Sergey Lagodinsky
Member of the European Parliament · ALE · DE
“Mr President, I would like to draw your attention to some of the chants that were uttered here from that side of the Chamber, when somebody dared to stand in opposition to one of the oral amendments.”
“Mr President, Madam Vice‑President, thank you so much for this action plan. And yet, OpenAI and Anthropic raise USD 122 billion and USD 30 billion, Mistral raises EUR 3 billion. OpenAI offers the American Government a 5 % stake, in Europe, we have no clear timeline for gigafactories.”
“So the extraordinary thing, as opposed to those people who are living here in peace, is that they are getting bombs on their heads while they are preparing for membership, while they are doing their homework, while they're doing reforms, while they're doing anti-corruption reforms. Yes, not everything is perfect.”
“We're not talking about the victims from the past. We're talking about the victims from now that are killed by Russia and by the Kremlin. It's not just about the past; it's about protecting them in the present.”
“Prezydent Zełenski dokonał błędnej prowokacji, popełnił błąd, nazwał jednostkę wojskową imieniem UPA, czyli zbrodniarzy wojennych, którzy mordowali Polaków. Jak Pan się odniesie do tego? Dlaczego on to zrobił i czy Pan to potępi? 2-0412-0000 Sergey Lagodinsky (Verts/ALE), blue-card answer.”
“(The speaker agreed to take several blue-card questions) 2-0319-0000 Bart Groothuis (Renew), blue-card question. – Thank you, Mr Lagodinsky. You say that regulations in Europe are not a problem for the development of frontier AI models. I beg to differ. The copyright directive is very different from the US and China.”
The complete record
Every one of 59 lines we hold for Sergey Lagodinsky, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 1 of 2.
“Mr President, I would like to draw your attention to some of the chants that were uttered here from that side of the Chamber, when somebody dared to stand in opposition to one of the oral amendments. People – colleagues – were called Nazis just because they dared to have a different position on something, which is very sensitive, but we do not share the style of calling each other Nazis. Some of the real Nazis ... (Protests) Some of the real Nazis who are present in this Chamber are never called as such during the sessions here. I have never heard anyone call each other that. I would like to ask you to identify and to sanction those who are attacking their colleagues just for their opinion here, who dare to oppose that amendment. 3-0190-0000”
“I do understand that, and I do agree that this is maybe not the most smart thing to do – what President Zelenskyy is doing – and if I were his advisor, I would advise him otherwise. But I am not his advisor. We are not sitting in Kyiv. We are not getting bombed and we're not getting raped. And that's why I don't think we have a moral right to teach anyone in the middle of a war. 2-0413-0000”
“Prezydent Zełenski dokonał błędnej prowokacji, popełnił błąd, nazwał jednostkę wojskową imieniem UPA, czyli zbrodniarzy wojennych, którzy mordowali Polaków. Jak Pan się odniesie do tego? Dlaczego on to zrobił i czy Pan to potępi? 2-0412-0000 Sergey Lagodinsky (Verts/ALE), blue-card answer. – Colleague, I don't need lessons from you on how to support Ukraine. I and my party have been supporting Ukraine and Maidan since 2014 and since the occupation in Crimea. We were against Nord Stream 2 as one of the few parties. I was for arms sales long before anyone in Poland was talking about arms sales to Ukraine. So I don't need lessons on that. What I do understand is the grievances of the Polish people.”
“We're not talking about the victims from the past. We're talking about the victims from now that are killed by Russia and by the Kremlin. It's not just about the past; it's about protecting them in the present. (The speaker agreed to take a blue-card question) 2-0411-0000 Piotr Müller (ECR), pytanie zadane przez podniesienie niebieskiej kartki. – Szanowny Panie Pośle! