Committee on Foreign Affairs Ordinary meeting ICM
Legend
Transcript markers
- text Sentence being played
- text Search result
- text Intervention cited by the link you opened
Click a sentence to play the video from that moment. Select text to quote it with the speaker, timestamp and link.
More options
Offset
Transcript offset
Export
Live capture
Versions of this video
Transcripts may differ slightly from one version to another.
AFET European Parliament
Follow its sittingsMathieu Bousquet
It's a real pleasure to participate today in this interparliamentary committee meeting on EU enlargement. I particularly welcome the opportunity to speak in one place with parliamentarians of the European Parliament, of current EU member states and the future EU member states, all of whom play a vital constitutional role in scrutinizing reforms and progress on the EU accession path, on holding governments to account for their positions on enlargement and ultimately in also ratifying the accession treaties that bring new members to our union. You also have a critical part to play in animating public discussions in your home countries on the future of the European Union and the geopolitical importance of enlargement.
This meeting comes, as the chair said, at a crucial moment for EU enlargement and for Europe more broadly. As geopolitical challenges continue to mount and the future looks even more uncertain, the EU and its neighbors alike need dependable and predictable partners with shared interests, shared values, and a shared stake in a common future. Yet this is not an abstract aspiration, it is a reality we are actively pursuing on both sides. 2026 has so far been a decisive year for EU integration of our enlargement partners.
Montenegro has provisionally closed additional negotiating chapters, bringing the total to 16. Crucially, work has also begun with EU member states to start drafting the accession treaty, making Montenegro's future membership a tangible reality. Last month, the Council confirmed that Albania has met the interim benchmarks on the rule of law, which is a precondition to begin provisionally to close chapters across all policy areas.
And on the 15th of June, the Council took the important step of opening negotiations on the first clusters, the so-called fundamentals, with Ukraine and Moldova, formally kicking off their accession negotiations. But I'd like to begin this morning by putting aside detailed, or some could call technocratic, discussion on acquis chapter, legislative alignment and intergovernmental conference, and focusing instead on the tangible impacts of EU enlargement for citizens and businesses. Because if we are to talk about seizing the momentum of EU enlargement, we must first be clear on why we are seeking to grow our Union. And here I see two central pillars in this respect. First, as the Chair said, EU enlargement is a geostrategic investment in our collective security and stability.
It is about building a stronger, safer and a more united Europe. At a time of growing geopolitical uncertainty, bringing our enlargement partners closer is in our clear strategic interest. Countries that share our values and aspirations belong in our European family. By supporting their path towards membership, we strengthen democracy, we reinforce peace, we create a wider area of stability and opportunity. Enlargement makes Europe more resilient, more influential and better equipped to protect the interests and the security of our citizens.
Second, EU accession is a transformative process for competitiveness, growth, and sustainability. Enlargement drives reforms, unlocks investment, and creates new opportunities for businesses, workers, and communities alike. It expands our common market, strengthens economic resilience, and helps ensure that Europe remains competitive in a rapidly changing global economy. By working together and raising standards across our continent, we can build a more innovative, dynamic, and sustainable Europe that delivers tangible benefits for citizens today and for future generations.
There is no higher duty for governments and parliaments alike in current member states and in future member states than ensuring the security and prosperity of their citizens. If we take EU enlargement to be a cornerstone of that security and prosperity, it follows that we have an historic responsibility to make enlargement a success for all. So how to seize this momentum for EU enlargement? First, we need to ensure that the accession process remains credible and merit-based. Progress should and does depend on objective delivery of reforms, and this is what has allowed us to move forward with the enlargement agenda so far.
Second, we need to ensure that enlargement is a whole-of-society project, a collective endeavor across all communities. Enlargement only succeeds when governments, business, civil society, local authorities, and citizens work together to drive and sustain the reforms needed. The European Parliament and national parliaments have a key role to play in this regard. As voices of the people, they ensure that citizens' views on and concerns about EU enlargement are heard. And as bridges to the people, they ensure transparency, accountability, and informed public debate on both the opportunities and responsibilities that enlargement brings.
This democratic exchange and open public discourse are key ingredients for successful EU enlargement. Third, the EU itself needs to get ready for the Union of 28 plus. This includes the preparation of a financial package for Montenegro as well as ongoing work on Montenegro's accession treaty. In parallel, the ongoing pre-enlargement policy reviews are assessing the impact on key institutions, policies and decision-making processes.
So beyond the institutional aspects, it also means putting our money where our mouth is with substantial financing that matches partners' ambitions and real progress, as the performance-based facilities we've put in place do, and bringing forward tangible gradual integration benefits as soon and as much as possible. On the former, the facilities are delivering, with the latest funds under the Reform and Growth Facility for the Western Balkans released just last month for Albania, Montenegro, and North Macedonia for a total of 674 million euros, against the proven delivery of 90 reform steps. Under the Reform and Growth Facility for Moldova, the total amount released stands at 503 million euros, against the proven delivery of 28 reform steps.
And regular payments under the Ukraine Facility have reached approximately 29.5 billion euros, again the proven delivery of 46 reform steps. On the latter, gradual integration, we are seizing the enlargement momentum to advance some of the benefits of accession prior to membership and smooth also the future transition from candidate country to member state. One key example is the Single Euro Payments Area, expected to lead to savings of 1 billion euro for consumers and businesses across the region.
On the 5th of May, Serbia became the fifth enlargement country to join SEPA's geographical scope, after Albania, Moldova, Montenegro and North Macedonia in 2023, extending these benefits further. Another is roaming and the abolition of roaming charges for mobile phone use abroad. The benefit was extended to Ukraine and Moldova on 1st of January this year, and the Commission is ready now to start negotiation with our Western Balkan partners as the Council has approved the negotiating mandate on the 4th of June.
But beyond SEPA and roaming, which are the most frequently used examples, a number of other measures are actively being explored. For example, the Single Market Highway initiative, the EU and our Western Balkan partners are engaging in industrial dialogue, advancing discussion on the famous ACAA agreement on conformity assessment and access assessment of industrial products, developing supply chain partnerships in strategic sectors, and establishing links between business communities. The Green Lanes initiative is facilitating cross-border trade between bordering countries and the EU, cutting trade cost, reducing friction, and paving the way for smooth market access as future Member States.
And at the cutting edge of digital connectivity, 18 European Digital Innovation Hubs are being established in the enlargement region, contributing to the digitalization of the public and the private sector and the development of AI expertise on terms similar to EU member states. In the end, the key to seizing the momentum of enlargement is recognizing that it is a shared responsibility. For the EU, in making all necessary financial, policy, and technical support available and presenting objective, merit-based assessments of enlargement partners' progress. And for candidate countries, in pulling out all the stops to implement high-quality reforms that align their politics, economies, and societies with EU norms and standards.
And for member states, in engaging in an honest public debate on the merits of enlargement to ensure that when all the work is done, we can cross the finishing line together. So I look forward to your questions and reflections about how we can achieve this shared endeavor together. Thank you very much.
Right, thank you, Mr. Busqué, for your introductory remarks. Colleagues, I can now give the floor to members from the national parliaments as well as the European Parliament. We will proceed on the basis of the received requests to speak on this topic, trying to alternate between MEPs and members of national parliaments.
Okay, so we start with Mr. Georg Georgiev from Bulgaria. Please.
Thank you so much, dear Chair.
Georg Georgiev
I would like first of all to express our appreciation upon this very important topic and that actually the European Parliament is raising it and is staying on the course of one of the most important issues nowadays before us, but literally the enlargement. Since the Bulgarian presidency of the Council in 2018, for us enlargement in direction the Western Balkans and after that of course with Ukraine and Moldova stays as a priority of our foreign policy, but not only we support it in every each form and dimension it has on the level of the European Union. So our country will continue to work in this direction.
Of course, we appreciate the very big efforts put by all of the candidate member states: Albania, Montenegro, Ukraine, Moldova, the Republic of North Macedonia, and of course, we are ready to share our knowledge and our experience, because it was not that far ago when we've been in their position as well. Now, in the light of the war in Ukraine and the Russian aggression, we appreciate even more how important enlargement is, and that our engagement is to give the perspective of the peoples of these countries what exactly the European Union means and what exactly is the effect of being member of the Union. Of course, we think that the merit-based principle should be acknowledged and should stay in place. The different countries are on different stages of their accession processes.
We appreciate that Montenegro is most probably the one which is the most advanced.
There are other countries which has to put some more efforts to execute the necessary conditions as is the case with our western neighbors, for example, which need to continue with their efforts on protection of human rights, of completing the, you know, memorandums and the negotiation frameworks out of the consensus in 2022, of course, and which are related with the different clusters, some of them, others with starting the accession process in general.
We think that the principle of all being in favor needs to be remained. The anonymity of the European Union member states to place the enlargement process should stay. And of course, in our perception of how this process needs to move forward is actually what the European expectations are. Yes, but then what the expectations of the peoples of the countries in the candidate member states is. So Bulgaria will continue to encourage, Bulgaria will continue to help.
We think that the second panel topic is as well very important, what is the role of the national parliaments. We are ready to continue with our support in this regard and of course to place the European Union as an important stakeholder in the process of giving security guarantees, guarantees for all the dimensions of nowadays in favor processes which we can provide. Thank you.
Grzegorz Schetyna
Hello. EU enlargement is of crucial geopolitical importance. That's true. In the face of Russia's aggressive policy and the growing global rivalry, Europe must be capable of acting jointly and decisively.
Ukraine, which is defending not only its sovereignty but also European values, deserves a clear and credible prospect of membership. Similarly, Moldova and the countries of the Western Balkans need a stable anchor within European structures. Leaving these countries outside the Union fosters a sense among their population they have been abandoned by the EU, fuels radical sentiments and opens the door to Russia, China and other states that harbor ill will towards the European Union. A divided Europe is a weak Europe. Therefore, enlargement is an investment in the security of the entire continent.
Secondly, the integration of new member states strengthens the single market and creates new investment opportunities. This is particularly important in the context of Ukrainian reconstruction, as the country has the potential to become a key component of the European economy. Thirdly, the European Union is above all a community of values. Countries aspiring to membership are undertaking difficult reforms because they believe in the European model of democracy, the rule of law and respect for human rights.
Denying them a realistic prospect of membership would undermine the Union's credibility as a partner and promoter of these values. The enlargement of the European Union is not a gesture of goodwill, but a strategic necessity. It is a positive development that we have managed to break the political deadlock and bring about the start of accession negotiations with Ukraine and Moldova, for which I would like to thank the Cypriot presidency also. This is a decision that will determine Europe's place in the world of the coming decades. Our role as politicians is to convince our societies that enlargement is not only possible but also necessary.
Let us not waste this opportunity now.
Thank you for your attention.
Thank you, Grzegorz, for your contribution. Next is MEP Marta Temido, please. And colleagues, may I ask you to kind of respect the two-minute rule, that would be fine.
Marta Temido
Thank you so much, Chair. I will respect the time. I will switch to Portuguese.
Depois de uma década de congelamento, o debate sobre o alargamento da União regressou à agenda política e traz-nos hoje também aqui. Como foi referido, há progressos tangíveis: início da preparação do tratado de adesão com o Montenegro, avaliação positiva do cumprimento de metas provisórias pela Albânia, abertura do capítulo sobre direitos fundamentais para a Ucrânia e a Moldávia. Mas também há sinais preocupantes: o alinhamento ou desalinhamento das políticas ambientais na Albânia, desrespeito pelas liberdades fundamentais na Sérvia.
Este é, portanto, um momento muito sensível para o qual temos de saber estar à altura. Para nós, socialistas e democratas, o alargamento não é só um instrumento político, é uma promessa de paz e prosperidade partilhadas que temos de saber honrar. Queremos responder às expectativas que criámos aos cidadãos dos países candidatos, mas também aos nossos próprios cidadãos. Para nós, a compreensão do atual contexto político é inafastável desta da corrente situação.
Mas temos que defender um processo de adesão absolutamente baseado no mérito. Não há possibilidade de comprometer os valores do Estado de Direito, da democracia, dos direitos humanos. Apenas os Estados democráticos virão reforçar a União Europeia. Os restantes virão fragilizá-la. E este tem de ser um critério válido para os países candidatos como para os países que são atualmente Estados-Membros.
Para nós, o alinhamento com a política externa de segurança da União Europeia é um tema fundamental, como é um tema fundamental oferecer a todos os países candidatos os mesmos critérios.
Nos últimos meses temos ouvido muito sobre propostas de novos processos de acelerar o alargamento. A questão que deixo é: precisamos desses processos ou precisamos de mais vontade política? O que tem a Comissão a esclarecer-nos sobre o corrente estado da reforma do institucional dos processos de alargamento que permita dar resposta a todas as expectativas destes países. Obrigada.
Thank you. Next is from the Hungarian National Assembly, Anett Pásztor.
Anett Pástor
First of all, thank you for having me here. It's a great honor to represent the new democratic Hungary and to be part of this conversation. Hungary has recently gone through a historic political change and after two years of campaign, a super intense campaign, I must say, we received a two-third majority of the Hungarian Parliament and we have the opportunity now to put Hungary into a totally new direction.
And for many years, Hungary was often seen as an obstacle in the European Parliament and we definitely would like to change that. And we are here because we believe that Hungary is a firmly part of Europe. Of course that doesn't mean that we're going to agree on everything. Of course we all here represent our country, our priorities, our interest, we have the own responsibilities, but I truly believe that we have to be able to discuss the disagreements respectfully and openly and find the best possible way to move forward.
We always stand up for Hungary's rights and interest and we do not see ourselves as an obstacle, we see as your partner. And we believe that Europe is the strongest if we work together and and when we work together we can achieve far more through cooperation than through confrontation and that is the Hungary I'm representing here today. So thank you so much for these few words.
Thank you.
Next is Mr. Louis-Jean de Nicolaÿ from the French Senate.
