  Defence spending · EU competences on defence
• 2025-10-03 “E-003885/2025 Answer given by High Representative/Vice-President Kallas on behalf of the European Commission The EU has consistently called for the release and repatriation of all conflict related detainees, including those from Karabakh, as a confidence-building measure. The EU has called on Azerbaijan to respect due process and to ensure that allegations of war crimes and other misconduct are investigated in a transparent manner. The EU continues to support efforts towards the normalisation of relations between Armenia and Azerbaijan on all pending issues and welcomed the joint Armenia-Azerbaijan statement of 7 December 2023 on confidencebuilding measures, including the exchange of prisoners 1 . Similarly, the EU strongly commended both sides for the initialling of their bilateral peace treaty on 8 August 2025 in Washington, marking a significant breakthrough to end decades of conflict 2 . The EU continues to call for the parties to maintain momentum and take further steps that would support the peace process, including the release of conflict affected detainees and stands ready to help with the implementation of the Washington agreements. Additionally, as stipulated in the Partnership and Cooperation Agreement 3 between the EU and the Republic of Azerbaijan, the rule of law and human rights are at the core of the EUAzerbaijan partnership. In this context, the EU has repeatedly voiced concerns regarding the unsettling rise of arrests of independent journalists, human rights defenders and political activists. The EU has consistently called on the Azerbaijani authorities to ensure that their actions adhere to the relevant obligations under domestic and international law, together with the release of all persons imprisoned for exercising their fundamental rights. These messages have been conveyed publicly and bilaterally at all levels. 1 https://x.com/JosepBorrellF/status/1732853939123437947. 2 https://www.consilium.europa.eu/en/press/press-releases/2025/08/08/armeniaazerbaijan-statement-by-the-highrepresentative-on-behalf-of-the-european-union-on-the-initialling-of-the-armenia-azerbaijan-peace-treaty/pdf/. 3 https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX%3A01999A0917%2801%29-20091101.”
  EU-Azerbaijan relations · EU-Armenia relations
• 2025-06-17 “E-002434/2025 Answer given by High Representative/Vice-President Kallas on behalf of the European Commission The then High Representative/Vice-President (HR/VP) presented the report of the EU Special Representative for Human Rights on the situation in Gaza at the Foreign Affairs Council of 18 November 2024 1 . Based on the report and information coming from Gaza, the HR/VP proposed to the Council to suspend the political dialogue with Israel, which falls under the exclusive competence of the Council. A majority of Member States was against the proposal 2 . The EU deplores the dire humanitarian situation in Gaza, the unacceptable number of civilian casualties and the levels of starvation and has consistently urged Israel to improve 3 . As a result of frank dialogue between Israel and the EU, Israel agreed in July 2025 to expand humanitarian access to Gaza, including through more crossings open, aid and food trucks entering Gaza, repair of vital infrastructure and protection of aid workers. Implementation of this agreement is vital, and the EU will monitor closely this implementation to ensure that the commitments given are respected. 1 https://www.eeas.europa.eu/eeas/foreign-affairs-council-press-remarks-high-representative-josep-borrell-aftermeeting-17_en. 2 See footnote 1. 3 https://www.consilium.europa.eu/media/cjtb3oep/20250626-european-council-conclusions-en.pdf.”
  EU competences on human rights · Relations with Israel - Palestine
• 2025-06-11 “E-002355/2025 Answer given by Ms Zaharieva on behalf of the European Commission While research related to dual-use products or technologies is not prohibited, any research and innovation activities carried out under Horizon Europe must have an exclusive focus on civil applications. When implementing the projects, all beneficiaries must ensure that all activities under the project comply with this rule as well as with ethical principles and relevant national, EU and international legislation. Horizon Europe projects’ results 1 , may be developed into technologies with a dual-use potential, even if they were originally intended and funded for purely civil applications. This transition could happen beyond the lifetime of the project itself. The Commission therefore cannot provide an overview of all projects that might have future results with dual use development. Ethics screening is part of the evaluation process under Horizon Europe, and it is done by specific ethics evaluators 2 . During the lifetime of a selected project, the continued compliance with the grant agreement is monitored by the Commission and its Agencies in charge of implementing Horizon Europe. The Commission and its Agencies would review all reported cases which allegedly breach Horizon Europe rules. So far it has not been established that any activities under current projects involving Israeli entities breached the principle of exclusive focus on civil applications. Article 2(2) of the Agreement on the association of Israel to Horizon Europe 3 sets out the principle that Israeli entities participate in the Horizon Europe programme under terms and conditions equivalent to those applicable to legal entities established in the EU. While any actions of the State of Israel cannot be considered automatically attributable to Israeli entities participating in Horizon Europe, Israel needs to comply with Article 2 of the EuroMediterranean Agreement 4 . In the context of Israel’s intervention in the Gaza Strip and the ensuing humanitarian catastrophe, the Commission has come to the conclusion that Israel is violating human rights and humanitarian law thus breaching Article 2 of the EuroMediterranean Agreement. Therefore, it has proposed to the Council to partially suspend the Horizon Europe Association Agreement with Israel so that legal entities established in Israel would not be eligible to participate in calls for grant and investment support under the Horizon Europe European Innovation Council Accelerator. Furthermore, in her State of the Union Speech on 10 September 2025, the Commission President announced a further package of measures. 1 Once the project is over. 2 The screening takes place after the main scientific evaluation and covers all the proposals selected for funding. Some of the projects also have additional ethics checks over the course of the project duration. 3 Agreement between the EU, of the one part, and Israel, of the other part, on the participation of Israel in the EU programme Horizon Europe — the framework Programme for Research and Innovation, OJ L 95, 23/03/2022. 4 ‘Relations between the Parties, as well as all the provisions of the Agreement itself, shall be based on respect for human rights and democratic principles, which guides their internal and international policy and constitutes an essential element of this Agreement.’”
  Disarmament and non-proliferation of weapons · Relations with Israel - Palestine
• 2025-01-08 “E-000052/2025 Answer given by Executive Vice-President Séjourné on behalf of the European Commission The Commission shares the concern about the increasing number and often severe incidents with pyrotechnic articles, many of which involve the misuse of professional articles. The Commission is finalising the evaluation of the Pyrotechnics Directive 1 to identify any shortcomings in the Directive itself and its application by Member States. The evaluation is expected to be published in Spring 2025. Following this evaluation, a decision will be taken by the Commission whether to revise the Directive based on an assessment of possible options. The Commission is closely following the implementation of the recently introduced Pyro-Pass in Benelux as a possible means to improve legal trade of pyrotechnic articles. The EU-wide introduction of such a system could be an option to be considered for the revision of the Directive. In addition, the Commission has launched a study to assess the feasibility of the potential options to tackle the growing security problems posed by the criminal misuse of pyrotechnic articles, and to provide a more detailed picture of the issue. To note that Europol is also considering the matter of criminal misuse of pyrotechnic articles. 1 Directive 2013/29/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 12 June 2013 on the harmonisation of the laws of the Member States relating to the making available on the market of pyrotechnic articles, http://data.europa.eu/eli/dir/2013/29/oj”
  EU law enforcement cooperation in criminal matters
• “And thank you. Thank you very much, chair. And thanks, first of all, to the rapporteur for a very good draft and also for all his work and his, um, conversations that he had in preparation of this. Um, yes. I agree with the colleague that the Macedonian people are exhausted and are longing for progress. Regrettable. It is that that the government and political forces in North Macedonia have not been able to come together, in particular on the interests of the Macedonian people. And the current government, of course, bears being in government a large responsibility for that. But it's not only on the Macedonians and and the progress that has not been made in the past year. Um, if I look at the Commission's report, I must say that maybe it is a little bit too positive. Uh, not in the sense that the right elements were not mentioned. And, uh, the progress has also been mentioned by the rapporteur is not in the report, but what's not in the report is the causes for the lack of progress on the side of the Macedonians, but also and that's my third point. The council, because the council bears a big responsibility for not providing a credible enlargement perspective in the interest first of, of uh, the, the country itself, but also of all of us in the European Union. We need to get progress on this and we need it soon. And the council should get moving on this. Finally. Um, yes. Uh, any kind of pursuing of narrow ethno nationalist interests of any kind is not good for North Macedonia. It's not good for for Europe. Um, we will work together on the report, and I look forward to a fruitful endeavor in this regard in the interest of North Macedonia and in the interest of the European Union. Thank you.”
