Committee on Foreign Affairs Extraordinary meeting Presentation of the new EU Arctic strategy
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 sittingsWe have therefore organized the strategy along four chapters. The first one is strengthening security and resilience. The second one is about protecting the environment and addressing climate change. The third one is about supporting the Arctic economy and economic security. And the fourth one contributing to the prosperity of the people living in the Arctic.
Claude Veron-Reville
Now regarding security, the basis of our updated strategy is not surprising for you. You have showed, as the chair Mr. McAllister underlined, that you have a strong interest in the file. You did so with the own-initiative report that was issued last year and also with the Arctic study that came out last month and that we have read carefully.
You have along those reports consistently highlighted the need for the EU to address the change geopolitical landscape. Rightly so. And our updated Arctic strategy reflects also this new reality by putting security firmly at its core. Because the Arctic regions are no longer insulated against shifting geopolitical dynamics. Russia's war of aggression against Ukraine, Russia's complete disregard for the rules-based order, inviolability of borders and territorial integrity have made cooperation with Russia impossible.
Russia is building up its military capacity in the Arctic, reviving the Kola Peninsula as a strategic bastion and expanding the capacities of the port of Murmansk. In parallel, we are seeing a steady normalization of more confrontational behavior in the region, hybrid threats in the Baltic and increasingly too in the Arctic, are serious concern with recurring incidents affecting critical infrastructure and regional stability.
Russia maritime doctrine is linking the North Atlantic, the Arctic, and the Baltic theaters. And we need to adjust to this reality and regard the Arctic and Baltic regions as a continuous interconnected strategic space. And finally, we need to leave no doubt that sovereignty is not negotiable. But also to have a safe and secure Arctic, we need a resilient and prepared and populated Arctic. And at the heart of this lies improved infrastructure that would boost east-west connections from the Baltic to the Arctic.
We need infrastructure that is suited to the Arctic and to both civilian and defensive purposes. This requires speeding up the implementation of TEN-T projects such as Rail Nordica project and completing Rail Baltica. We need also to upgrade our vigilance capacity to safeguard our infrastructure against harsh climate and hybrid activities. This is why we will work to enhance our situational and maritime domain awareness through satellite data, in situ and remote sensor observation, and information sharing.
To do this, we aim to establish a maritime security hub. We want to work with Member States to improve the security of submarine cables in the region through an Arctic cable hub. Looking ahead, we hope that this initiative can be expanded to a comprehensive maritime security hub with Member States in the lead. We also want to increase our icebreaker fleet. The EU can count approximately 10 icebreakers, whereas Russia has nearly 50 of them.
The EU will need first to map the specific need for icebreakers with Member States through the new EU Industrial Maritime Value Chain Alliance, and we will explore opportunities to pool funding and technical resources within the neighborhood grouping.
Claude Veron-Reville
That means that we are ready to reach out to our partners too. Then again regarding space, Earth observation and navigation. We want to boost our Copernicus and Galileo coverage of the Arctic to improve our ability to monitor land and sea ice mapping, permafrost related changes, oil spill and maritime safety in the Arctic. To add to Copernicus capacities, a new Earth observation governmental service will support decision making in security and defense. And to complement Galileo free navigation services, the EU will initiate secure navigation services for government use with Galileo public regulated service.
These initiatives highlight that Arctic security is a key priority for the EU. Arctic security is European security. As the High Representative Vice-President said in Strasbourg on Tuesday, Europe has interests to defend, it has partners to work with and responsibilities to meet. Europe will not be a bystander in the Arctic. It is a collective effort which requires coordination with NATO and with partners.
I will stop there and give an opportunity to my colleague from INTPA, Mark Gray, to complement on the other points. Thank you very much and I look forward to hearing your comments and questions.
David McAllister
Thank you very much for your introductory statement. Before I give the floor to Mr. Gray, I'm pleased to welcome a group of national parliamentarians from Iceland, Liechtenstein, Norway, and Switzerland who are in Strasbourg for the 56th meeting of the EEA Joint Parliamentary Committee. Welcome, dear colleagues, to the European Parliament. Mr. Gray.
Mark Gray
Thank you so much, Chair, honorable members. Thank you for the invitation and I can also, also like to express my welcome to members from national parliaments and we've met quite a number of them very recently in Reykjavik. I want to begin by paying tribute to this Parliament and the recommendations and the study that has been very much a foundation also for the drafting of this joint communication. It's been an extensive consultation process. We've tried to listen as, as much as we can.
And I think many of the key elements that have been set out by this House are captured in, in the joint communication. I want to make three points and I'm going to try not to repeat what has just been said. First, very briefly, why are we doing this? Two, that shift of political framing that I think is important.
But if I can also respond to the chair. Strategies are nice, but what are you actually going to do about it? So I will try and spend most of the time on that. In terms of why are we doing this, I think the special envoy Claude has set out very nicely the changing situation. I think the the reality is that this is not an update of a strategy.
This is a new strategy to adapt to a new reality. And that reality is changing faster than probably any of us could expect. We now see that the Arctic is a geopolitical theater. We see that it risks to become a security theater. We have seen claims made on the Arctic and parts of it.
And I think with the European Union's experience, whether that be in Ukraine or in terms of our response to Greenland, we uphold the principles of territorial integrity and sovereignty.
That brings me to my second point: the framing. We are addressing this through a new lens, and it's a partnership lens. And again, with a number of colleagues at the back of this room that we've discussed in Norway, in Iceland, in Canada, the United States, Greenland, Faroe Islands. This is about building a strategy that very much brings together like-minded partners to address the issues of concern. For us, the framing matters because the northern neighborhood precisely conveys the sense of criticality, the closeness, the connectiveness that this issue brings.
What we are trying to do is to show what the European Union means for the Arctic, but also what the Arctic means for the European Union, and that we stand and support our neighbors. I think that's obviously true for the three European Union member states in the Arctic, Sweden, Finland, Denmark, but this is a strategy for the whole of the European Union. But now I want to turn to, in a sense, the chair's challenge of what about this, how are we going to turn this into reality? And I think what you have seen in this strategy is a complete mobilization of the whole Commission. This is not just a strategy of DG INTPA and the EEAS, and I should pay tribute in particular to DG MARE, who have played a fundamental role over many years.
This is a strategy that, if you go through it, has got real meat.
of deliverables here across a whole set of areas, whether that be, as has been mentioned, on digital, on space, on transport, on critical raw materials, on research, on innovation, on tourism, etc., etc. There is a lot of, there are a whole set of proposals here that look at the Arctic from that dual-use perspective. So not simply from a military or simply from a civilian, we are trying to build capabilities that cross those two different issues, whether that be in terms of space, again, whether that be in terms of transport. Of course, we're very aware that there is a special fragility around the Arctic. And that is why when we look at issues like critical raw materials, we absolutely underline the environmental, social, and governance standards.
It's when we look at renewable energy, we are very clear and strong on our commitment on at least what the European Union can do in terms of the moratorium on oil, gas, and coal in the Arctic.
When we look at the economy, we look at it from the perspective of what can we do concretely that benefits the people of the Arctic. And again, I come back to the point about how much we've placed emphasis on working together with the peoples of the Arctic, indigenous peoples, local communities, to build a number of very actionable points that will directly benefit them, whether that be, as I say, fisheries, blue economy, small and medium enterprises, tourism, etc. So there is a whole final section of the communication that addresses the people dimension. But I want to conclude with, in a sense, a question of what happens next. The first thing to say is that yes, this is a strategy, so it's not a legislative proposal, it doesn't have a detailed timeline, a detailed action plan, costings for each initiative.
But this is not business as usual. Already next week, the Commissioner Sinkevičius has been asked to follow up on the implementation of the strategy.
Already next week, DG INTPA will convene a meeting of all DGs to bring together all the different strands across the Commission to now go one by one, strand by strand, of how we take each one of these actionable points and take them forward. So it's from our perspective not a case of we write a strategy and we come back in a few months' time to consider what we did. We start already next week concretely looking at how we take this forward. Thank you for your attention.
David McAllister
Right, thank you to both of our guest speakers. And now we have time for an exchange of views. As always, I first give the floor to the coordinators for two minutes each, and Łukasz Kohut is speaking for the EPP.
Łukasz Kohut
Thank you very much, dear Chair. Nothing unites people like a common enemy. Our enemy comes from the East. It is a threat to us all, especially those in Central and Eastern Europe and the North. As the strategy rightly says, the Arctic, the North Atlantic, and the Baltic Sea are becoming one interconnected strategic space.
What happens in one affects the security of all Europe. Hybrid attacks are hitting us everywhere. GPS jamming, cable sabotage, drones over our infrastructure, and the shadow fleet in our waters. The High North is part of the same front. We cannot protect Europe while leaving the High North exposed.
The Arctic is a second gateway to Europe and must be fully protected. As the standing rapporteur for Norway and on behalf of Mika Aaltola, the rapporteur for the Arctic, we believe that the strategy is moving in the right direction by providing concrete tools to enhance security. Firstly, the maritime security hub will enable us to share information from various national and EU sources, from the seabed to space. Tracking Russian shadow fleet vessels must be a priority. Europe has concrete tools such as Earth observation data, Copernicus, and navigation services, Galileo.
Secondly, the Arctic cable hub is another initiative that could monitor and protect submarine cables in the North Atlantic and Arctic regions. Critical infrastructure is essential for security nowadays. Thirdly, we must expand European icebreaker capacity, as you mentioned, including through the new EU Industrial Maritime Value Chains Alliance. European polar vessels must balance the power in the region. Vigilance and preparedness are essential.
The EU must operate in various dimensions, such as defense, including military mobility and civil protection. We already know how to do this in the Baltic and across the European Arctic. Now these tools need real funding in the new EU budget, of course. I believe that like-minded partners in the region, such as Norway, Canada, and Iceland, will treat this strategy as an opportunity to develop also their capacities. Thank you very much.
Andreas Schieder
Yes, good morning, and thanks for the presentation. And I have the honor to speak also on behalf of our S&D shadow rapporteur, Robert Biedroń, who regrets not to be here. But I'm also particularly pleased that we are accompanied today with colleagues from the Norwegian and Icelandic parliament, which are also, let's say, part of the Arctic. And as previously has been pointed out, the 2021 strategy is no longer reflecting the reality which we have. We see that it's becoming increasingly volatile and also geopolitically sensitive, and therefore we need this update.
And the High Representative rightly said already, Arctic security is European security, and it's also about this rule-based order.
And we have to say that the Arctic in the past, even in the coldest days of the Cold War, was a rule-based order respected by everybody. And this compromise now is shaken. We have Russia, we have we have China there. We have to protect our critical infrastructure, the cable hub was already mentioned. And also think that still in the future partnership must be one of the key pillars, as you also pointed out of the strategy.
And especially important is to strengthen the EU partnership with Greenland, while also always saying we respect the Greenland's right to decide its own future in close cooperation with the the Denmark Kingdom. And we also should continue to deepen our relations with Norway, Iceland and Canada, as they are partners which are sharing the values stable, I have to say, not like others. And then there's the climate change. The Arctic warming nearly is warming nearly four times faster than the global average, and already the global average is enough. So four times more is even a big disaster, so we have to look on this.
And there is the question of critical raw materials where we have to look also that extraction is sustainable and meets the highest environmental and social standards, but also respecting the rights of the indigenous people. And this is my last point. I think we have to understand that the Arctic is an area where people are living, and living condition is important, but having people living there is also the answer of the strategic challenges of the Arctic. Thank you so much.
David McAllister
Thank you, Andreas. Who would like to take the floor for the Patriots group? Nobody for the ECR? Then for the Renew group, I give the floor to Marie-Agnes Strack-Zimmermann.
Marie-Agnes Strack-Zimmermann
Vielen Dank, David. Ich will nicht wiederholen, was die Kolleginnen und Kollegen gesagt haben, aber die Arktis ist eben nicht nur ein Abenteuerland, ein wunderbares, sondern auch im Sicherheitsbereich ein großes Thema. Und ich bin sehr froh, dass Europa endlich da sich damit beschäftigt mit diesem Thema. Nicht umsonst arbeiten wir auch an dieser Stelle in Zukunft mit Kanada eng zusammen, wenn wir feststellen, dass die Grenze zwischen Kanada und Dänemark eine über 3000 Kilometer lange Seegrenze ist. Allein da berühren wir uns schon.
Und angesichts dieser Welt, die ziemlich aus den Fugen gerät, ist es eben von großer Bedeutung hinzuschauen: Was können wir machen? Was müssen wir machen sicherheitspolitisch? Und insofern, um es auf den Punkt zu bringen, vielen Dank, dass wir dieses Papier haben. Wir sollten daran weiterarbeiten, aber eben nicht nur drüber reden, sondern uns auch klar werden, was wir tun können. Der Bericht sagt ja einiges.
Das Thema Grönland wurde gerade aufgegriffen. Das, was wir letztes Jahr erlebt haben, übrigens stand Europa da an einer wirklich sehr soliden Stelle an der Seite Dänemark bzw. Grönland. Das zeigt, wenn wir zusammenstehen, ist es hilfreich. Also hinschauen reicht nicht. Wir müssen unsere Strategie haben und wir müssen sie auch robust, verbal robust durchsetzen, um dort nicht eine weitere Front aufzumachen.
Vielen Dank.
Ville Niinistö
Thank you, Chair, and thanks to the Commission for presenting the strategy. Obviously, there are a lot of improvements from the last strategy, but there are also some worries that our group have, so I will focus mainly on those. We think that the improvements on geopolitical understanding and the importance of that situation, I think there are a lot of improvements in that.
I think it's important that we prepare for the Russian hybrid threats, we act against the Russian shadow fleet, we could do even more on that. But I will focus now more as a former minister for environment of Finland on the environmental and climate responsibility that EU has in the Arctic. Arctic is a very sensitive area. I mean, if species have to move northwards, they have no place left to go if global warming continues. There are very many biodiversity-rich areas, undersea areas, for example, which are not yet protected.
So it's one of the least protected areas still in the world. And EU and my own country, when I was a minister, we worked a lot to increase the protected areas in the region and also work for the moratorium on the fossil fuel extraction. I see that in these issues in this strategy, there is a bit of backtracking from 2021. That's at least my feeling. So if you can alleviate my worries and also answer my question, because I feel that the geopolitical challenges and the environmental challenges are interlinked.
Partly we have geopolitical threats in the Arctic if we don't create better rules on stopping overexploitation. So the better rules we have on areas of no-go where you can't economically exploit the resources in the most sensitive northern areas, if we can have a moratorium there, it will also ease the pressures of different countries fighting for those resources, including also Russia.
I have to say also that often historically if there has been protected areas, Russia has respected them. So if we do make international treaties in these issues, it's a progress where we can also reduce the risk of geopolitical tension. And the same same applies to IMO as well and maritime traffic. We have to make sure that there is a highest standard of what kind of criteria the vessels that move into the Arctic waters fill because the risk of oil spill is very high and there's the European waters and European coasts that are also affected by that. So I would like you to answer a bit more about my worries that there is still focus on environmental regulations and standards globally and and you are advocating that and that goes hand in hand with the geopolitics.
David McAllister
Thank you. Who would like to take the floor for the left? Please, madam. Two minutes.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. The new Arctic strategy is an important step forward. But let me be clear. A strategy is only as strong as its implementation. From Nordic perspective, the Arctic is not Europe's periphery.
It is an integral part of our security, competitiveness, and future.
Merja Kyllönen
I would like to highlight three priorities. First, security must be backed by concrete action. Russia's war against Ukraine has fundamentally changed Europe's security environment. We must strengthen our preparedness, protect official infra, and improve our ability to respond to emerging threats. This requires closer cooperation between the EU, NATO, and the Nordic partners, as well as concrete investments in Arctic infra and security, and especially in transport area.
We cannot afford to treat Arctic security as a secondary issue. Second, we must turn Europe's Arctic ambitions also into smart investments, innovations, and jobs. We have world-class expertise in many area in Arctic research, digital solutions, expertise in strategic assets for the entire European Union. In the north part of Europe, the EU must ensure that ambitions translate into concrete projects, stronger industrial capacity, and long-term economic opportunities for Arctic regions.
I'm not saying again what my dear colleague Ville Niinistö said about climate and environmental issues. I don't misuse your time, but I'm totally on the same line with him. And I think he will support me as a former transport minister with the transport roads in the Arctic area. I think words are not enough. We need also funding, investments and measurable results.
And third, security and economic development must go hand in hand with environmental responsibility and respect for local communities. So Sámi people and other indigenous communities must be respected and local people must have a meaningful role in decisions affecting their future. Thank you.
David McAllister
Thank you. And finally for the ID group, would somebody like to take the floor? That is not the case. Then I now give the floor to our AFET standing rapporteur for the Arctic, Urmas Paet, please.
Urmas Paet
Thank you very much.
Thank you, dear colleagues from the Commission and External Action Service and of course from this house. I have been following and dealing with Arctic issues in the European Parliament for last 10 years already, so that I have seen lots of changes in the attitude, which is, I would say, unfortunately under given circumstances of course positive, that we pay much more attention to developments in Arctic. If I recall, which was the attitude and comments around 10 years ago, why at all we should deal with Arctic, and if we look today that the main center is in security issues, then yes, we have noticed huge and big changes in this regard. I'm of course very happy that finally there is also new European Union's Arctic strategy. Of course I fully agree that the implementation is the most important element here.
And I just want to mention few points where I think that comparing also with the European Parliament's last year's recommendation, where actually 510 members of this house supported this recommendation, so this is actually rather big majority, which also expresses large and united understanding about Arctic developments in European Parliament. Well, few things which I still want to mention. Of course I understand why maybe some of them are not in this new European Union's Arctic strategy, but still I guess we should keep them in our minds.
European Union's future, I mean enlargement. Yes, we got message from Iceland from August, but still, I guess European Union itself should have its doors open and be very welcoming and positive about this kind of developments, because it's always better to have, for instance, two security nets than one. Today we have the NATO, but well, looking at the developments in the world, I would say that EU in this regard is very important new contributor to European security. Second element, energy and energy security. I of course share the concerns of my colleagues from Green group and Left, but this is of course the issue where we have to find adequate balance point.
Because at the same time we also speak that energy security of Europe is very important, but the most secure energy we can have is energy which comes from Europe. And in this regard, of course, Norway is very important contributor to the European energy security.
And unfortunately whatever EU says, be it moratorium, be it whatever, well, I have my doubts that Russians or Chinese will care about it. So that we should avoid also the situation that with our regulations and with our attitude we only in final end manage to influence the most secure and environmental friendly energy production in North, I mean Norway. And the others who don't have such a high standards do whatever they want. So that in this sense I guess the balance point here is very important. Thirdly, I'm glad that also I would say finally European Commission and External Action Service are taking Arctic issues much more seriously than before.
And in this regard I guess that also the adequate structures and empowerment of this field is important. Fourthly, China. We speak a lot about Russia when we speak about security in Arctic, but of course we should much more also keep eye on Chinese activities in this regard. And to stop here, I also would like to see that in this house before the end of this mandate we once again come back to Arctic issues also in our plenary hall. Thank you.
David McAllister
Thank you Urmas. As a vice chair of our committee you know that you can sometimes be generous with speaking time. So.
Urmas Paet
Yes, thank you, but I felt that there is not such a strong pressure. But sorry, sorry.
David McAllister
Now, who else would like to take the floor? First, Hana Jalloul. Please raise your hand, Billy Kelleher.
Hana Jalloul Muro
Thank you very much. I can see from all our interventions that the main worry we have, all of us, I think, here, is the issue of environmental topic, that I think all of us are worried with this new strategies, local communities, what is the guarantee that we respect the local communities? And something important for us that has been mentioned before, apart of everything related to the environment, is critical raw materials. How is this addressed here? What is the clear strategy on raw materials, thinking about communities, environment, everything, but how is our policy on raw materials?
Has been mentioned also when we talk about international actors, you know, I know that the main worry also for us here is China, Russia, how these actors are involved there, how the European Union can have our own leverage on the issue, which it is very important. And something I was reading the other day, that maritime routes now that are coming from other parts of the world because of the defrosting and things like this, that what will be very interesting to hear from you.
Thank you very much indeed because this meeting is very important. This is gonna be a very important topic for the European Union in the next years. Thanks.
Villy Søvndal
Since I'm a Danish MEP, I'm very much interested in the Greenlandic part of it. I visited Greenland a month ago. It was the same month where the agreement between the US and Greenland and Denmark was ratified in New York. There was very much a sense of relief, and I think everyone who visited Greenland has a feeling how much threatened the population of Greenland felt, in this case not from Russia and China, but from the USA. And I think it's very important therefore that the outcome of the agreement was an agreement that NATO should play a much more central role in the defense of the northern of Greenland, which I think is good.
It's a good exchange for a bilateral agreement between Denmark and and and US that it's now a multilateral agreement that's there in in what security is is concerned. Another thing worrying about the geopolitical a lot more difficult situation is that Greenland is only connected with two cables to the rest of the world. If these ones are cut, the communication possibilities for big parts of Greenland is changed. I wonder if you have some views about what actions could could be taken there. And then I think your your approach to this, that it's the people living there as the central part, is a very, very important one because I think that's been also in the in the struggle with the US, the Danish approach, that nothing there should be made without the people living there.
And I think this approach is an important one. I see the hammer is raised, so thank you very much.
David McAllister
Who else would like to take the floor? Then before I hand over to our guest speakers for their closing statements of each five minutes, let me just also add that I very much welcome that the strategy has been updated and that it is a joint ownership of the European Commission and the European External Action Service. So we I think have a really good strategy in place, but of course actions speak not words. And one of the first litmus tests will be how much of this will we see in the MFF for the next period, because of course all will cost a lot of money. Since we're running out of time, I will not go into any details, many were addressed by the colleagues.
Thank you.
I will close this meeting at 22:00, so we have five minutes each. Who would like to begin? Madame Baron-Revaz.
Claude Veron-Reville
Thank you very much, Mr. Chair, and thank you very much, honorable members. I'm very happy to see from the comments that we see eye to eye on the situation of the Arctic and the fact that today's strategic and security landscape call for revisiting seriously our approach to the Arctic. As Mr. Urmas Paet underlined, we're not new to the Arctic.
We started our first policy on the Arctic in 2008 and we're already at the fifth iteration. But gradually we increase our involvement on Arctic affairs and we've increased also the importance we give to security without walking back on the key elements that are environment, climate change and the people. Someone mentioned the importance of standards and notably IMO. I want to highlight that the Arctic is neither a place empty of people nor a place with no rules. There are rules applying to the Arctic and definitely IMO is one of the key rule-setter for the Arctic and the shipping.
And we will continue to be extremely involved in those framework because the pollution that can come from shipping is an area that we must keep in focus. A third point of partnerships. Partnerships, as you've seen, are central to the way we see our policy for the Arctic.
And partnership will take a very concrete step soon as we prepare for the summit with Canada at the end of the month, and the Arctic issues will be discussed with Canada. There is also a potential to strengthen our cooperation with the UK, which is not an Arctic state, but a key state in the GIUK gap, the Greenland-Iceland-UK gap. And as we prepare for the EU-UK summit on the 20th of November, and the security and defense partnership with the UK importantly includes the mention of Arctic issues. And my counterparts in the UK have already reached out to me to discuss how we can see and how we can collaborate on this issue. Norway and Iceland, of course, we have security and defense partnership with these countries, and we have already an Arctic dialogue with Norway, and we wish to continue this dialogue.
And with Iceland, there is a whole paragraph on Arctic issues in our security and defense partnership with Iceland, and that will be another opportunity to discuss what we can do together.
Claude Veron-Reville
Regarding Greenland, I will leave to my colleague from the Commission to speak about the cooperation frame, but we as European have been unambiguous in lending our support to the Kingdom of Denmark, to Greenland and to Denmark. And we have all welcomed the trilateral agreement that is strengthening the security in the Arctic and we will continue to stay behind the Kingdom of Denmark. The Kingdom of Denmark has our back. And to conclude on the implementation, we've worked very closely with all services of the Commission to produce this strategy and we will continue to work for its implementation. You are right that implementation will be key and you are right to mention that the MFF will be key.
Some actions can already be taken under the current MFF, for example adding some satellites to increase the observation of the Arctic territory, but some will need to be backed by the future financing of the EU. Highlighting also that the Foreign Affairs Council will now follow up on this strategy. And as the Foreign Affairs Council follows up on this strategy, I hope and I look forward to stay in contact with the AFET and the European Parliament to prepare for those conclusions. Thank you very much.
David McAllister
Sure, we will certainly remain in contact. This topic is always high on our agenda. Mr. Gray, please.
Mark Gray
Thank you, and I'd like to thank the honorable members for the extremely salient points on many key issues. I'm going to start with the chair's first, firstly in terms of the MFF. I think we would love to be able to put a bill in the text and say this is where it will all come from. I think we would argue that it simply underlines the wisdom of the Commission's proposal on the MFF in the sense of you can see actions here that will require funding from Heading 1, from Heading 2, from Heading 3. It will require a mobilization of Member State funding.
And of course, we have already the very clear commitment of the Commission on Greenland to double the funding in the next MFF. So I think from our side, um, there is a very clear will. And I think we hope very strongly that that, um, that logic in terms of an issue like the Arctic is underlined as final decisions are taken on, on the budget. My second point I want to bring together, um, Greenland and people. Because I very much agree with the assessment that basically anything we try to do in this strategy, we need to do it together with the people of the Arctic.
Because only they genu- really understand, I think, the challenges that we face on a whole series of particular issues.
And that's why it's so important that we work so closely together. That's why there's a lot of emphasis in the communication in the final chapter on dialogue and engagement, a very particular focus on engagement with young people. I think both the High Representative but also the Commissioner have spent quite some time in their engagements talking to young people across the Arctic to very much try to listen and understand their concerns. I want to move next to the climate. I'd like to already state that from our perspective we do not see a backtracking.
I think it was very important the statement that was made that you need to look at the geopolitical and the climate together. There is a complete, a full chapter in the communication on the climate, and that to be very open was done very intentionally. We wanted to send a very clear message of the unprecedented scale of the challenge we see.
If you look at AMOC and the discussions that are taking place on that, and you see very quickly the real climate emergency we face. The same debate on permafrost. The same debate on pollution. And that is why you will see throughout this text a set of key deliverables on the climate itself, but then as you look at each one of the sectors, the climate dimension is very much reflected there. As has been mentioned by the special envoy, I think the IMO regulations point when we look at pollution, when we look at emissions of black carbon emissions from the Arctic, very clearly set out also within the communication.
Of course, it would be remiss of me not to mention the question of hydrocarbons in the Arctic. There's been a lot of press coverage, as there was, I think, always going to be, whatever the language was there. I think the President, the High Representative, the Commissioner have been very clear on this. If you take the text that's in the communication and you compare it to 2021, it is the same language on the EU's commitment.
Exactly the same language on the EU policy. Where there is a difference is indeed on the fact that we have not been able to reach that multilateral legal obligation. And that's why there is different language and that does reflect also the energy security angle, which is important why you see that language. But in terms of the EU's commitment, it is crystal clear. Thank you.
David McAllister
Thank you to both speakers. There are no further comments from your side. Is there anything to raise on any other business? That is not the case. Then let me announce the date of our next meeting.
That will be on the 3rd of November 2026 from 9 to half past 12 and from 3 to 5 in the afternoon. This meeting will take place in Brussels. The meeting is closed and let's now all rush to the plenary.