Louis-Jean de Nicolaÿ
Merci Monsieur le Président, mes chers collègues. Nous revenons avec mon collègue Mickaël Weber du Monténégro et d'Albanie où nous avons participé à une mission de la commission des affaires européennes du Sénat français. Nous avons pu constater sur place la dynamique forte de l'élargissement qui a été marquée par le sommet de Tivat. L'élargissement est présenté de longue date par la Commission européenne comme un investissement géostratégique. Il importe donc à cette fin d'inciter les différents États concernés à accélérer le rythme des réformes en vue de rejoindre prochainement l'Union européenne.
Vous le savez, la Commission européenne joue bien évidemment un rôle éminent, mais l'élargissement est d'abord et avant tout l'affaire des États. On le mesure d'ailleurs parfaitement s'agissant de l'ouverture de chapitres de négociation avec l'Ukraine, permise par la fin de l'opposition manifestée par la Hongrie. L'article 49 du traité de l'Union européenne stipule que les conditions de l'admission d'un nouvel État membre et les adaptations que cette admission entraîne font l'objet d'un accord entre les États membres et l'État demandeur, soumis à la ratification par tous les États contractants conformément à leurs règles constitutionnelles respectives.
S'agissant de la France, l'admission est soumise soit au référendum, soit au Congrès qui réunit les deux assemblées, le Parlement et le Sénat. Je tiens à souligner ce point car à la fin du processus, il reviendra au peuple français, directement ou par la voix de leurs représentants que nous sommes, d'approuver ou non l'adhésion d'un nouvel État membre. Or vous n'êtes pas sans savoir la grande sensibilité de ce dossier, qui est effectivement un dossier stratégique pour l'Union européenne, pour les valeurs que nous défendons, mais aussi pour la capacité à mener à bien les politiques publiques que nous défendons. Permettez-moi d'abord d'aborder ici l'un des critères les plus importants à nos yeux : la capacité d'absorption de l'Union européenne.
Cet aspect est trop souvent négligé. Comment fonctionner demain à 30, voire à 35, 36 ? Même en cas d'intégration graduelle, on ne peut pas aborder l'élargissement sans mettre aussi sur la table la question de la réforme du fonctionnement interne de l'Union, sinon nous en ressortirions collectivement affaiblis. Or, on a longtemps associé élargissement et approfondissement. Qu'en est-il aujourd'hui ?
Une politique me paraît essentielle à préserver, voire à développer dans le débat budgétaire actuel, compte tenu de la réforme des plans de partenariat nationaux et régionaux. C'est la politique de cohésion.
Je suis convaincu que celle-ci doit être réaffirmée, d'autant plus que les États candidats avancent sur le chemin vers l'adhésion, ce que nous souhaitons tous. Merci.
Thank you, sir. Next is for the European Parliament, Petras Auštrevičius.
Petras Auštrevičius
Thank you, David. Good morning to everybody, colleagues, ladies and gentlemen. Indeed, if we look at the EU enlargement history, we are already 53 years old, coming after Irish, British and then Danish accession in 73. Haven't we learned enough in 50 years history?
I think we did. And there are very few, probably, new discoveries which we might see on the way of enlargement, rather than to look back and to really assess all the pros and cons of the enlargement. But I see more pros rather than cons. Indeed, from my point of view, enlargement is rather home agenda of European Union, although we are discussing this issue in the Foreign Affairs Committee.
Why it's home? Because enlargement, it's about European security, economic development, cooperation, many things what nations once they are in EU are bound to do. And it's a great achievement. There is no better instrument of uniting Europe than the enlargement, and probably we should not look for any alternative. We should utilize enlargement instruments given and created at the best.
But, you know, enlargement is not just a technical process.
Enlargement is something what should be understood as indeed full unification and political different level of cooperation among European nations. And we have to look at the enlargement as very comprehensive as long-term durable project. Once assessing the enlargement many countries have joined after 73. And every country joining brought something good and new to the European Union. In opposite look the country which rejoined the European Union did so much of harm for itself and even for the European Union.
I mean the UK's Brexit case. So my point is joining is a privilege, rejoining is a failure. Thank you.
David McAllister
Right, thank you Petras. Colleagues, you were rather reluctant at the beginning to request the floor. In the meantime we've got so many requests, so with your understanding I will close the speaker's list for this first session. You still also have the time to speak at the second session, but we cannot accept more requests to take the floor. We now have a long list and from now on it will be two minutes maximum each.
Next is Stefan Olson from Sweden.
Speaker 13
Now Sweden strongly supports the enlargement of the European Union. We support it because we believe that every European democracy that fulfills the accession criteria should have the opportunity to join our union. Sweden did so 30 years ago and it has been a great value to us. But we also do this because for the geostrategic reasons. Russia's full-scale invasion of Ukraine has reminded us that peace in Europe cannot be taken for granted.
The Kremlin continues to pursue an aggressive and imperialist foreign policy. Its goal is not only to dominate Ukraine but to deny sovereign nations the right to choose their own future.
And this is not acceptable to us. Every country that is anchored in the European Union becomes more resilient and less vulnerable to Russian intimidation. Enlargement strengthens not only the candidate country, it strengthens Europe as a whole.
We recognize the work that Albania and Montenegro have done, and we believe that they are approaching the final stage of the path towards membership. But for Sweden, our primary focus is always on Ukraine and also on Moldova. And I know that I speak for the entire Swedish Parliament when I say that our most important priority today is to support Ukraine and in securing Ukrainian freedom and independence, because we believe that this is also in Sweden's security interests. So for Sweden, enlargement is not only about giving every European democracy a fair opportunity to join the Union. We see this as a vital security interest.
Thank you.
Thank you. Next is our friend Pavel Fischer from the Czech Republic.
Pavel Fischer
Thank you chair. Thank you very much for putting this important agenda of enlargement at the table today. EU enlargement remains the right strategic priority and membership is also a geopolitical investment in a Europe that is safe, stable and secure. But we must require of candidate states exactly what we require of ourselves.
It means that if Kaja Kallas recently has stated that China is training Russian fighters to wage war against Ukraine, it means that we have to draw attention and also conclusions from this. If that is true, and we have no reason to doubt it, China is no longer a competitor or a systemic rival. China is also a co-belligerent. And this changes everything. We have we face now two urgent tasks.
First, define a clear unified EU policy toward a regime that is actively working against us.
And also demand the same clarity from every single state seeking closer ties with the European Union. I mean not only which are on the list of membership but also those who want to cooperate with the EU. And this is probably the lessons learned from the slow response to Russia. We were still import record volumes of Russian LNG last year. We eventually reacted but late and unsufficiently.
We cannot repeat that mistake with China. A living organism defends itself when threatened.
And that is not optional, this is the very condition of survival. Enlargement yes, but only with partners who share not only our values but also our threat assessment. Thank you.
Thank you, Pavel. Next is for European Parliament Costas Mavrides.
Thank you, Chair.
Costas Mavrides
Listening to the discussion we had today, I would say that the most commonly used phrase, which I fully agree with, is that the EU enlargement is a strategic necessity. And I would add to that that it is a mutual necessity for EU to be more autonomous and for countries within Europe to become part of our family as long as they share our values. And as the negotiation, because we do need peace, democracy, security. As the negotiator myself on behalf of the S&D regarding Montenegro, I would testify that Montenegro is a good example, a good case of a candidate country that by all means has the full support of my group and also the support of the public opinion within Montenegro to join EU.
But we also have bad examples. And I will say one of that, because we are not here just to say nice words. Turkey.
Turkey has been a candidate country for many years, still occupies part of the Republic of Cyprus EU territory, follows a very aggressive neo-Ottoman policy in the Eastern Mediterranean and beyond, and is still, of course, we all know, I don't know if anyone wants to argue that today's Turkey is a democracy, I would be a big surprise, and still is in accession process. So in, and I will finalize with this, Mr. Chair, we need to give incentives to those countries that want to share our values and accept our rule of law, our commonly accepted rules. Those who do not should be out of this process. Thank you.
Dario Pušić
Thank you, Mr. President. I will speak in Croatian. Poštovane zastupnice i zastupnici, obraćam vam se kao zastupnik u Hrvatskom saboru koji predstavlja Hrvate izvan Republike Hrvatske, a dolazim iz Bosne i Hercegovine. Hrvati su temeljem Daytonskog mirovnog sporazuma konstitutivan narod Bosne i Hercegovine, međutim stvarnost je potpuno drugačija. Već 16 godina hrvatskom narodu u Predsjedništvu Bosne i Hercegovine sjedi čovjek kojega biraju Bošnjaci kao svog drugog predstavnika u Predsjedništvu.
To nije ni legitimno ni pravedno ni u skladu s temeljnim načelima Daytonskog mirovnog sporazuma.
Zato je izmjena Izbornog zakona u Bosni i Hercegovini nužna, a Hrvati, kao i svaki drugi konstitutivni narod, moraju imati pravo sami sebi birati svoje legitimne političke predstavnike. Jednako tako, Bosna i Hercegovina mora biti uređena na načelima federalizma, po uzoru na Belgiju i druge europske države koje su pokazale da se složena društva mogu urediti na pravedan, održiv i funkcionalan način. To nije samo interes Hrvata u Bosni i Hercegovini, to je i interes Europske unije.
Hrvatski politički predstavnici u Bosni i Hercegovini danas su najdosljednija proeuropska snaga i istinska lokomotiva europskog puta Bosne i Hercegovine. Kao Hrvat iz Bosne i Hercegovine jasno tvrdim, strateški interes hrvatskog naroda da Bosna i Hercegovina što prije otvori pregovaračka poglavlja s Europskom unijom. To je važno zbog gospodarskog razvoja, ali još više zbog stabilnosti, sigurnosti i mira u ovom dijelu Europe. Europa ne smije zatvarati oči pred političkom nepravdom prema jednom konstitutivnom narodu, vrijeme je za pravedno održivo rješenje za Bosnu i Hercegovinu. Hvala vam.
David McAllister
Hvala puno.
Thank you for your statement. Next speaker is Alessandro Giglio Vigna from Italy.
Alessandro Giglio Vigna
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I speak in Italian.
Alla Camera dei deputati in Italia la Commissione affari europei in questa legislatura sta portando avanti alcuni importanti lavori parlamentari per dare un contributo dal lato parlamentare sul tema dell'allargamento. In particolare stiamo discutendo di una risoluzione sull'allargamento ai Balcani orientali e stiamo analizzando un atto in fase ascendente, un atto dell'Unione europea.
Per la prima volta nella storia della della nostra Repubblica abbiamo ufficialmente udito i presidenti delle commissioni politiche, delle commissioni di integrazione all'Unione Europea in audizioni ufficiali del Parlamento italiano per andare a recepire quelle che sono le idee, le istanze e le loro proposte. E quindi le parole di questi nostri colleghi, alcuni dei quali sono presenti qua anche oggi, entreranno ufficialmente in un documento del Parlamento italiano.
Abbiamo poi svolto diverse missioni. Noi ci siamo resi conto dopo tutto questo lavoro che l'Unione Europea deve cambiare paradigma per quel che riguarda l'allargamento, deve porre le questioni tecniche, le questioni burocratiche in seconda fila rispetto al grande tema della geopolitica, perché in geopolitica il vuoto non esiste. Quindi se l'Unione Europea non farà dei progressi in questi paesi, evidentemente questi paesi, le loro popolazioni guarderanno da un'altra parte e quindi la politica ha bisogno di tornare centrale a fronte invece di tutta la aspetto burocratico.
È chiaro che l'Europa ha bisogno di andare verso un'autonomia strategica. Torno anch'io sul tema dell'indipendenza strategica dalla Cina. Ancora un piccolo passaggio importante per l'Italia: vi è anche l'accordo di associazione con San Marino e la Repubblica di Andorra.
Ovviamente per l'Italia è particolarmente importante l'accordo con San Marino. Grazie anche della tolleranza per i minuti, Presidente. Sa che noi che arriviamo dai paesi mediterranei abbiamo un po' di problemi a stare nei tempi europei.
David McAllister
Thank you. It's not my tolerance, it's the tolerance of your colleagues you're straining. Riho Terras is next.
Rihards Kols
Yes, thank you, Chair, and warm welcome, literally, to all colleagues from the national parliaments. On this topic, since we are right now in a time of FIFA 2026 World Cup, I think what matters also in enlargement process is the rules what has been applied for the potential member states.
And I think the problem is the credibility of EU when there is a process where some of the candidate countries are in a process of 20 years in negotiations and accessions. I see the big issue when the EU starts to debate on changing the rules on potentially future member states. I'm referencing here, I wanted to hear from the Commission, there has been reported that five member states have proposed introducing the temporary limited voting rights, stripping voting rights for future member states up to 10 to 15 years on issues such as budget, foreign policy.
Isn't that short-sighted and sending a totally opposite signal to candidate countries? I'm not only speaking on Eastern enlargement countries, I'm speaking on Iceland, they will have the referendum in August, Norway. And we're sending a message that we actually, when you join us, for another 10-15 years you will have no voting rights on a budget and other essentials. So this is about the credibility. And I would suggest throughout the accession process, of course everyone restated that everything has to be merit-based and it is and it has to be, there are clear established procedures.
But I would suggest that actually we should debate on introducing the qualified majority votes throughout the accession process for the clusters.
And final one decision to grant the full membership, yes, it's consensus. Not because why it's needed to avoid the political gridlock when there is nothing related to the clusters open for negotiating with the candidate countries, there are EU member states for whatever political reasons are sabotaging the process of the accession. Thank you.
Željana Zovko
All right, thank you very much and thank you for organizing this necessary exchange of views with national parliaments on the most important subject that is concerning the peace and security for our citizens, especially those ones who are bordering the countries that are at stake. And as we have heard from our Cypriot colleague, some colleagues have different threats coming from different geographic position in which they are.
We spoke about Montenegro for Western Balkan and Eastern Partnership, now the countries that are very prone to be the first one on the line. But the one that we are really neglecting is Bosnia and Herzegovina. And we just heard the appeal for this unjust change of electoral law many years ago that Croats have almost disappeared from Bosnia and Herzegovina and they don't have a right for legitimate representation. So we are leaving open the wounds that are going to be explosive in times to come and no one really has deep discussion within the national parliaments. Where did we go wrong in our peace building and searching for peace and stability in these countries?
So I would like just to appeal for all of you, Bosnia and Herzegovina is the example where we can go wrong in building post-conflict society and also preparing candidate countries for further enlargement. If we have these lessons and if we come to the right conclusions, maybe we will not have a blockage and we will not need this qualified majority or unanimous vote discussion that we have heard from our French colleagues.
Because some most of the time we are just reading the speeches without really looking into lessons learned and that's that's that's something of of my concern here in the Parliament. Thank you.
Thank you. Next is Paulo Edson Carvalho Borges da Cunha from Portugal.
Speaker 24
Muito obrigado, senhor presidente. Falarei também em português, caros colegas. O alargamento da União Europeia regressou ao centro da nossa agenda estratégica. Mas sejamos claros. Alargar a nossa União Europeia não é apenas nem pode ser apenas um gesto de solidariedade geográfica, nem um processo meramente técnico em que os países se limitam a cumprir requisitos.
Tem de ser um imperativo de sobrevivência e de afirmação geoestratégica e política. O mundo mudou. À nossa porta enfrentamos uma Rússia agressiva e imperialista que ameaça a paz e a soberania do nosso continente. Ao mesmo tempo, cruzamos os braços perante uma realidade de um abandono estratégico gradual por parte dos Estados Unidos, para além do papel dúbio da China, o que nos deve obrigar a redefinir as nossas prioridades globais. A mensagem tem de ser clara.
O futuro da Europa depende mais do que nunca da própria Europa. Alargar a União Europeia é fortalecer a União e não apenas acolher novos membros. Significa transformar a Europa, reformar, investir, reforçar e torná-la mais forte.
Só assim fará sentido. Não podemos cometer o erro de crescer em tamanho e paralisar em eficácia. Este é o momento exato para termos a coragem de mudar as regras internas que há anos nos bloqueiam. Regras de veto e processos de decisão obsoletos que nos tornam lentos num mundo que exige respostas imediatas. Saibamos dar este passo.
Muito obrigado.
David McAllister
Obrigado, dear colleague. Next is Mr. Felix Claus from the Netherlands.
Felix Claus
Thank you, Chair, and thank you for the opportunity to be here.
I really sense that this is a historic responsibility that we all have coming from national parliaments to make Europe whole and free in this generation. And I'm glad to be a part of it in this room today. I would like to bring some notes from the new Dutch government and the new Dutch House of Representatives, which has always been strict, fair, and engaged, but now is also applying the principle and the perspective of geostrategy in terms of enlargement. And we think now that size matters and security matters too.
So we want to speed up enlargement by introducing gradual accession. And my question to the European Commission is, how does the Commission respond to the proposals put forward by France and Germany, by countries like Slovenia, Austria, Italy, in order to introduce gradual accession? And then also, I think we cannot separate EU enlargement with EU reform. So in June 2024, the Council asked the European Commission to put forward proposals to review policy and to reform the EU, to abolish, as we see it in the Netherlands, vetoes on a lot of projects, but mostly on foreign affairs. So when is the Commission putting forward these proposals?
Because if we want an enlarged European Union to work, we want it to work well. Thank you.
Thank you. Next is MEP Helmut Brandstätter.
Helmut Brandstätter
Thank you, David. Dear colleagues, great that you are all here. I want to start with a quote from Thomas Jefferson, the third president of the United States. He said, when it left to me to decide whether we should have a government without newspapers or newspapers without a government, I should not hesitate a moment to prefer the latter.
So of course we need governments, but we need strong independent media. And I can tell you, I did visits in different countries of the enlargement countries and the situation is not as I think it should be. And very openly, it's not perfect in Austria either or in other countries. There are a lot of mistakes in Austria I could explain, I've been a journalist for a long time, I could explain it to you. But I think it's really necessary.
And recently we had colleagues from Serbia here and from the, it was very strange because from the, from the ruling party they did complain how bad the newspapers are to them. Of course we know that most of the newspapers and the media in Serbia are under the control of President Vučić. And in other countries it's also difficult.
So my proposal was very simple. I said, okay, we'll be in Serbia, in Belgrade, in September or October. Let's sit together with the media, with the NGOs, with a university and let's discuss the situation, you know, government, opposition. And I would propose that for other, all the other countries as well. I think a very normal, good, liberal, transparent media landscape is really essential for every country that is part of the European Union.
And I really also would ask the Commission to look more intensively as far as that is concerned and also start discussion with the different governments.
If it's merit-based, of course, it is very important, free media. And one more thing, yesterday we had the EUDS, European Democracy Shield. There is a lot of disinformation all over, especially also on the on the Balkan countries. Please read it, it will be on Monday, it will be online. In September we'll discuss it.
Democracy Shield against disinformation is very important for all of us. Thank you.
Thank you, Helmut. Next is Peter Kalivoda from Slovakia.
Peter Kalivoda
Ďakujem pekne, pán predsedajúci.
Vážený pán predsedajúci, vážené kolegyne, vážení kolegovia. Rozširovanie Európskej únie dnes nie je len téma bruselských úradníkov. Je to otázka bezpečnosti, stability a budúcnosti celej Európy. Slovenská republika rozširovanie podporuje. Chceme, aby krajiny, ktoré patria do európskeho priestoru, mali jasnú európsku perspektívu.
Vidíme významný pokrok u krajín západného Balkánu, ktoré už dlhé roky plnia reformy, prijímajú ťažké rozhodnutia a pripravujú sa na členstvo. Vítam aj posun pri Ukrajine a Moldavsku. Ale musíme byť féroví.
Žiadna kandidátska krajina nemá dostať preferenčný prístup len preto, že je dnes politicky viditeľná. Ak by niektorá z menej pripravených kandidátskych krajín predbehla tie, ktoré si roky plnia svoje domáce úlohy, bol by to mimoriadne negatívny signál. Ešte dôležitejšou otázkou je, čo by to znamenalo pre samotnú Európsku úniu, keby prijala za svoju členskú krajinu takú krajinu, ktorá na to členstvo ešte nie je plne pripravená. To by nebol problém na jeden rok. To by bol problém na celé desaťročia.
Preto Slovensko podporuje rozširovanie Európskej únie na základe európskeho práva, princípu zásluhovosti. Pravidlá EÚ jasne hovoria, že každý kandidát musí splniť podmienky, aby postupoval v prístupových rokovaniach. Ak ich nesplní, musí pokračovať v reformách. A tak je to správne. Aj aktuálna debata na úrovni ministrov a premiérov ukazuje, že viaceré členské štáty už sami vidia riziká príliš rýchleho rozšírenia.
Doteraz sa mnohí schovávali za blokovanie prístupových rokovaní zo strany Maďarska a teraz, keď sa priestor uvoľňuje, každý musí povedať otvorene to, čo si myslí. Slovensko pozíciu na rozdiel od iných nemení. Od začiatku sme za rozšírenie, ale za férové, rozumné, zodpovedné rozšírenie, ktoré posilní Európsku úniu a nie také, ktoré jej prinesie nové problémy. Ďakujem.
Thank you. Next is Mr. Pepe Mercadal from Spain. Mercadal.
Josep « Pepe » Mercadal Baquero
Thank you, chair. Well, in Spain, I wanted to say that the public opinion is favorable to, mostly favorable to EU enlargement, even in parliament where Spanish politics, you know, right now is very polarized.
We managed to get majorities in favor of motions asking for EU enlargement, particularly on Ukraine enlargement. So, I think that's a, that's an issue that it's cross-party and, and the main parties maintain the, the support. The current government has also shown and proved to push for enlargement.
I want to remember that it was under the Spanish presidency that the leaders agreed to start to kick off official negotiations for the Ukraine access. And I want to add on the on the or join some colleagues that have have said that well enlargement can't be has to be also thought together with the with EU reform, no? I want well I want to say that I I am in favor of that as well, mainly erase veto veto power. But I also want to to to say that EU access is not only interest-based. Of course it's in our interest, but it's also always has been principle-based, no?
And we are asking candidate countries to reform, to respect human rights, and we have to lead by example. And well, I have to regret that this Parliament passed the return regulation, which is against human rights. I don't think that's a good example, sending migrants to detention centers to third countries, sometimes maybe to candidate countries. That's a lack of respect for human rights and a lack of respect also for candidate countries.
Thank you. Next is Mr. Brown for the European Parliament.
Grzegorz Braun
A short message to those who aspire to become EU members: don't do it. Defend your independence. The European Union is not about free trade, it's about attacking your businesses with Green Deal. It's about attacking your nations with migration pact. It is not about freedom of speech, it's about censorship.
And it is not about peace and stability, it's about permanent conflict inside and outside.
It's about warmongering. It's about supporting and promoting the Kiev regime, which is supporting and promoting the Ukrainian Nazi Banderist traditions.
Hundreds of thousands, hundreds of thousands of murdered Polish, by the way, also Jewish people, never buried decently in a civilized way. And the Kiev regime is giving the names of genocidal, genocidal Banderist heroes to their schools, their streets, and different public facilities. So this is the truth about the European Union. Beware, the Euro-Soviet, Euro-Nazi structure that is pretending, that is pretending, that is about peace and prosperity is about, is about putting an end to your national traditions. Beware.
David McAllister
Time is up, Mr. Brown. You know, all members of the national parliaments and the European Parliament this morning here were able to express their views without offending others. And it's so unfortunate.
David McAllister
So anyhow, you experienced Mr. Brown, he needs this kind of attention. And now we will give the floor to Mr. Slobodan Zečević from Serbia.
Slobodan Zečević
Mr. McAllister, ladies and gentlemen, thank you for the opportunity to address AFET.
I will speak briefly about my country, Serbia. After years of cultivating stabilocracy, it is good to finally see a realistic report on our government's performance in meeting EU accession standards. However, I would like to focus on prospects for improvement. Unfortunately, we in pro-EU opposition parties do not trust that the Serbian government has a genuine intention to make progress. I refer specifically to very recent changes to a package of judicial laws that were reviewed by the Venice Commission and are currently before parliament.
I draw your attention to the fact that the ruling regime sent one version of the draft laws to the Venice Commission while submitting a different version to parliament. Please do not be misled by claims that the differences are only in transitional and final provisions. A highly respected lawyer has stated that by failing to resolve the aftermath of the previously contested legislation, these sneaky provisions obstruct the reinstatement of temporarily assigned prosecutors. This means the commission was effectively bypassed and deprived of the opportunity to evaluate what will happen to the prosecutors already affected by these laws.
The consequences may last for years. It may sound unbelievable that a government would act this way, but this is the sad reality in which we are fighting for European values and standards in Serbia. Moreover, these measures are already being politically instrumentalized in the ruling regime's campaign for the next elections, which has begun with increased pressure of police and high public prosecutor on NGOs and opposition leaders and with intimidation of citizens. Thank you.
Adrian Balutel
Dear chair, dear colleagues, thank you for the attention to the matter of enlargement. Indeed, for us, this is a crucial topic right now. I want to praise the European Union, the Council, the Commission, the Parliament, but most important, the member states, the ones that are present here, I hope, for the effort that has been made to open the negotiations for the first cluster for Moldova and Ukraine. That's a huge achievement for us, that's an important milestone that was reached with great effort and we are grateful for this.
For Moldova, seizing the momentum on enlargement is not just a slogan. It's a profound political commitment we took in front of the citizens to deliver on EU reforms, to deliver on EU agenda fast, to align with EU acquis, to deliver on economic growth using EU toolbox, to ensure as many sectoral integration opportunities as possible and what's most important to ensure Moldova democracy and sovereignty is safeguarded from Russia, Russia's hybrid attacks and that's only possible through European integration.
In this regard, we reaffirm our commitment for merit-based approach of integration, and all what we ask for is a continuous support to open all clusters of negotiation by the end of this year and to give us the opportunity to prove yet again that we can deliver on the deadline. That's the only ask that we have, and the biggest commitment we take is that we can deliver on the reform agenda.
We see European integration as a profound transformative process of the country, of the communities, and we are proud to walk this walk. Last but not least, just want to say that beside our integration ambition, one thing that can help us all is supporting Ukraine on their accession path that we know it's complicated, but their resistance is heroic and we will be standing by their side as we did by now. Thank you.
Thank you. Next is Mr. Jovan Subotić from Montenegro.
Jovan Subotić
Thank you, Chair.
Dear colleagues, here to send positive messages also from Montenegro, not only hearing good things about my country. I look at this subject seizing the momentum from both sides, two sides. One from Montenegro, which is enthusiastic, proud, excited, hardworking people going looking forward to its European future and more concretely dedicated, reformed, committed Montenegro Parliament and government that's completely and fully aligned with the common foreign and security policy. I see it as a country that already its population feels concrete benefits of the future membership and I really see it as the only future for us.
But I also see seizing the momentum on the EU side to feed on the enthusiasm of the all candidate countries present here and on the fact that the enlargement is again high on the agenda as it is essential for many reasons, namely security, peace and the promotion of the European values. And I truly believe that the EU values represent the best chance not only for future of Europe but also for the future of the world, we can say.
All in all, seizing the momentum between Montenegro and between European Union and between all the candidate countries and the European Union means enjoying the accession process with all of its highs and lows and embracing the concepts of compromise and mutual cooperation to promote the merit-based process and to demonstrate that we could be a great and trustworthy partner. So, hard work in Montenegro continues. Hundreds of laws adopted only this year. No vacation, looking forward to 2026, closing all the chapters by 2026 and hopefully ratifying our contract during the next year. Thank you so much for your attention.
Thank you. Next is Mr. Tomasz Grodzki from the Polish Senate.
Tomasz Grodzki
Thank you, Chair.
Ladies and gentlemen, Europe currently faces a historic choice, whether it wishes to be just an observer of the changing world or an active leader that actively shapes a secure future. At a time when the post-war architecture of security and peace has been brutally rejected by Russia, the enlargement is one of the most crucial answers to it. The accession of Ukraine, Moldova, and Western Balkans is a strategic necessity and an investment in our common security. History teaches us that a geopolitical vacuum in Europe is usually fulfilled by somebody.
Countries aspiring to join the EU are particularly vulnerable to the advances of authoritarian regimes hostile to European democracy, the rule of law, and the European way of life. The enlargement is the only way to permanently drive these hostile influences out of Europe. Of course, the enlargement process is neither short nor easy. Poland's path to the European Union took over a decade. It requires responsibility and the fulfillment of clearly defined criteria by the new member states.
However, technical challenges must not obscure our strategic goal. The enlargement of the EU is therefore not a costly charitable project, but one of the most cost-effective investments we can make today in the interest of our citizens and taxpayers. Ladies and gentlemen, we now have the opportunity to repeat the success of the great enlargement of 2004, which made Europe stronger, more stable and wealthier. Today is a time to complete this work. Let us choose courage over fear.
Let us choose unity over division. Thank you.
Thank you, dear Mr. Szrot.
Next is Mr. Andro Krstulović Opara from Croatia.
Andro Krstulović Opara
Thank you, David. I will speak in Croatian. So. Hrvatski strateški interes je potpuna integracija zemalja Zapadnog Balkana u Europsku uniju. Nema nikog zainteresiranijeg od Hrvatske, i to zbog toga što je naša vanjska granica 1350 kilometara, naša zajednička granica, duža nego rusko-finska granica.
Možete zamisliti koliki su to izazovi za ilegalne migracije.
I upravo zbog toga želimo u našem susjedstvu imati zemlje koje su zadovoljne, prosperitetne i mirne, prije svega stabilne. Od mog rodnog grada Splita granica je 30 kilometara. Hrvatska živi od turizma i svaka nestabilnost će poremetiti tu važnu granu gospodarstva kod nas. Integracijom Bosne i Hercegovine, Crne Gore, Albanije suzbija se isto tako maligni utjecaj Rusije, nažalost i Srbije, ali i veliki utjecaj Kine na te zemlje.
Čuli smo već ovdje, a i jučer je i Vijeće Europe donijelo vrlo jaku i snažnu deklaraciju da je Srbija posebni problem za samu sebe i sa svojom voljom stoji u mjestu i guši demokratske procese i izvozi nestabilnost u susjedstvo. I ti maligni utjecaji u Bosni i Hercegovini su zapravo paralizirali proces otvaranja pregovora jer dva naroda, Bošnjaci i Srbi, blokiraju imenovanje glavnog pregovarača za pristupanje Europskoj uniji i to tako već četiri godine.
Ruski svijet i srpska inačica, srpski svijet, taj imperijalistički koncept imaju svoje protagoniste u vlastima brojnih zemalja, pa tako nažalost i u Crnoj Gori, koja od te zemlje želi napraviti balkansku Bjelorusiju, unatoč velikim uspjesima Crne Gore na njezinom putu u Europsku uniju, u kojoj se mi itekako veselimo, kojega podupiremo. I zbog toga odlučnost našeg načela potpore proeuropskim snagama u tim zemljama i pristupanju temeljenim na zaslugama mora ostati u našem fokusu. To je ono što sam htio kazati, kasnije ćemo nastaviti dalje. Hvala vam lijepa.
Roberto Menia
Thanks chair. I prefer to speak Italian. E parlando italiano parto con una citazione latina: "mala tempora currunt", direbbero i latini. I tempi che corriamo son terribili. Non pensavamo che accadesse così.
Da quattro anni ci ritroviamo una guerra in casa, in Europa, quella tra Russia e Ucraina. Le vicende di queste settimane stanno ponendo spesso agli osservatori il nostro ruolo, il ruolo degli europei, quando si parla della presunta ininfluenza dell'Unione Europea. Questo che cosa ci dice? Ci dice che la storia corre, a differenza di quello che ci spiegava Fukuyama, non si è mai fermata. E quando la storia corre bisogna anche accelerare le decisioni, essere più rapidi, essere più svelti.
Quindi processo di adesione. Noi dobbiamo favorire il processo di adesione, com'è ovvio, dobbiamo essere più veloci anche in questo, anche perché i soggetti che ci provano e che ci guardano e ci vogliono entrare non possono avere risposte in un decennio o peggio, anche perché gli attori che vengono da fuori convincono che è sbagliata la scelta europea. Noi invece siamo condannati, ma tutti noi da europei siamo condannati ad un percorso obbligato. E dico condannati pur sbagliando termine. Noi non possiamo che credere in una grande Unione Europea.
Quando cade il muro di Berlino noi parlavamo di riunificazione e oggi parliamo di allargamento. Noi non allarghiamo nulla geograficamente perché già siamo. Noi dobbiamo dare all'Europa più speranza, più sogni, dobbiamo dare all'Europa risposte ed in tempo reale.
Quindi sì al processo di... Io sono felice, da italiano non posso che rallegrarmi per i progressi del Montenegro, di quello che succede nei Balcani occidentali che ho dall'altra parte dell'Adriatico e così per la Moldova e così per l'Ucraina. Dopodiché dobbiamo dare risposte però in tempo reale, quindi accelerazione sia dei processi di adesione sia dei processi decisionali nelle scelte europee. Ovviamente nel rispetto dei nostri valori che ci fanno europei e ci fanno democratici. Ma dobbiamo credere anche in un processo di crescita che sia poi non solo tecnico, industriale o commerciale di mercati, ma anche di uomini, anche di sogni.
L'Europa ha bisogno di identità e anche di entità.
Noi dovremmo promuovere, sono convinto, per esempio anche una grande rinascita demografica della stessa Europa. Dobbiamo crederci e poi dobbiamo porci come giusto e come logico in questi tempi anche il tema della difesa europea che non può che essere una difesa comune che ci fa soggetti e soggetti che contano. Grazie.
Speaker 40
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Greece fully recognizes the current geopolitical imperative and the need for the EU to respond decisively in a rapidly evolving environment. However, enlargement should remain a long-term transformative and credible investment in peace, stability and prosperity.
Our position is clear: safeguard the integrity of enlargement by preserving its intergovernmental nature and established methodology. Gradual integration must remain clearly distinct from enlargement. It must safeguard the single market and ensure a level playing field among candidates and member states. The status and prerogatives of member states must be fully preserved, especially their exclusive role in decision-making and decision-shaping within the Council, notably the CFSP.
We welcome the opening of the first negotiation cluster for Ukraine and Moldova, which serves as a timely reminder that the geopolitical push for eastward enlargement should not leave the Western Balkans behind. Greece, consistent with the Thessaloniki Agenda of 2003, will actively support the enlargement path of the Western Balkans region, including the views of its EU Council Presidency in 2027, on the basis of already announced initiatives aimed at advancing reforms, resilience, and strengthening public support for their EU accession.
The EU should enhance its role both as a security provider and as a facilitator of dialogue and mediation, given the region's proneness to spillover effects. Our actions should aim mainly at fostering good neighborly relations and reconciliation, while at the same time we should encourage strong local ownership and promote regional cooperation initiatives. We highlight the importance of the effective implementation of the Growth Plan for the Western Balkans, a key instrument for advancing integration of the region with the EU and fostering economic governance between the Western Balkans and EU member states.
The effective implementation of the common regional market action plan will significantly contribute to the region's economic integration and bring them closer to the EU. Thank you.
Thank you. From Romania, the next speaker is Mr. George-Cătălin Boștinăru.
George-Cătălin Boștinăru
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Dear colleagues, Russia's war of aggression against Ukraine has reconfirmed how important it is to advance the enlargement process. In Romania, we consider enlargement a geostrategic investment in peace, security, and prosperity. This is a vision that we have consistently advocated for. We support a clear, transparent, and rigorous enlargement process, both in the Western Balkans and with our eastern neighbors.
This process must remain merit-based, grounded in reforms and in the fulfillment of accession criteria. And we believe we have both the responsibility and the momentum at this time to move forward in this direction. As we are on the heels of the EU-Republic of Moldova summit, I will state that Moldova has shown remarkable resilience in the face of external pressure, hybrid attacks, and attempts to undermine its democratic institutions.
We welcome, therefore, the historic developments that allowed the opening of negotiations on cluster one with both Ukraine and the Republic of Moldova. We hope this important milestone will soon be followed by the opening of all remaining cluster negotiating clusters, and we remain fully committed at parliamentary level to supporting the European perspective of both Ukraine and the Republic of Moldova. We also welcome the progress made by Montenegro and Albania and hope to see both countries advance further this year.
So Romania believes that we have momentum and we must preserve this momentum through firm political will and a clear commitment to the objective of the larger and stronger European Union. Thank you.
Thank you. We come to our five final speakers for this first session and then we will have the response the answers from Mr. Busquets, the coffee break and then we continue with the second round. So the next five speakers are first Mr. Motuzas from Lithuania.
Remigijus Motuzas
Thank you Mr. Chair, colleagues. Lithuania strongly supports the EU membership aspirations of all candidate countries. Enlargement is no longer only about the future of candidate countries.
It is increasingly about the future security and resilience of the EU itself. We are currently at a critical moment. The momentum in the enlargement process must be maintained and translated into tangible progress. Advancing accession negotiations, particularly with Ukraine and Moldova, is essential to sustain reforms and strengthen the credibility of the process. The main objective is Ukraine's full-fledged membership in the European Union as a fundamental security guarantee not only for Ukraine, but also for Europe as a whole.
There is no alternative to Ukraine's European path.
Our security depends on it. At the same time, enlargement must remain credible, predictable, and strictly merit-based. The same standard should apply to all candidates, and the process should not be held back by unrelated bilateral issues. Looking ahead, Lithuania made EU enlargement one of the key priorities of its presidency in the Council of European Union 2027.
We see enlargement as a strategic investment in Europe's long-term security, resilience, and geopolitical strength. In this sense, enlargement is not about widening the Union, it is about strengthening it. Thank you.
Thank you, next is Mr. Michael Weber from France.
Michaël Weber
Merci Monsieur le Président, chers collègues. Il nous a paru lors de notre récente mission au Monténégro et en Albanie que l'attente était très forte à l'égard de l'élargissement. Nous avons pu constater sur place que ces pays avancent bien sur de nombreux chapitres.
Néanmoins, il nous faut être lucide sur le chemin qui reste à parcourir dans le contexte international de plus en plus incertain et le contexte budgétaire de plus en plus contraint que nous connaissons. Permettez-moi d'insister ce matin sur deux points. Le premier est essentiel : nous ne devons pas transiger sur le respect des critères de Copenhague, même dans l'optique d'une intégration graduelle par étapes défendue désormais par les autorités de plusieurs États membres. L'élargissement doit être fondé sur le mérite. Tout élargissement qui s'écarterait de cette voie risquerait à mes yeux de plonger l'Union dans de graves difficultés.
Les enjeux relatifs à l'État de droit et aux influences étrangères, contrairement à ce qui a été dit tout à l'heure par Monsieur Brown, ne sont pas minces dans plusieurs pays candidats. On ne peut pas non plus ignorer l'enjeu spécifique de sécurité lorsqu'on évoque la situation de l'Ukraine, mais aussi de la Moldavie avec le conflit gelé en Transnistrie. Le second point, c'est que la Commission européenne ne doit pas procéder avec l'élargissement comme elle l'a fait par le passé, c'est-à-dire lancer des dates avec des motifs de pure communication politique, mais qui ne seraient pas respectées. On peut se réjouir que la nouvelle méthodologie de l'élargissement proposée il y a quelques années par la France ait effectivement débouché sur un processus plus politique.
À cet égard, il me paraît important de conserver à l'égard de l'ensemble des pays candidats une ligne stricte en matière de respect du premier des critères de Copenhague, celui de l'État de droit. C'est là un critère déterminant en matière de démocratie, de lutte contre la corruption en particulier qui entraîne tout le reste en matière économique ou de capacité administrative notamment. Je vous remercie.
Thank you. Next is Mr. Ivica Mesic. Molim.
Ivica Mesic
Poštovani predsjedavajući, kolegice i kolege zastupnici, nadovezat ću se na govor kolege Krstulovića Opare.
Bosna i Hercegovina nema većeg zagovornika od Republike Hrvatske. To je hrvatska Vlada jasno pokazala svojom podrškom ključnom za Bosnu i Hercegovinu i kod dobivanja statusa kandidata 2022. i kod otvaranja pregovora o pristupanju Europskoj uniji 2024. godine. Dijelimo najdužu granicu, geopolitički i povijesno smo upućeni jedni na druge. Europski put očito vodi preko Republike Hrvatske. Hrvati u Bosni i Hercegovini kao jedan od tri konstitutivna naroda imaju najveći motiv da Bosna i Hercegovina postane stabilna i prosperitetna država unutar Europske unije.
Izražavam žaljenje zbog očiglednog zastoja Bosne i Hercegovine u pristupnim pregovorima, ne samo zbog kašnjenja u donošenju reformske agende i gubitka stotina milijuna eura, nego i zbog nemogućnosti provođenja potrebnih reformi, zbog narušenog međusobnog povjerenja i unutarnjeg konsenzusa. Moram ovdje i danas upozoriti da određeni krugovi unutar Europske unije pokušavaju nametnuti protuustavnu i protudaytonsku agendu u Bosni i Hercegovini kao građanske države u kojoj se tolerira izborni inženjering kojim je Hrvatima u četiri navrata nametnut predstavnik u Predsjedništvu Bosne i Hercegovine glasovima drugog, brojnijeg naroda. Neki takvu protuustavnu manipulaciju pokušavaju lažnim narativom predstaviti kao europski standard.
Takva agenda u izravnoj je suprotnosti s međunarodnim obvezama koje imaju prema Bosni i Hercegovini svi garanti i potpisnici i Washingtonskog i Dejtonskog sporazuma, među njima i Republika Hrvatska. Europska unija ne smije biti platforma za protuustavno djelovanje i subverziju sporazuma čiji su garanti države Europske unije i Sjedinjene Američke Države. To naglašavam upravo ovdje u Bruxellesu jer neki pokušavaju proglasiti neeuropskim od nas predložen model neteritorijalne izborne jedinice koji funkcionira u samom centru Europe, baš ovdje u Bruxellesu. Kao rješenje zagovaramo primjenu upravo tog bruxelleskog modela neteritorijalne izborne jedinice temeljenog na provjerenoj europskoj praksi.
Bruxelles je najbolji primjer kako se sustavno čuva identitet i prava malobrojnijih zajednica. I ne samo to, takav model neteritorijalne izborne jedinice desetljećima odlično funkcionira u Bosni i Hercegovini, što se krije od europske javnosti, pa to ponavljamo ovdje u Europskom parlamentu da svi čuju. Brčko distrikt u Bosni i Hercegovini već više od 20 godina uspješno koristi ovaj model neteritorijalne izborne jedinice koji su implementirali u BiH zajedno predstavnici SAD-a i Europske unije. Hvala.
Speaker 45
Thank you, Mr. Chair. I will speak in Bulgarian.
България последователно е сред най-силните поддръжници на разширяването на Европейския съюз. Ние много добре разбираме от собствен опит стабилизиращата и трансформираща сила на европейската перспектива. Днес Европейският съюз, но и държавите кандидатки имат отговорността да се възползват от създалата се динамика. Това трябва да се случи по начин, който увеличава доверието в процеса на разширяване. Напълно отчитаме геополитическата наложителност.
Разширяването днес е по-важно от всякога за сигурността, стабилността и стратегическата сила на Европа. Но геополитическите аргументи не могат да заместят реалната нужда от реформи, политическата воля и изпълнението на критериите за членство.
Подходът, основан на собствените заслуги, трябва да остане в основата на процеса. Един разширен Европейски съюз ще бъде силен и единен само ако всички страни кандидатки изпълнят същите стандарти и условия, които са изпълнявали и предишните кандидатки. В тази връзка приветстваме усилията за напредък и политическия ангажимент на страните кандидатки. Те показват, че когато има реални усилия за реформи, Европейският съюз отговаря с ясна и осезаема подкрепа. В същото време трябва да бъдем откровени.
Напредъкът на отделните страни кандидатки остава неравномерен. Европейският съюз инвестира значителни политически и финансови ресурси в подкрепа на реформите. Сега от нашите партньори зависи да използват пълноценно тази подкрепа и да покажат отговорност, последователност и истинска политическа воля. Накрая, България смята, че единодушието на всички етапи от процеса на разширяване трябва да бъде запазено.
Разширяването не е чисто техническо и процедурно упражнение. Това е преди всичко политически процес и той изисква доверие между държавите членки и страните кандидатки и трябва да се ползва с обществена подкрепа в нашите общества. Thank you.
Speaker 46
Thank you, and the last speaker for this first session is Mr. Branislav Josifović from Serbia.
Branislav Josifović
Thank you. Already in 2021, Serbia has fulfilled all of the technical conditions needed for opening of the cluster 3.
In the last five annual progress reports on Serbia, the European Commission has called on the EU member states to approve opening of this cluster to Serbia. In an effort to continue its EU integration efforts, Serbia has agreed to implement additional reforms prior to opening this cluster to prove its commitment to EU path, namely media environment, changes to the set of media laws and formation of the new council of the regulatory body for electronic media. A set of media laws has been adopted in June 2025. It consists of the law on electronic media, law on public media broadcaster and the law on public information and media. The second, implementation of ODIHR recommendations.
The most complex recommendation was addressed successfully and the changes of the law on the united voters' register were adopted in early November 2025. This law establish a permanent and inclusive commission for the revision of the UVR which consist of experts nominated by the ruling majority, parliamentary opposition and civil society. Alignment with the EU common foreign and security policy. Serbia has reached an all-time high in alignment with CFSP in autumn of 2025, currently sitting on 65% alignment. Additionally, Serbia supports the stability, security and rule of law in Europe as a whole.
With regards to Ukraine, Serbia firmly supports territorial integrity of Ukraine and has voted accordingly in the UN General Assembly and other institutions. Serbia provides aid to Ukraine amounting to 93% of all the humanitarian aid coming from the Western Balkans region. Improved dialogue and cooperation with civil society in Serbia. The Ministry for European Integration established the EU Growth Plan Monitoring Committee with civil society and its backbone in October 2025. Also, according to the assessment of the Venice Commission, the new package of judicial law currently on the agenda of the National Assembly of Serbia fully satisfied recommendations contained in its April opinion.
The opinion was issued after the adoption of the package of law proposed last year by Uglješa Mrdić. Thank you.
Thank you, dear colleagues, for your contributions. Mr. Busqué, I think it was very helpful perhaps that you also hear the views of national parliamentarians. A number of issues were raised. I don't want to in any kind of way summarize them, but you now have the task of trying to respond to as many comments and questions as possible, let's say in a timeframe of 10 minutes. Is that possible?
You're French, you can do that.
Mathieu Bousquet
Thank you, this is a big challenge, but I'll do my best.
No, I mean, first, thank you very much and thank you for the debate. I mean, it's, it's very good, I mean, to see clearly, I mean, the commitment and the vision from the national parliaments of the candidate countries, but also, I mean, from the member states and the European Parliament, clearly this geostrategic vision and the fact that many of you share the view that it was really an imperative to move on the enlargement file. So this is extremely positive. We also hear that there are different positions, there are different sensitivities and we take note. I think enlargement is really a key area where we need the debate to take place and today was really an excellent contribution to this debate.
We welcome that. I'm not going to come to all the comments, but maybe try to summarize some elements. I think one element that we want to look at is how can we take into account the lessons learned from past enlargements.
And this is where we came five years ago, six years ago, with the revision of the methodology, which is also a revision of methodology placing the question of rule of law first. Et pour répondre à la question du parlementaire français, la question de l'état de droit est complètement centrale dans le processus d'élargissement puisque les fondamentaux sont le premier à ouvrir et le dernier à fermer des différents chapitres de l'accession. Coming to the revision of the accession treaties, this is also something we need to take into account. The last accession treaty was for Croatia. It was some time ago.
Croatia is a very active member state, but we need also to take the lessons and see also after what happened.
And one of the key questions related to that is to ensure that the reforms that have taken place are sustainable and that there is no also possible backsliding in after joining the EU. So in terms of revision of the process, and this is also related to, I mean, the process we have seen, we've seen the process of enlargement sometimes slowed down by some very technical or discussions or positions which were not completely reflecting the progress of the partner country.
A member of parliament here, of a national parliament or of the European Parliament, I mean, was mentioning, where can we get the information? I think all the parliaments, the representatives of the parliaments from the accession countries know that the enlargement report is really the source, the enlargement package, as we call it, I mean, to come in October, is really the place where you can find all the information, I mean, which is an assessment.
And this assessment is not an assessment by the Commission, but it's really based on consultation with parliaments, with civil society organizations, because as we also mentioned, and many of you mentioned, I mean, the enlargement process is a whole-of-society approach, and this is extremely important. Nevertheless, I think, and this is something which is clearly coming from the discussion, if we are adding the contributions from all of you, is that to keep the credibility of the process, we need to find the right balance between a merit-based process, for which we are looking at whether the reforms are solid and are sustainable, and we are talking about sometimes very difficult reforms to pass by the accession country, which may require a little bit of time, because as I said, it's a whole-of-society approach.
And we are talking about sometimes very difficult reforms to pass by the accession country, which may require a little bit of time because, as I said, it's a whole-of-society approach, but this is the responsibility of the accession country. And the geopolitical considerations that many of you were mentioning, that it is important that we are seizing the opportunity. So finding the right balance between merit-based approach and this geopolitical consideration. Some member states have come with positions which were mentioned by some of you with a view to accelerate the enlargement process, but at the same time keep the merit-based approach.
So we welcome different ideas and how we can look at it. In terms of assessment in the partner countries and this is also part of the gradual integration. You know that some of the countries are also now part of the rule of law report process as do the member states and the Commission is clearly committed to provide regular support to those accession countries who want to move forward and who want to implement the needed reforms.
Sur la question des réformes institutionnelles à l'intérieur de l'Union pour se préparer correctement dans une Europe qui serait une Union européenne non pas à 27 mais à plus de 30 membres. Nous vous savez que la question des modifications institutionnelles sont dans les mains du Conseil et des États membres et de ce Parlement. Donc la question se pose à eux. Par contre ce qui est clair c'est qu'on peut voir comment explorer toutes les possibilités qui sont dans le traité pour faire fonctionner au mieux notre Union dans ses politiques diverses y compris la politique de l'élargissement.
Mais je pense que vous vous référiez non seulement aux politiques euh euh de l'élargissement, mais aux politiques internes aussi, et notamment au euh à la ce qui est fait aussi dans le cadre de la préparation du futur cadre financier pluriannuel. There were a number of questions related to to Bosnia. I think you know the all of you the situation in Bosnia. There is a need for Bosnia-Herzegovina to undertake the constitutional reforms to ensure political equality and non-discrimination, also in line with the Sejdić and Finci case law of the European Court of Human Rights. So we we are not there.
I mean, we cannot move forward with Bosnia until the Council adopts the negotiating framework. And for that, Bosnia-Herzegovina needs to demonstrate progress. But we are ready to support Bosnia in the way we can. There is also a number of legislation which is due to be adopted, which hopefully will help make things moving forward. Now, maybe if I have three minutes, I want maybe to finish with one key question, which is about communication.
If we are looking, and the representative from the Spanish Parliament mentioned, I mean, the broad support there is in Spain for enlargement of the Union. We see very big differences between the Member States in support to enlargement, I mean, Spain and Sweden being, I mean, I would say, the top level. But overall, 56% of the EU citizens are in favor of EU enlargement. The younger respondents, and I understand we have representatives from some young groups here, age 15 to 24, are the most in favor, 67% of them are in favor of enlargement. Around one third of the respondents overall feel informed about enlargement.
Only 32% feel they are informed about enlargement, and so 67% do not feel informed. And what we found out in analyzing further the figures is that the more citizens are informed, the more in favor they are. So I think this is a key message, and also for you colleagues from the different national parliaments, I mean to come back and really to stimulate the debate and have information sessions in your countries.
It's extremely important to communicate in member states and in accession countries in a fair and transparent way, evidence-based way. And a colleague of the member, a member of the European Parliament was mentioning of course for that the need to have a media landscape which is not, which is transparent and allowing to have this discussion being away from the foreign information, foreign interference and manipulation of information that we have seen taking place in many member states and accession countries.
So with that chair I want to conclude by thanking you very much and really happy to to continue the debate and and working with you. Thank you.
David McAllister
Right. Thank you Mr. Busquet. Colleagues we are running nearly 25 minutes late already. Is there anyone who would like to urgently address a point? Is this urgent?
Well please.
Željana Zovko
Right, I would just like to raise a point. I'm a member of European Parliament and I would just like to raise a point to Mr. Bosquet's claim that Bosnia and Herzegovina has to change constitution according to only Sejdić-Finci case. If you follow Bosnia and Herzegovina our resolutions from European Parliament, and you should as a Commission, they have to change electoral law according to Constitutional Court decisions and international court decisions. So don't please just take one part that suits you and this is exactly the affirmation that came from Croatia that was that was wrong because some are really taking just one part of the requirements for Bosnia and Herzegovina Commission and it shouldn't be the case. So Constitutional Court decision, Ljubić case and Sejdić-Finci case as international court decision.
And please stick to the European Parliament's resolutions that were adopted by majority of this house. Thank you.
Mathieu Bousquet
I just think I said that there is a need for Bosnia and Herzegovina to undertake the constitutional reforms according to I mean I mean focusing on political equality and non-discrimination. That's what I said. So just to correct me if I was misunderstood.
Thanks. Now comes the most important announcement of the day. We are now taking a family photo. Everyone remains where she or he is seated but you stand up. The picture will be taken from here.
Okay? And then we will have a short coffee break. Short. Just grab a coffee, come back inside and we'll continue at five past eleven. But first the picture.
Photographer.
David McAllister
Grüß Sie, guten Morgen. So, may I please ask you to be now seated again? And if somebody from the secretariat could inform colleagues who are still outside that we are resuming business.
So the second session of today's meeting is named 'The Role of Parliaments in Progressing EU Accession'. I would firstly like to warmly welcome our guest speaker, Mr. Joachim Koops, Chair of the Board of the Global Governance Institute and Professor for Security Studies at Leiden University. He's focusing on global governance, democracy, and security.
Professor Koops has worked extensively with international organizations and also EU institutions. Most relevant to today's discussion, he is the lead author of a recent study for us in the European Parliament entitled "Parliaments in the EU enlargement process: strengthening capacities of accession country parliaments under the evolving enlargement methodology." Since we're running late and without any further ado, I will now give the floor to our invited speaker, Mr. Koops, for ten minutes. And then we'll have, like at the first session, a Q&A part. And I invite you to take the floor.
Please indicate here at the secretariat in case you haven't yet whether you would like to speak or not. And now, Mr. Korps, the floor is yours.
Joachim Koops
Mr. Chair, thank you very much. Honorable members of the European Parliament, of national parliaments, ladies and gentlemen. Precisely 65 years ago, the European Parliamentary Assembly, the predecessor to this house, discussed a historically significant step regarding the democratic preconditions for European enlargement.
The so-called Birkelbach report, named after the report's author, German Member of Parliament and Member of the European Parliamentary Assembly Willi Birkelbach, set out for the first time core democracy and fundamental rights dimensions for countries wishing to join the European Community. In the context of Spain's impending application to join the European Community in '62, which at the time was still a dictatorship under General Franco, it was crucial to anchor European accession processes firmly in democratic and human rights principles.
As analyzed in detail by the political scientists Emma De Angelis and Irini Karamouzi, the Birkelbach report defined a democratic state as a state in which governments enjoy democratic legitimation and the people take part in decision-making, either directly or through directly elected representatives. It also stated that the applicant states should be required to recognize the principles indicated by the Council of Europe as a condition for membership, especially the rule of law, human rights and fundamental freedoms as outlined in Article 3 of the Statute of the Council of Europe, therefore already firmly establishing inter-organizational dimensions between the EU and the Council of Europe's human rights framework. The Birkelbach report highlighted the fact that democracy, defined as the respect of fundamental rights and freedoms, was to be considered an essential requirement for community membership.
Since then, every single of the seven rounds of enlargements have been a significant investment in the strengthening of democracy and human rights and into the EU's transformative power at core geopolitical moments. These rounds of enlargements have also highlighted the tensions between short-term momentum and the the reason for speed and decisive action, but also long-term investments into strengthening the candidate countries' core institutions. Fast forward to now, and the geopolitical importance as well as the importance of advancing democracy, human rights, as well as the national, European, and international rule of law have never been as pressing and as urgent as today.
The EU's current member states as well as the accession countries face multiple attacks and challenges to democracy, fundamental rights, and indeed peace and security. Ukraine in particular, but also Moldova, have made remarkable progress in their reforms, also on the democracy-strengthening side, despite Russia's relentless onslaughts and brutality. But external and internal interference and the rise of autocratic and anti-democratic tendencies not only across EU accession countries but also within the EU make the role of parliaments and the strengthening of civil society an even more urgent and fundamental pillar of the enlargement process.
As you all demonstrate with your daily work and your exchanges here today, national parliaments both in the European Union and in the accession countries have played and will play an irreplaceable and central role. In our report, which the chairman already mentioned, for the European Parliament last year on parliaments in the EU enlargement process, we conducted an in-depth analysis and survey with more than 90 parliamentarians across the EU and the accession countries, representatives of international organizations, NGOs, civil society, as well as democracy and human rights experts, as well as enlargement experts and policymakers.
The main objective of the exercise was to determine the extent to which parliaments in the accession countries serve as a key driver for advancing the so-called fundamentals under the new enlargement methodology. Above all, the rule of law and becoming functioning democratic institutions.
National parliaments and indeed the European Parliament play a central role in not only, sorry, in serving as co-oversight bodies of their own governments in what is essentially still a very executive-driven process. In our report and through our interviews on the role of national parliaments and civil society, we also saw a recurring tendency, unfortunately, in the European Commission's reports on the accession countries, where the sections on functioning democratic institutions are often the shortest and least developed ones.
National parliaments are crucial for parliamentary oversight, for serving as a forum for a constructive debate, for bridging and not fueling societal polarization, for putting strong procedures in place for fighting corruption and undue influence, for ensuring transparency and accountability of key political decisions, and for ensuring effective lawmaking, evidence-based policymaking, and inclusive relations with civil society. Fulfilling all these functions in the enlargement process might often place the national parliament at odds with the governments, and even at odds with the speed of the accession-related reforms. Yet, a strong and genuine oversight role is a long-term investment into democracy, even if it comes at the expense of speed of decision-making. Too often, national parliaments in accession countries are at risk of acting as mere approval institutions rather than holding the executives to account.
Yet, significant process has clearly been made. Also as a result of the wide-ranging networks and cooperation arrangements between national parliaments of the EU and their counterparts in accession countries, as well as the role of the European Parliament.
Through twinning and cooperation arrangements between members of parliament and also administrative staff, as well as European Parliament initiatives advanced by the EP's Democracy Support and Election Coordination Group, as well as the Administrative Directorate for Democracy Support, significant progress has been made in the strengthening of parliaments, parliamentary capacity, particularly when these initiatives were carried out in closer coordination with international organizations and local civil society groups, then effects were measurably highest. In addition, networks of networks, such as the Democracy Support Network, provide an important forum for exchange and discussions amongst European parliaments and parliamentarians. This also include reflections on crucial advancements in strengthening minority rights, women rights, and the participation and role of youth.
Yet, progress has not been even and is not even guaranteed. Judicial reform processes must be further pushed, anti-corruption measures and public administration reform enhanced, but also the closer involvement of civil society remains a core concern. Civil society is not only a cornerstone of democracy and effective relations between the parliament and its wider citizens are crucial, but larger protest movements are also indicative of important cross-cutting concerns.
As the current demonstrations in Albania highlight, this also applies to issues of environmental protection and deeper questions of democratic processes. Many citizens are also looking at the EU and the European Parliament for clarity and support on the intersections of core topics of democracy and environmental protection, and indeed the European Parliament has also addressed that issue in a recent discussion and resolution. Finally, the passing of laws without effective and sustained whole-of-society implementation risks undermining true democratic transformation.
Here too, relations with civil society and a monitoring of genuine progress are vital. Given the far-reaching cuts to democracy support, also a result of the decisions by the US administration but also EU governments, a key cause of concern is the sustained implementation of these reforms and support measures. Looking ahead, stronger pre-accession funding under the MFF, particularly for the role of parliaments and their interrelation with civil society, are urgently needed. Apart from these challenges in EU accession countries, EU national parliaments and the EP also face challenges in terms of polarization, rising anti-EU sentiment, and a sliding away from commitments to fundamental rights and the enlargement process.
The momentum must not be lost and the benefits of enlargement, both for the citizens and current member states as well as EU accession countries, must be clearly reiterated. Despite positive support for enlargement amongst the citizens, there are already indicators of sliding popular support for enlargement, which serves as an important reminder that the process requires strong, reiterative political investment. This is even more urgent given the geopolitical conditions under which core external actors such as Russia and China are attacking not only the European democracies, but also the benefits of enlargement itself.
In addition, we also face increasing competition from our ally, including the US, which risks also undermining some of the benefits of enlargement processes. But enlargement is also a pivotal moment to reflect once again about the core values and fundamental point of the European integration project for the continent. Security and geopolitical stability must go hand in hand with good governance, democracy, and the protection of the rights of human beings anywhere in this world and beyond the borders, and hopefully also the soon-to-be enlarged borders of the European Union.
The values of the EU are universal and enshrined in its treaties. And as the resolution on the EU enlargement strategy of 11th March in this house has emphasized, the EU's prosperity and security rests on its ability to defend democracy, the rule of law, human rights, and the rules-based multilateral order with the UN at its heart. But these values must also be defended universally and without hesitation, even when it comes to our closest European and external allies. Within the EU, within the accession countries, and wherever injustices occur. This also applies to protecting the progress made in the establishment and defense of international law and the most vulnerable.
European governments focusing on necessary defense spending have nevertheless also significantly cut humanitarian development, conflict prevention, and democracy assistance budgets with far-reaching consequences. The European Parliament, also pushed by anti-immigration sentiments in national capitals and parliaments, has agreed to a tightening of EU immigration rules that have consistently been condemned by the UN as violating fundamental rights. In the Middle East, the violation of international law and European reluctance to uphold it has been most stark.
Whilst the terrorist attacks by Hamas on Israel on 7th October 23 was an unspeakable crime, and Israel rightly received our support, we have not done nearly enough to put all possible pressures on Israel to end the genocide in Gaza. Crucially, we have also not done nearly enough to end our own complicity. This undermines not only European's commitment to the defense of fundamental rights and our geopolitical position, but it also threatens to reduce the moral essence of the European integration project itself that we seek to enlarge and export. The European Union's enlargement process is not only about enlarging territory, citizens, rules and markets. It is also about enlarging the promise of defending democracy, human rights, and the rule of law beyond state boundaries.
Parliaments across the EU and together with the EU accession countries have a crucial role to play in not only advancing the democratic dimension of enlargement, but also the collective defense of human rights and the European and international rule of law.
Well, thank you Professor Korps for your valuable insights. And now we can start our discussion. You know the procedure by now. Keep it to roughly two minutes and then we should get through with all speakers. And the first one is our beloved Petras Auštrevičius.
Petras Auštrevičius
Thank you, Chair. We have emphasized much and for good reason the dimension of parliamentary democracy in the accession process once the report on enlargement was made.
And I am rapporteur on that report. And indeed, we can't overestimate the importance of parliamentary democracy. There are two points. Indeed, you can't learn parliamentary democracy or import any model of parliamentary democracy into your own country. I mean, you have to develop it, improve, adjust, and indeed implement to full extent.
Mr. Cox, would you comment a bit more on, let's say, regional aspects? Because I mean, each and every country has a lot of regional aspects and not just capital area.
People are more relying on, you know, living standards and living conditions regionally.
Sometimes, I mean, there is a kind of discrepancy between the messages coming from the capital and regional regional representatives. But to focus on member states' national parliament's role and their involvement, again, I think what we have to do in the national parliaments as well in the European Parliament to have more visits to candidate countries, to get to know, to see, to learn from those national experiences, establishing important political contacts and meeting socio-economic partners of candidate countries. It's very, very important. And most importantly, we have to make our statements and assessment based on impact assessment and in-depth analysis, not creating any prejudice or, you know, kind of partial assessments and so on and so forth.
So the more, indeed, analyses will be coming from NGOs and analytical centers, think tanks in between, the more it will be. So I call on really in-depth analysis of the enlargement policy and impact on EU and candidate countries in order to give instruments for politicians. Thank you, Chair.
Speaker 52
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Dear colleagues, the role of national parliament is indispensable as in the end of the day, it's us, the national parliamentarians, who vote to ratify each and every treaty of accession of any country.
But the role of national parliament is far more complex and important than only this final vote. The enlargement talks experience of every member state is unique and rich, so it's very important to share this experience with the candidate countries. It's an experience on how to transfer thousands of pages of the acquis communautaire into the national laws. Sometimes the scale of this gigantic task is underestimated or not understood.
And by saying this, I have in mind my own country three decades ago before we only started the whole process. Today in Lithuania, 22 years after the accession to the EU, we have our own unique experience which we gladly share in detail with Ukraine, Moldova, Albania, Western Balkans, indeed any any country willing to listen to us. We do this by meeting colleagues from these countries, visiting them or receiving their delegations in Lithuania on a regular basis. It's very important to stress on a regular basis because that is how the administrative capacity is built in each and every country. Thank you.
Zagorka Aleksić
Thank you, Mr. McAllister. Ladies and gentlemen, it is an honor to speak today about the role of the Serbian Parliament in the context of the European integration process. Full membership in the European Union is the Serbian strategic goal. This is a permanent choice, not just words, not just some declarative statements.
For years, our Parliament has been working hard by adopting new laws and following European Union rules. We have shown results. Through our parliamentary working group for ODIHR recommendations and together with civil society, we changed the law on the voters' register and we made a permanent commission to check it. Also, to make our democracy stronger, we also adopt set of media laws. In the energy sector, we are matching European Union energy policies through our laws.
Following the opinions and recommendations of the Venice Commissions, we worked with dedication on changing our judiciary laws. Serbia is a true part of Europe.
We share the same European history, culture, and future, of course. Our connections are deep and permanent and they will reach their full potential when we become a full member of the European Union. Serbia did everything needed to open cluster three back in 2021. As a member of parliament, as a representative of majority in parliament, I truly hope that our work will be better recognized in the future. We are always fully open to dialogue, partnership, and respect on our common European path.
Thank you.
Nacho Sánchez Amor
Well thank you David. On the substance I think you discussed in the first round, but I would like to say that even if the geopolitical earthquakes always has been in the origin of the enlargement, the accession process is a merit-based process. And that means many things. If it is merit-based, it's individual. Let's forget about the packages.
Let's forget about the couple. Because if it is merit-based, that means every country has to be measured for their merits.
And the other thing, this is a double direction. If it is merit-based and they comply and they deliver in the process, it can't be at the end of the process a kind of political veto or political let's wait a little bit because this is creating this European fatigue that we noticed in the Balkans. I take your point, Mr. Kopson, executive's parliaments in the report, you are completely right. And I would like to know from you your opinion on the successive vetoes not included in the treaties and only included in this strange thing called negotiation framework that allows every country to veto the continuation of the process only creating a problem with one cluster or one chapter.
The Parliament is strongly rejecting this logic. And other thing, fundamentals can be in any way an alibi to hide or shadow other interests. Because sometimes we put on doubt or we create problems, inevitable, the most of the candidate countries are less mature democracies or immature democracies, but let's be clear. We can use the fundamentals to hide other less revealable, let's say, reasoning, agriculture or whatever other. And my final call for the national parliaments, you are European institutions.
Let's not enter in the trap in which we have to take care of the European interest and you are only taking care of the national interest. You are European institutions and as Mr. Köps said, you are involved in the big game of Europe and then please try to avoid to appear only as the institution taking care of the domestic agenda. Thank you.
Marcel Spatari
Mesdames, messieurs. Je vais parler en français. J'ai entendu aujourd'hui dans cette salle que l'adhésion de la République de Moldova à l'Union européenne représenterait une menace pour son indépendance. Rien de plus faux. La seule menace pour l'indépendance de la République de Moldova est l'agression de la Russie et la seule solution contre cette menace est l'adhésion à l'Union européenne.
Certainement l'adhésion de notre pays à l'Union européenne nécessite des réformes intérieures et un large soutien démocratique. Aujourd'hui environ trois quarts du Parlement soutiennent l'orientation européenne du pays.
Pour donner à ce soutien une forme institutionnelle, nous avons créé pour la première fois au début de cette législature, en octobre dernier, une commission parlementaire pour l'intégration européenne. Cette commission réunit plus de 10 % des députés issus de toutes les fractions parlementaires, et plus de la moitié de ses rapports sont adoptés à l'unanimité. Notre rôle est de suivre, d'accélérer et de rendre plus transparente l'action européenne de l'État. Tous les deux semaines, nous auditionnons au Parlement trois ou quatre groupes de travail gouvernementaux sur le progrès de la transposition de l'acquis. Notre objectif politique est de finaliser les négociations d'adhésion d'ici 2028.
Tout l'agenda législatif, gouvernemental et administratif est organisé autour de ce calendrier.
Nous développons également une diplomatie parlementaire active. En mars, nous avons accueilli les commissions des affaires européennes des pays baltes, nordiques, de la Pologne et de l'Allemagne. Ce mois-ci, en juin, nous avons accueilli les commissions d'Italie, d'Espagne, de Grèce et du Portugal.
Ces visites ont abouti à des déclarations communes demandant l'accélération des négociations et confirmant un soutien politique et technique fort à l'adhésion de la Moldova. Puisque je m'exprime aujourd'hui en français, j'ai le plaisir d'inviter les commissions des affaires européennes des États francophones à visiter la République de Moldova en septembre, notamment la France, la Belgique, le Luxembourg, mais également toutes les commissions parlementaires des pays francophones qui souhaitent venir nous voir sur notre voie européenne. Nous allons envoyer une invitation officielle pour cette visite commune. Venez nous connaître dans notre pays parce que l'élargissement ne se fait pas uniquement à Bruxelles, mais également dans les villes et villages de nos pays candidats. Je vous remercie.
Merci bien monsieur. Next is Christina Schwarz-Fuchs from Austria.
Christina Schwarz-Fuchs
Mr. Chair, distinguished colleagues, the Austrian Parliament firmly believes that parliaments play a crucial role in advancing the European Union accession process. For Austria, supporting countries of the Western Balkans, as well as Ukraine and Moldova, is a key foreign policy priority and an important contribution to peace, stability, and democracy in Europe. The Austrian Parliament actively supports this process through capacity-building initiatives.
One successful example is the Democracy Workshop International, which has been established in Montenegro, Kosovo and Albania and promotes democratic education among young people. Through the Democracy Workshop Forum, parliamentary administrations from across the region regularly exchange experiences and best practices on democracy and civic education. Another important initiative is the Western Balkans Fellowship Programme, which enables parliamentary staff from the region to gain practical experience in Vienna, build professional networks and deepen their understanding of democratic governance and EU standards.
These initiatives demonstrate how parliamentary cooperation can strengthen democratic culture and support countries on their path towards the European Union. Austria remains committed to standing alongside our partners throughout the accession process. By working together, our parliaments can help build a stronger, more democratic, and more united Europe. Thank you.
Thank you very much, dear chairwoman. Next is Dimitrios Mantzos from Greece.
Dimitrios Mantzos
The return of enlargement on top of the EU priorities marks a significant milestone, bringing us back on track regarding the West Balkans accession procedure in accordance with the 2003 Thessaloniki agenda. So in a sense, this is a continuation and a renewal of that initial commitment to enlarge our European family.
Dimitrios Mantzos
Of course the accession debate always goes hand in hand with the cause of deepening our union by respecting and ensuring the EU acquis with no exceptions or reservations. Indeed the accession procedure is a rules-based endeavor based on grounded on merit on deep reforms and shared values and it is always crucial that we ensure that on the one hand that we closely monitor all necessary reforms but on the other hand that we recognize actively recognize progress made and encourage candidate candidate countries to take more steps forward especially in the fields of the rule of law the independence of the judiciary the fight against corruption protection of the environment respect for minorities rights as has been recently showcased in Albania and elsewhere.
In this context, we concur that national parliaments do have an immensely important role to play regarding reforms in democratic institutions and in the field of human rights in candidate member countries. Parliaments, mainly their European Affairs Committees, could and should positively contribute to the exchange of best practices and expertise. So it is true that national parliaments are not ordinary state authorities; they constitute the democratic basis of Europe, the bridge between European democracies and their citizens. So we believe that by shifting the balance from the executive branch towards the legislative branch, we can actively increase awareness and engagement regarding both the political system and civil society in the accession procedure, which may serve as a crucial factor for its very success.
Thank you. And next speaker's from Portugal, Ms. Eva Braz Pinho.
Thank you, Chair. I'll speak in Portuguese. O durante décadas o alargamento tem sido a política que permitiu consolidar a democracia, a estabilidade e a prosperidade no nosso continente. Foi bom durante a primeira sessão ouvir que é uma opinião relativamente generalizada que o alargamento passou de uma política de vizinhança para ser verdadeiramente uma questão de segurança europeia, de estabilidade regional e até de afirmação geopolítica do nosso projeto.
Speaker 63
Esta já é mesmo uma necessidade que não é apenas dos países candidatos, é uma necessidade estratégica para nós. Não obstante, deve naturalmente continuar a assentar todos os processos no mérito. E aqui queria também sublinhar a opinião que já foi partilhada por vários colegas de que os critérios de adesão existem para proteger a qualidade do nosso projeto baseado nos nossos valores e dos quais não devemos de forma nenhuma abdicar. Mas também devemos evitar o erro da União não oferecer reformas que demonstrem progresso para os estados em processo de adesão que demonstram progresso.
E eu julgo que este é um ponto importante porque a credibilidade da União também se mede na forma como tem a capacidade de assumir os seus compromissos para com os países que estão em processo de adesão. E neste contexto, julgo que os membros dos parlamentos nacionais assumem um papel particularmente relevante para demonstrar também que o alargamento não é uma ameaça ao projeto europeu, mas sim uma oportunidade para o reforçarmos. Julgo que é importante fazermos um trabalho de combate à desinformação para que seja baseado em factos, demonstrar aos cidadãos europeus que uma Europa mais ampla e mais plural é uma Europa mais forte e mais influente no mundo.
E neste aspeto, eu julgo que a cooperação interparlamentar é fundamental. Já foi aqui dito hoje a necessidade de partilharmos boas práticas, de cooperarmos uns com os outros, de explicarmos aos países em processo de adesão como é que os processos de escrutínio das iniciativas legislativas europeias podem ser feitos, como é que fazemos o acompanhamento e esse processo de integração europeia que é tão importante.
Eu julgo que temos uma oportunidade única para reforçar o nosso continente europeu. E eu queria agradecer ao senhor professor por ter mencionado também a importância da juventude neste, neste processo de construção. E deixar-lhe a questão: que mecanismos concretos é que acha que enquanto parlamentares nacionais podemos desenvolver uns com os outros para reforçar também a representatividade e a sensação dos vários cidadãos também dos países candidatos de relação com o projeto europeu? Muito obrigada.
Thank you. Now I give the floor for the second time this morning to our friend Pavel Fischer.
Pavel Fischer
Thank you so much, Chair. Mr. Professor, thank you very much for your remarks. I will have two reactions and one question to you. First, thank you very much for speaking about cognitive warfare or foreign interference or meddling in our affairs. The role of parliaments is even more important in this regard, to bridge the extremes as you rightly said.
Second, thank you for speaking for the rule of law.
Yes, there is no distinction between the rule of law at home and internationally speaking, and we are committed to maintain the high respect of the rule of law. Otherwise, with double standards, we should be very much aware of the fact that we undermine ourselves and that the very bedrock of our prosperity or security is under threat if we commit this kind of blind, short-term approach to the non-respect of the international law.
Thank you very much for your remarks. We feel that this is based on facts on the ground and a very high level of sense of observation, which we appreciate. Yes, enlargement needs political leadership, and this is not only an issue of technocratic matter.
And my question focus less on candidate countries and more on current member states because I ask oftentimes myself do we do enough that European integration is a matter of political debate, of public consensus and of social affair? I think that this is also a question that we should develop more and I would be very much interested in your point. Thank you.
Pedro Correa
Thank you Mr. Chair. I will speak in Portuguese.
A crescente competição geopolítica, a fragmentação da ordem internacional e o aumento das ameaças híbridas vieram demonstrar que o alargamento não é apenas uma política de expansão institucional da União. A adesão à União não pode ser reduzida a um exercício técnico de alinhamento legislativo e a transposição de normas comunitárias não são suficientes de modo a garantir uma integração plenamente bem-sucedida. Os governos negoceiam a adesão. A Comissão avalia o cumprimento dos critérios. O Conselho toma decisões políticas.
Mas são os parlamentos que transformam compromissos internacionais em compromissos nacionais. E são os parlamentos a voz e a representação dos povos europeus.
É no espaço parlamentar que as reformas associadas ao processo de adesão são debatidas, escrutinadas, legitimadas e incorporadas na vida democrática dos países candidatos. Para os países, a eficácia do sistema judicial, a capacidade de investigação e repressão da corrupção, a transparência e a integridade das administrações, a luta contra o crime organizado, em especial contra as atuais hordas migratórias, são políticas essenciais. Senhor Presidente, na balança do poder geopolítico, as potências internacionais definem a sua esfera de influências e o seu espaço vital de forma unilateral.
E por isso, a diplomacia parlamentar não deve ser entendida apenas como apêndice ao processo de adesão. A diplomacia parlamentar para o alargamento é falar com todos. A diplomacia parlamentar deve ser reconhecida como uma componente estruturante da preparação para a integração europeia. Muito obrigado.
Louis-Jean de Nicolaÿ
Merci Monsieur le Président. I will speak in French if you don't mind.
Mes chers collègues, le directeur général de la Commission européenne en charge de l'élargissement a conclu ses réponses tout à l'heure par ce qu'il a appelé la communication. En réalité, il s'agit de communication au sens large, mais aussi de bien plus que cela.
Il s'agit de politique au sens large, car il faut convaincre les opinions publiques, les citoyens de nos pays. Si nous, sénateurs, membres de la commission des affaires européennes du Sénat, sommes favorables à la dynamique de l'élargissement dans son principe, et concrètement quand des pays comme le Monténégro accomplissent de réels progrès dans tous les domaines, encore nous faut-il non seulement informer ou communiquer, mes chers collègues, mais surtout conquérir les cœurs et les esprits de nos concitoyens, et singulièrement ceux d'entre eux qui sont de plus en plus tentés, incités par certains partis, à faire de l'Europe une sorte de bouc émissaire idéal. Le rôle des parlements nationaux dans chacun de nos pays est ici essentiel. Non seulement au regard des traités ou pour des raisons constitutionnelles internes, comme je l'ai brièvement rappelé à propos de la France, mais aussi et surtout pour être associé à chacune des étapes décisives du processus afin de conférer à celui-ci sa véritable dimension politique, géopolitique et stratégique.
C'est notamment tout l'intérêt de l'approche graduelle de l'élargissement prônée notamment par la France et par l'Allemagne. Nous visons une nouvelle approche axée sur le processus d'intégration qui élimine les obstacles trop formalisés pour des étapes pardon intermédiaires et simplifie la méthodologie actuelle. Ainsi nos parlements pourraient être associés informés à chaque fois que progresse l'ouverture des principaux chapitres de négociation pertinents en se concentrant sur le fond des réformes plutôt que sur les seules étapes procédurales. Les parlements et leurs commissions en charge des affaires européennes en particulier pourraient être mieux mobilisés pour assurer cette orientation politique fondamentale.
Thank you, chair. Thank you.
Iskra Mihaylova
First of all, thank you for the opportunity to discuss today together with the colleagues with the other countries and national parliament. But I think that the most important message from today is this message that the parliaments, including the European Parliament, chaired by you in this committee, will participate strongly not only to observe the process of integration of candidate countries, not only to observe the process of technical negotiations between the countries and European Commission, but also to contribute as a parliamentary dimension in all this process.
Because we in Bulgaria understand the role of the national parliament as a very important institution which will act in two main directions. The first one is, of course, to be in touch and cooperate and join the efforts of the parliament of candidate countries and be supportive, be active, be constructive, offering some solutions and transferring the European policy to the parliament of these countries. But secondly, there is a very important part of our work, I think. This is the question of what messages we give to our citizens in the national level.
Because protecting in some of the cases the national interest, which is typical for the national parliament, can be dangerous for the whole process of negotiations. So we should create the position on the national level to communicate. I'm fully agree with the colleagues which are discussing the process of communication, but also to create these messages which are already given by the European Parliament. They should be continued by the national parliament.
And in this context, the role of the parliament and inter-parliamentary cooperation and the negotiations will be very important for this overall process of integration and enlargement of European Union. Thank you.
Thank you. Next is Mr. Slobodan Cvejić from Serbia.
Slobodan Čević
Thank you, the chairman.
I'll try to connect the situation in media in Serbia that were mentioned for several times today and the role of the parliament in the accession process to show you how actually parliament can be abused in implementing certain policies already defined by the national laws and the procedures. And I refer precisely to the last process of election of members of the Council of the Regulatory Body for Electronic Media. This body has a huge role and responsibility and it was politically controlled and blocked for many years now. I used to be a member of that council for ten months, but that's another story.
So as an insider, I know how it is functioning. The whole process actually was blocked by a move of a certain political group in Serbian Parliament who is an ally of the ruling regime. And not based in law or ethics, they simply stopped the whole process by some demands. There was no response to that from the political and NGO bodies that propose candidates.
And now we are blocked within this process. So the parliament was abused to actually work in favor of the ruling coalition and not to perform duty as such at the moment when the regime realized that it was too risky for them that if one of the candidates that they control would move to the other side, maybe some of the otherwise for a long time demanded decisions to take away the license from some of the national broadcasters would be implemented.