  EU enlargement
• “Thank you very much, chair. And uh, I will indeed focus on the right of inquiry, although I'm tempted to say things also about enlargement, but maybe for another time. The good thing about the right of inquiry is that it doesn't require unanimity in council. So that's good. It's a special procedure and there is a result to achieve here for the Cypriot presidency, a good result, I think. And um, I think that we have come quite far in after many years of, of very little progress last year we found a way forward with the much appreciated efforts of the Polish and Danish presidencies, and we are now in the position to take the step forward. And I would be a little bit more ambitious than yourself, because I think we can take the final step, not just a step in the process, but the final step. So we need to to to to speak soon. Uh, hopefully, uh, on, uh, getting a picture of how we look at the mapping exercise, um, and, and then to move forward indeed to hopefully finish this, uh, this, this file, uh, because in, in this mandate or in this legislative period, that is not the timeline that the Parliament has, uh, has in mind. And I, in all earnest, think that it's also time for the council to, as you said yourself, uh, realize that the right of inquiry, the, the instrument of scrutiny of this House is important and is a vital part of what you said in the beginning of your intervention, the strength of a directly, democratically elected Parliament as this as this House is. So I hope that we, uh, together with, with, under your leadership can really move this file, hopefully over the finish line. I'm ready. We are ready. And hopefully we can make progress soon on this.”
  Transparency requirements of EU institutions
• “I propose for mainstreaming of counter mobility and actions that help restore affected critical infrastructure using European assets. Crucial gap where we really rely heavily on third parties at this moment in digital Europe. There are proposals to address hybrid threats in the digital domain, to extend certain activities to include armed forces, and to ensure that restrictions on third countries do not affect cooperation with associated countries, including Ukraine. In the EDF, proposals to better include Ukraine and other associated countries and subjects to further agreement countries with a security and defence partnership. So that's, for example, also the UK. Moreover, changes to ensure that irrespective of the funding source, EDF remains a truly European program in European izing our collective efforts. We also sharpen language to ensure faster timelines for disruptive technology projects, appropriate support for SMEs, mid-caps, and avoiding conflict of interest in expert panels that make decisions on projects. And perhaps most critically, I propose to delete the Commission's ASAP amendments as it is no longer necessary with the adoption of EDP as we adopted EDP under urgent procedure at the request of the Council. The file is now still blocked in that same council and not amending ASAP gives, I think, further impetus for swift finalisation because the objective should be a functioning EDP as soon as possible. I want to thank you again and I look forward to the cooperation with the colleagues on finalising this opinion. Thank you.”
  EU competences on defence
• “Thank you, Mr. President. Commissioner, dear colleagues, 2025 has been a good year for relations between the EU and the UK. I would even dare to say that it has been the most positive year since the UK left the European Union, as it was a year marked by renewed energy and cooperation after a period of coolness following Brexit. It is encouraging to see that reconnection is coming with this year's EU, UK summit and the renewed commitments from both sides to enhance the cooperation. I also want to thank the Commissioner in particular for his long standing efforts to improve that relationship. It builds naturally on the foundations that were established after Brexit in the Trade and Cooperation Agreement, together with the Withdrawal Agreement and the Windsor framework. The backbone of the post-Brexit Brexit relationship on which my co-rapporteur, Nina Carberry and I have reflected in this report and together with the involved opinion committee opinion giving committees, we have evaluated how those foundations have held up in practice. And as it covers a wide range of topics, there is a lot to say about it. The list is long, but I will mention just a few of the areas addressed energy cooperation, the Youth Experience scheme, the SPS agreement, law enforcement and judicial cooperation. We have reflected on the progress made towards the full implementation of the TCA, while also looking ahead to deepening our existing cooperation and exploring new areas. As Afet rapporteur, I will focus a bit more on the foreign policy and security cooperation. I have seen how both the EU and UK have been taking significant steps towards closer cooperation, which is more important than ever as we support Ukraine together in fending off Russias brutal invasion. And the EU is at the same time confronted with the consequences of having neglected its deterrence for too long, this geopolitical reality demands a deeper partnership with our like minded allies and in particular, with our best friend, the United Kingdom.”
  EU-UK relations
• “Mr. president. Commissioner, dear colleagues, we are reminded daily that Russia's war of aggression is nothing less than a terror campaign of war crimes and crimes against humanity. And we know there can be no real peace without justice. Justice for those murdered in their sleep by Russians targeting their cities, for those tortured to death in Russian prison camps, for those buried in mass graves, for the children torn away from their parents. For Russia's crime of aggression. And of course, we Europeans are appalled that the naive US efforts to broker peace fail to address any form of truth, justice or accountability. Even worse, they want to reward the aggressor. Our message in this regard must remain clear, just as can be slow and frustrating. But it is patient, Unrelenting, and it does not require the aggressor's approval. There is one condition justice must be empowered. And here the EU must continue to carry its weight and stand up for principles and ensure broad support. The EU must fiercely back the Special Tribunal on Aggression, the ICC and all other institutions involved in delivering justice. Because Ukraine is not only fighting for its survival, it's fighting for the principles that underpin our union and the international rules based order. But colleagues, it is easy and comfortable, maybe even to talk about accountability. But we cannot forget about saving lives and defending Ukraine. Are we doing everything we can to help defend Ukraine and its people? We can and do, can and must do more to ramp up production together with Ukraine, deliver air defence and deep strike capabilities, and consider to set up an air protection zone over uncontested areas of Ukraine. You mentioned the support loan. Very glad that we have it. But I want to remind you about the clarifications that the Commission gave in the February plenary on the Swift and the swift adoption and the use of the derogation regime laid down in article 135 of the support loan. It is very important because there can be no peace without justice, but also not without strength. Thank you.”
  Russia-Ukraine conflict (10th term)
• “Mr. president, I stand here rather desperate, to be honest, especially also listening to the commission and the council. But let us try one more time to find unity on one point. One point on humanitarian values, empathy and respect for lives of innocent people. We here should, as a minimum, agree to the need to open Gaza immediate and unrestricted access of humanitarian aid, food and medical supplies into Gaza by independent, international respected organisations. This Parliament, it seems, and for sure a large majority of our citizens wants Once this, our citizens have lost respect for Europe's inaction over Gaza and Europe's double standards. There are no excuses. After all the well-documented violations of international law, the lack of recommendation to suspend all or part of the agreement is a violation of the Commission's role as guardian of the treaties, and the EPP knows that. And equally, the Council's lack of action in its inexplicable and undermines protection of rules based international order. We should find the political resolve to ensure that Europe acts now to open Gaza. Thank you.”
  Relations with Israel - Palestine
• “Yeah. Thank you. Thank you very much. And thank you for your our colleagues in in Kiev for being with us. It's great to see you under the dire circumstances. Um, um, and of course, I, fully concur with what my. The previous speaker said we as a European Parliament from the start. From the very start, even before the full scale invasion, have been calling to do more and to do it more swiftly, and we will continue to do so. And we will also continue to be at the forefront when we enter into the phase of the accession process, because also there not only you as a Rada, but also all the Ukrainians deserve all the support that they can get, especially from this institution, in the necessary agreement that needs to be found with the member states. Um, on the 90 billion loan. Uh, may I point you respectfully, dear colleagues in Kiev, to the declaration of the European Commission that they read out when we voted about the 90 billion Loan. It's important that you have that declaration in your pocket always, because in that declaration of the European Commission, it is set out how the Commission will actually proceed on the flexibility and on the swift procedures involved with the with the procurement of military support. So please, um, check that declaration of the Commission upon the vote in the European Parliament on the negotiations and the opening of clusters, the national programme on proximity approximation, the MPA, um how do you view your own planning on that and assuming that you will fulfil your own planning with regard to the implementation. Um how do you see the, that working group that you mentioned that you want to set up with the member states? Uh, what should that working group, uh, be talking about? And when, in your opinion, and my last question is how is the current collaboration with the government, and can we as fellow parliamentarians help you in any way or form, uh, with something, uh, in regard to your parliamentary procedures or, um, in some way assisting the efforts that you are making towards the reforms. Thank you very much.”
  EU-Ukraine relations
• “Thank you chair. Thank you, Mr. Copeman, for being here, and also for your commitment and your energy that you are putting into the process in the past years. I'm hopeful. I must say, despite the changing political landscape, I think the urgency has not diminished, but it increased the urgency of preserving what we have, but also in our own interest to finish what we started more than 70 years ago, including the countries that are now candidate. But we will need to escape this last decade of inaction and to go into a 5 or 10 year period of real action, not unwavering commitment to the EU path, but more real results. My question is specifically on Serbia and Kosovo. Can you name some elements that you think need to change in the so-called dialogue, or do we need an entirely different process? And on the membership application of Kosovo? Why is the Commission not proceeding with the application that is now on the shelf for almost two years? I know that there are countries who do not recognize Kosovo, but I think that a judging, if the application meets the criteria, does not stand in in the way of the Commission to proceed on that. Thank you.”
  EU enlargement
• “Nothing has changed. Russia is still the aggressor. Daily war crimes, brutality, hybrid warfare in Europe. No desire for real peace. And why then let Lavrov's daughter representing Russia at the Biennale. Why then allow athletes to compete under their own flag and maybe even championing Russian crimes? No normalization. Not in sports, not in culture, nor anywhere else like in the G20. What has changed is the moral compass of decision makers, for example, in sports governance, allowing Russia to come back to the stage, to all those sports governance executives that struck Zimmerman. My colleague mentioned, I say, you have trouble recognizing right from wrong. You have stopped attaching consequences to the unacceptable. And at the Paralympics, we saw what it leads to. It emboldens a Russian athlete to even turn his back to the Ukrainian flag. I have no doubt that sports and culture can be forces for good, uniting people, building bridges. But people who claim that this is true for Putin and his cronies are either dangerously foolish or one of his complicit supporters. Thank you.”
  EU-Russia relations (from March 2022)
• “Thank you. President. Commissioner, colleagues, thanks to the authors for this timely resolution because Putin uses foreign fighters recruited under false pretenses from Africa and elsewhere, and he's running out of soldiers thanks to the effective Ukrainian defenders. The alternative to this conscription in Russia's cities would expose a losing war. It is very uncomfortable to watch African fighters dying on a battlefield they were never prepared for. For a cause they never chose and being abused by Russian soldiers. Ukraine's defense also takes place in multinational fora, where African voices are too often silent or pro-Russian. Therefore, the EU must join forces with our African partners to clarify the human cost of Russia's brutal and illegal policy also on African streets. Second, make clear that Russia and its Wagner Group and Africa core are no friends to Africa, but only advance Russian interests through disinformation, deceit and exploitation. Thirdly, that we offer credible alternatives, including through our Csdp missions. Thank you.”
  EU policy on African region
• “Mr. president, Commissioner, colleagues, the answer to strengthening our sovereignty and security is simple. More Europe, not more slogans. Last month we adopted here a clear agenda for concrete action, which I know you support. We must stop dressing up national reflexes as strategy. Fragmentation is an expensive weakness. You said it, Commissioner, but member states are not even close to understanding the urgency. So it seems. What do we need first? Political courage and operational doctrine to act. Not after the next crisis, but now. Secondly, make article 47 real. Thirdly, build EU command and control Autonomous if needed. Ford fixed decision making, no unanimity traps, no defense planning by council working groups and fifth spent together a European DARPA also and EU owned strategic enablers. Contrary to the member states, you said it also. Commissioner. Our citizens understand the urgency and we have a clear recommendations in this regard. My question is, will we finally care whether member States actually listen? Thank you.”
  EU competences on defence
• “Yeah thank you chair. Thank you chair. And we must support Ukraine. Now that's obvious. And I find it hard to imagine. But if you don't do it for Ukraine. Do it for yourself. Ukraine's successful defense against Russia is the best investment in our own defense, not only because it fends off Russian threat, but also because the importance of Ukraine's defense industry for European defense innovation is crucial. And this loan should allow, therefore, Ukraine to defend itself to save lives. And we must ensure that it is fit for purpose and not positioned as an instrument to boost the tip. Ukraine's defense requires flexibility and speed in the EU and the economic area. Certain products are simply not available or not in sufficient quantities, especially in such areas as air defense, drone and anti drones. I want to ask the Commission, can you guarantee that the procedure for the eventual necessary derogation is not longer than the innovation cycle of Ukraine? Because that is what we are risking, that Ukraine has an innovation that needs to be implemented immediately and we don't have the sufficient time speed. We must go beyond narrow, short term national industrial interests and help Ukraine now with what is needed.”
  EU-Ukraine relations
• “Thank you Mr. president, Commission and council colleagues. We need real sense of urgency and determination. For a long time, we in this House asked for bringing Russia's assets in place. So thank you. Commission for the reparations loan proposal. And thanks to the Council for ending the ability of Russia's assets to block our sanctions against Russia's financial assets. This clears the way. But myths are stubborn. So for tomorrow's final discussions with Prime Minister, but also with others, it's not theft. The assets stay frozen. Used. Is the cash owned by financial institutions structured in a loan. Belgium and others are not alone. When did we ever leave a member state to carry such responsibility alone? Proposals prove the opposite. And this will not destabilise the euro. Our sanctions did not. Using article 122 did not. Nor will this legal action and Euro profits are not our concern, and litigation will not exceed €1.5 billion already withheld by euroclear. The risk is not too high. The greatest risk is doing nothing and that is unmitigated history.”
  EU-Russia relations (from March 2022)
• “And I'm asking this because I deeply feel that we should unite across parties, across member states, across governments, not on whose side are we taking? Not on international law, on fundamental norms of humanity. And they are, um, now, uh, at stake here. So the united approach, can you give us some insights in how we could could turn that narrative around because that these settlements are illegal and we are facing them already for decades. That's true. And we have been saying, yeah, it's illegal, but nobody has done anything. So can you intellectually explain to us why this is somehow different from other violations of international law or previously upon agreed treaties? And then lastly on the settler violence, can you also deepen a little bit more on the role of the local authorities, the military, the other authorities, also, the ones who are absolving the the are doing this, this thing with the historic building permits compared to the, uh, to the to the existing laws, uh, and so on. So the, the, the supportive structures, if you want, uh, around the settler violence and the and the and the the, the settlements themselves that can remain, uh, alive due to this support the support structures. Uh, if you can. Thanks.”
  Relations with Israel - Palestine
• “Yeah. Thank you, thank you. Chair. Um. Um, I must say, it's tempting to, uh, share my personal, uh, take of the situation and then go into statements rather than into questions. But I will try to profit as much as possible from the experts that we have here. Um, and yes, I also do regret that we do not have one of the countless, one of the thousands of voices that are speaking out daily, uh, from, uh, from the West Bank, uh, of, of Palestinians, uh, that are effectively daily, uh, experiencing the violence from the settlers, the effects of the illegal settlements and so on. Uh, for instance, Fakhri, whom I know personally from the south of East Jerusalem, where he, uh, I visited his house of what's left of it because it's a cabin. He lives in a cabin because his house was demolished already three times. That is the kind of testimonies that we need. Um, but I said I wanted to pose some questions to the panel. So it is now, um, can you explain, uh, the changes compared to the last 5 or 10 years when it comes to the also Christian Palestinian communities? Because I think that there's no difference. There's no difference. Also, Christian Palestinian communities are as much targeted.”
  Relations with Israel - Palestine
• “And thank you. Thank you very much, chair. And thanks, first of all, to the rapporteur for a very good draft and also for all his work and his, um, conversations that he had in preparation of this. Um, yes. I agree with the colleague that the Macedonian people are exhausted and are longing for progress. Regrettable. It is that that the government and political forces in North Macedonia have not been able to come together, in particular on the interests of the Macedonian people. And the current government, of course, bears being in government a large responsibility for that. But it's not only on the Macedonians and and the progress that has not been made in the past year. Um, if I look at the Commission's report, I must say that maybe it is a little bit too positive. Uh, not in the sense that the right elements were not mentioned. And, uh, the progress has also been mentioned by the rapporteur is not in the report, but what's not in the report is the causes for the lack of progress on the side of the Macedonians, but also and that's my third point. The council, because the council bears a big responsibility for not providing a credible enlargement perspective in the interest first of, of uh, the, the country itself, but also of all of us in the European Union. We need to get progress on this and we need it soon. And the council should get moving on this. Finally. Um, yes. Uh, any kind of pursuing of narrow ethno nationalist interests of any kind is not good for North Macedonia. It's not good for for Europe. Um, we will work together on the report, and I look forward to a fruitful endeavor in this regard in the interest of North Macedonia and in the interest of the European Union. Thank you.”
  EU enlargement
• “Thank you chair. Yes. Because this week is my role also to ruin the good mood. Um. We are not a problem. You are. You are not the problem. You are saying the right things and doing the right things. But that is in sharp contrast with the council. I cannot, uh, say anything else on that. And we have had several meetings also this week where the council really reflected an absolute lack of sense of urgency. So my question to you is, what do we need to do or what should happen to get the right sense of urgency. The second question on 42 seven, you mentioned it and these things and all the advisors on the internal market, they are in our reports, in the internal market, in the CSP, in the drones report. But on 42 seven, can you reflect on where exactly is the problem with the development of the doctrine when it comes to territorial defense? I'm not talking about out of area operations, but why is it so difficult for certain member states to understand that defending Estonian territory is defending European territory as a whole? Thank you.”
  EU competences on defence
• “Minute for both reports. Short term national interests, no matter the origin, are holding back the establishment of a European defence and nowhere more so than in the internal market for defence. Contrary to what some say here, this is an indispensable part of a genuine defence union. Of course we want all countries of Europe to flourish. But hidden covert protectionism is not the answer. Because of closed minds in the leadership of defense, primes and old cultures in national ministries of defense, Europe's internal market for defense does not take off. These nationalistic approaches abusing the concept of national security interests, cost European taxpayers tens of billions of euros. It weakens innovation and competition, forces us to buy American products and spend our money inefficiently. And it costs lives. As Kramer said, for Europe to do better, we need the synergies of a single defense market with unified innovation, development and procurement. We need real binding action to enforce this defense internal market. Thank you.”
  EU competences on defence
• “(09:32:23 – 09:34:18): Thank you very much Chair. Look everything you said I understand. I think you are doing a good job, you are technically on point but it also reflects this whole debate, the discussion, the reactions even from our Parliament that we are in deep shit. We have a big problem because a simple question on QMV which we desperately need you answer but I know it's going well we don't need it. This is the problem. The problem is that I don't know did you read for example the CSTP report that this Parliament adopted in January? It's quite a lot of paragraphs on your agency in it. We ask there to coordinate, to not do, oh I represent the member states no, we need one not twenty seven, one C2 capability and we asked can you please together launch a project to initiate a C2 capability in Europe, one not twenty seven, not one of just France or Finland or Italy, one. And also the example on that you say no we are cooperating quite. I hear very very different stories of the cooperation between European Defense Agency and DEFIS and I'm saying this in a public meeting which I probably shouldn't because it shows that we are not on par on the tasks that we asked from us. But where is the sense of urgency with the member states on the situation that we are in? We cannot afford to stay in this nationalistic approach of defense spending. Yes we are working together as long as it happens in my country it's just unacceptable and I think that we together do not share. I mean I'm the only one that comes close is Mister Stakis. I'm a little bit more emotional because I'm half Italian maybe that's the explanation but we are not doing the right things on the right moment now and I regret to say it but I'm really disappointed.”
  EU competences on defence
• “Thank you. Very generous. It's a pleasure to to represent Seda here for the mini defence omnibus. I have just returned from Iter where I also present the opinion. So sorry it was first aired and now here instead. But I have a good contact already with it. Rapporteur calls and I look forward to working with the shadows here also of course, and the teams. And I thank the Shadow Secretariat for their support. Ford will not waste any time to convince you of the need and the urgency to shore up our resilience, deterrence and defense. And indeed, we are required to both long term solutions, but also short term solutions to rapidly ramp up defense, innovation capacity and overall readiness. But from my perspective, to be very honest, the current commission proposal makes just a small a small or mini contribution if you want in the right direction. Yes, but it falls short of meeting the ambition level we would like to see. That doesn't mean that we shouldn't do this, but it's only the beginning. In line with Parliament's position on the White Paper on Defense Readiness 2030. We need to have more. And as I said, this is only the start. Since we are the opinion giving committee. I have tried to focus on proposals on defence instruments. In short, the draft opinion that I set out contains the following. Um. Main proposals. We have no proposed amendments to step in horizon in connecting Europe.”
  Defence spending
• “Minute for both the reports. Short term national interests, no matter the origin, are holding back the establishment of a European defence and nowhere more so than in the internal market for defence. Contrary to what some say here, this is an indispensable part of a genuine defence union. Of course we want all countries of Europe to flourish. But hidden covert protectionism is not the answer because of closed minds in the leadership of defense, primes and old cultures in national ministries of defense. Europe's internal market for defense does not take off these nationalistic approaches, abusing the concept of national security. Interest costs European taxpayers tens of billions of euros. It weakens innovation and competition, forces us to buy American products and spend our money inefficiently. And it costs lives, as Kramer said. For Europe to do better, we need the synergies of a single defense market with unified innovation, development and procurement. We need real binding action to enforce this defense internal market. Thank you.”
  EU competences on defence
• “Mr. president, and thanks to all colleagues for mostly constructive, supportive and encouraging remarks. And thanks to the Commissioner especially for his remarks. Extra remark on Saif. Because on defence and close cooperation and reinforcing our industrial base together we need to deliver and I hope with unleashing every possible creativity, we will still be able to make it. And thanks also to the support of some colleagues, Barry Andrews and others in this regard. We cannot afford to be hesitant. Many of you said that when it comes to foreign policy cooperation, our shared security and foreign policy interests are at stake, and we have to take common responsibility with those who fight for the same cause. And in this regard, I do want to commend also Prime Minister Starmer and the Commission for the efforts on the coalition of the willing for Ukraine, but also the UK's UK support in South East Europe, their active involvement, their supporting candidate countries on their path to the European Union. And this report, I think, shows in all elements and all themes that we have come far, that we are not there yet. It shows the road ahead, so let's keep moving in the right direction. Thank you very much to all.”
  EU-Ukraine relations
• “Thank you. Thank you very much, chair. And I also want to thank following colleague, our Commissioner, for being here today for presenting the outcome of the summit. And yesterday's summit in London marked a promising and convincing restart of the relationship with outcomes that are, personally speaking, even exceeded my expectations. So I want to commend the Commissioner, but also the British colleagues for their for embracing this positive, um, positive atmosphere that was looming already in the past months. I'm glad to see that both the UK and the EU realise that, especially in these difficult times, the challenges, the major challenges that we are facing, we can better tackle them together than apart. To me, as rapporteur, obviously the security and defence partnership stands out. It's an important step in the right direction, especially given the fact that no framework existed in the domain of foreign policy. So I'm very pleased with that. Glad to see also a shared commitment in the deepening of this cooperation in the elements that were specified, but also broader. I think it doesn't stop here. It will need we need we all feel the need to to continue and to deepen as soon as possible. Specialists in this domain, tackling the shadow fleet, supporting Ukraine, standing together as we were also in the past weeks. Um, in that, in that remit, um, the elements um, I will not repeat them.”
  EU-UK relations
• “And thank you. Thank you very much, chair. And thanks, first of all, to the rapporteur for a very good draft and also for all his work and his, um, conversations that he had in preparation of this. Um, yes. I agree with the colleague that the Macedonian people are exhausted and are longing for progress. Regrettable. It is that that the government and political forces in North Macedonia have not been able to come together, in particular on the interests of the Macedonian people. And the current government, of course, bears being in government a large responsibility for that. But it's not only on the Macedonians and and the progress that has not been made in the past year. Um, if I look at the Commission's report, I must say that maybe it is a little bit too positive. Uh, not in the sense that the right elements were not mentioned. And, uh, the progress has also been mentioned by the rapporteur is not in the report, but what's not in the report is the causes for the lack of progress on the side of the Macedonians, but also and that's my third point. The council, because the council bears a big responsibility for not providing a credible enlargement perspective in the interest first of, of uh, the, the country itself, but also of all of us in the European Union. We need to get progress on this and we need it soon. And the council should get moving on this. Finally. Um, yes. Uh, any kind of pursuing of narrow ethno nationalist interests of any kind is not good for North Macedonia. It's not good for for Europe. Um, we will work together on the report, and I look forward to a fruitful endeavor in this regard in the interest of North Macedonia and in the interest of the European Union. Thank you.”
  EU enlargement