And that ended also with a national television openly promoting violence and pressure on political opposition. A few nights ago, there were public attorney and one lawyer in the show in which they were actually calling for arresting for the never explained case of the sonic weapon, and the leader of our party, Zdravko Ponoš, was shown in picture and called by name as one of the tentative victims, let's say, of this case. So these are the things that we have to fight and struggle in regular parliamentary life in Serbia. It's very difficult and it obviously depends strongly on political will and not only on technical process of accepting certain laws and so on.
We need to change that. Thank you.
David McAllister
Thank you. Our two final speakers are first Mr. Weber from France and then Mr. Kaliňák from Slovakia. Did we miss anyone? But it's not the case. Monsieur Weber.
Michaël Weber
Merci Monsieur le Président. Je m'expliquerai en français. Peut-être juste sans redire ce qu'ont été évoqués les collègues.
Je crois que la première des choses et le premier rôle des parlements respectifs, c'est d'anticiper l'élargissement et de permettre les enjeux, de comprendre les enjeux, de les partager, de constater les avancées, l'adaptation. Ce que je retiens de notre déplacement, déplacement du Sénat français en Albanie et au Monténégro, et je prends note aussi de l'invitation de Monsieur Spatari de Moldavie. Car in fine, et cela a été souligné tout à l'heure par Monsieur Busquets, il s'agira aussi pour nous de défendre auprès de nos populations l'intérêt de l'élargissement. Je prendrai quelques chiffres. Au Monténégro, c'est, je crois, je le dis sous le contrôle du député du Monténégro, c'est 86 % d'adhésion de la population à l'idée de l'élargissement.
Si je prends l'exemple en France, c'est plutôt en deçà de 40 %. Et pourtant, c'est une destination touristique très prisée par les Français, aussi bien le Monténégro que l'Albanie. Il y a là, à mon sens, un paradoxe.
Et puis le dernier élément, c'est évidemment de garantir en permanence, de rappeler toujours les enjeux de notre projet politique européen commun. On l'a évoqué tout à l'heure là aussi, l'état de droit, et j'y joins le droit des minorités, la lutte coordonnée contre les ingérences étrangères qui ont été soulevées, soulignées à plusieurs reprises ce matin. Je crois que c'est vraiment un enjeu essentiel qui fait sens ensemble. Et donc aussi l'enjeu spécifique de sécurité qui, là encore, est à la fois source d'inquiétude mais aussi source d'espoir pour le projet commun qui fait référence à l'idée même d'Europe à son origine. Merci.
Thank you, and finally Mr. Kalivoda.
Peter Kalivoda
Ďakujem pekne za slovo, pán predsedajúci, vážené kolegyne, vážení kolegovia. Naše národné parlamenty majú v procese rozširovania veľmi dôležitú úlohu. Nie sú len divákmi. Majú vysvetľovať občanom, prečo je rozširovanie dôležité, ale majú aj dohliadať na to, aby bolo férové, zodpovedné a podľa rovnakých pravidiel pre všetkých. V tomto duchu som z pozície predsedu Výboru Národnej rady Slovenskej republiky pre európske záležitosti spolu s predsedom Národnej rady Slovenskej republiky nedávno prijal delegáciu Verchovnej rady Ukrajiny.
Komunikácia s Ukrajinou ako kandidátskou krajinou je teda nastavená priamo a vecne. Pre Slovensko je mierová a stabilná Ukrajina kľúčová. Je to otázka našej bezpečnosti, ekonomiky, ale aj stability celého regiónu. Je v našom záujme, aby Ukrajina po splnení všetkých podmienok vstúpila do Európskej únie. Ak by niektorá z menej pripravených krajín však predbehla tie, ktoré si roky plnia úlohy, bol by to mimoriadne negatívny signál.
Ešte dôležitejšou otázkou je, čo by to znamenalo pre samotnú Európsku úniu, keby prijala krajinu, ktorá na členstvo ešte nie je pripravená. To by nebol problém na jeden rok, bol by to problém možno na celé desaťročia.
A preto musíme byť úprimní. Ukrajine najviac pomôžeme tým, že jej pomôžeme splniť podmienky a nie tým, že budeme predstierať, že už splnené sú. Národná rada Slovenskej republiky a jej európsky výbor sú pripravené ponúknuť skúsenosti, know-how a praktickú pomoc, ale v riadnom, férovom a zodpovednom procese. Ďakujem pekne.
David McAllister
Alright, thank you very much. Anyone else would like to take the floor?
That is not the case. Professor Koops, if I could ask you in about 10 minutes to respond to as many comments and questions as possible.
Joachim Koops
Absolutely. Thank you very much, Mr. Chair. Thank you for variety of statements, interesting comments and questions. Trying to, yeah, address them as concisely but as completely as possible. First comment on the regional aspects and the context.
Obviously, it's very important that there's not one size fits all approach to the support of national parliaments and particular capacity building programs and dialogue. And I think there are plenty of examples, particularly under the twinning scheme many of existing countries of the EU have been taking part in where it's a tailor-made approach.
And that also goes in fact to some of the comments that were made by the Lithuanian member of parliament where it's crucial that those countries that underwent themselves the enlargement process during the 90s and early 2000s share their experiences which themselves are of course also very context-specific. But there's some general challenges and she mentioned the transposing of EU law to national law which in itself of course is a major challenge but also direct interpersonal transfer of experiences of the tensions that sometimes also can occur in the transition process for national parliaments.
And in our report, again, we saw countless examples of where countries like Lithuania, Slovakia, even Estonia, with small staff in the parliament, teamed up with other countries in the EU to really develop tailor-made programs for assisting the current accession countries' parliaments and institutions and structures. So that has worked rather well, and I think the learning of those best practices and applying them is crucial because it also underlines that inter-parliamentary diplomacy — and I don't want to say capacity building, it's a bit of an outdated term — but inter-parliamentary exchanges and strengthening really does work. And there are lots of examples of older member states, so to say, France, Germany, Belgium, and newer member states having teamed up to advance these elements.
Completely echo the colleague's comment on in-depth impact assessments and analysis. The European Commission reports are an important starting point, but as I stressed, the sections on the fundamentals, particularly when it comes to functioning democratic institutions, which by the way was never clearly defined by the European Commission, is always the kind of thinnest and lightest subsection. And it has a variety of reasons that we also try to engage with, also in our discussions with Commission officials.
But what is clearly lacking is a dedicated process for external input, as was mentioned in terms of think tanks, scholars' assessments that can complement the official evaluations. And I think the European Parliament has done an admirable job in opening up these kind of discussions, in regularly reaching out for external input that also can hopefully flow into the discussions at national government levels and the Commission. And if I may also say, I think there needs to be the issue that there is a gap in the Commission itself on democracy support. There is no dedicated institution dealing with that when it comes to EU accession countries, it's in the enlargement structures mostly hidden, which also gives not so much prominence then to the entire topic of functioning democratic institutions.
So I think there are some opportunities and openings there. Mr. Sanchez Amor, of course, absolutely echo your comments on the merit-based approach and of course on the pitfalls and dangers that always exist of strategically stalling the enlargement process. So again, the national negotiation frameworks have at least that risk that countries can individually, unanimously really stall or or put spanners in the spokes of progress. So I would also say that we see this rather critical as a as a mechanism and an executivization of the enlargement accession process.
And indeed, of course, member states can also sometimes abuse and use the fundamentals as an excuse for holding up progress. And and I think that needs to be called out. That needs to be clearly identified and hopefully then also overcome and and tackled. The Austrian colleague absolutely, also by the way features strongly in the report. Austria has also been a consistent player when it comes to building international coalitions with EU member states and accession countries on democracy support, on training national parliaments on the administrative side, but also political side.
New innovations right now indeed focusing on youth leadership.
So these are also good examples of how interparliamentary diplomacy works indeed. Yeah, on the Greek colleague I can also only agree that of course it's a rule-based endeavor in the Western Balkans. It's not an easy process. It's also important to maintain pressure so to say on the reforms being implemented at the national parliament level as well according to rule-based guidelines here.
On the Portuguese colleague, I mean, allow me again, also the historical reference. Portugal itself is, of course, also an important example of the Mediterranean enlargement, so to say, the very beginnings of the enlargement process in the 70s and 80s, again, where democratic anchoring of the accession process was not the only factor, but an important factor also in democratic transition. And I think Portugal has also some important lessons to share here. And indeed, the emphasis on youth is not an easy one. We often, of course, almost as a knee-jerk reaction, always add youth as an important element.
But then youth itself is not a specific group. That's a very general term.
I mean, there are a variety of how we can define them, and they're not a unified actor. But I think the key understanding here is that, particularly now in the economic context, far more economic opportunities also need to be linked to the prospect of EU enlargement. And that brings it back again to the fundamentals and functioning institutions to also the fundamentals of economic progress and tailor-made programs there. I think there's some good examples again of coalitions of member states that have engaged with empowering youth delegates as well. It's not always easy to get transparency into the selection process sometimes.
So who is, for example, invited and selected for youth representation from the accession countries?
That's the same with, by the way, leadership, young leaders programs and women empowerment. But by and large, there's more awareness and more programs that target specifically that section of society. Pavel Fischer's comment on, yeah, cognitive warfare, double standards, are well taken. They're of course a crucial, central discussion right now in the entire process. And that enlargement needs political leadership indeed.
And you asked the question about not only how to sustain and raise support among the citizens in accession countries for EU enlargement, but also in existing member states.
And again, for specifically that reason, the entire accession process is an opportunity. It's an opportunity to engage also in existing EU member states with skeptical factions, both at the parliamentary level, but also in society writ large, in terms of support for not only enlargement, but also the European Union project in itself. And far too often, of course, we see the debates framed in risks, the debates framed in national particularistic interests.
It's seen as a kind of zero-sum game. If certain accession countries join the EU, then this comes at a cost for certain sectors. And whilst some of these aspects need to be taken very seriously and at face value, think about agricultural sector, for example, this should not again be taken as an excuse for lobbying against the enlargement process and philosophy per se. Easier said than done.
Even without misinformation, disinformation campaigns, there is a lot of domestic resistance and reactionary movements right now that are despite, I heard in the previous session the citing of the Eurobarometer in terms of 60%, 66% overall support for enlargement, but if you look at specific country breakdowns, there is also some concern that citizen support is waning. So we really need to also double down and take the current discussions and efforts we have in accession countries also as an opportunity for existing EU members to strengthen the case for EU enlargement based on the fundamentals. So in that sense, accession is also an opportunity. Then I could not agree more with the comment that was made on the importance of parliamentary diplomacy. This meeting again itself is a very good example in terms of inter-parliamentary engagement.
And we've over and over seen the effectiveness also when parliamentary and inter-parliamentary tools are paired with close cooperation with other international organizations. What I mean by that, I mean the OSCE has a parliamentary process and body, the Council of Europe has a parliamentary assembly dimension as well, all of them active more or less effectively also in supporting and enhancing democracy in the accession countries. So exchanges of best practices, coordination, cooperation, again, there are different approaches and different let's say experiences of success, but by and large the exchange and coordination efforts have also paid off in some cases.
So the entire field of parliamentary and inter-parliamentary diplomacy is certainly key. And the question now is whether it can be maintained like this, given also cuts in funding. I don't know to what extent that was already discussed in this configuration, but there are of course extreme funding pressures right now that are at play, not only because of external donors that have reduced their funding for democracy support in the accession countries, but also international organizations increasingly struggling with limited budgets. And that would be a loss, because this should really not be seen as a zero-sum game between organizations in the field and EU actors and EU national parliaments.
But I think even now, I know this is an old call, coordination and complementarity, but it's more important than ever, because the goal I think is shared by all organizations. And that's why I also put an emphasis on now the negotiations in terms of the next budget, EU budget. And of course we see an increase on the instruments for enlargement, but the specific funding for parliament-to-parliament dialogue, support between parliaments, inter-parliamentary diplomacy, I think is not there yet and needs to also be considered extensively. I think, yeah, there were some recurrent points also of course about messages to our own citizens.
I think I covered that already in previous remarks.
And yeah, of course, each and every parliament, and that goes back to, you know, a tailored approach, also faces significant political issues themselves, where opposition might be intimidated, where the process, electoral process is flawed, where access of civil society is highly limited yet. And I think that's the heart of the tensions, of course, on the one hand, of an executive-driven process, where the counterpart for the Commission, for example, and EU member states is always the government, of course, and is the preferential negotiation partner, but where it's even more important that the national parliaments and also the European Parliament put a very close watch and finger on what is going on in parliaments themselves. Because often, of course, there might be contradictory processes at play. We want enlargement to and accession to progress, ideally smoothly.
We want the transposition of EU law to progress as smoothly and fast. But that also sometimes comes at the cost and expense of really strengthening national parliaments, looking closely at what is happening in terms of are these bodies truly democratic, are there marginalizations or dysfunctionalities, and what needs to be addressed, also linked, of course, overall with enlargement and accession progress. I think more or less addressed all of the points, and thank you for the opportunity for replying.
David McAllister
Thank you, Professor Kops. First of all, did our guest miss something? Would somebody like to raise a point? That is not the case. Then first of all, thank you for your presence today.
You're a regular guest in the European Parliament and for once again contributing to the discussion. This dear colleagues concludes our interparliamentary meeting today. Thank you for your active participation and your contributions. One thing is clear enlargement is back and we will be very busy in the next years at a national and European level dealing with the accession process. It certainly requires sustained commitment from both the EU and also the candidate and potential candidate countries.
I have one last practical announcement.
Due to the heatwave today, our lunch with the heads of the national delegations will take place in a different venue than originally planned. We will not be meeting on the 12th floor, it's far too hot up there. We will go to the multifunctional restaurant, that is the Zone G level 00 room 1 and the lunch will start immediately. I would like to thank you all for participating, hope to see you again soon in Brussels and a safe travel back home. The meeting is closed.
Ask anything about this video — I analyse its transcript to answer.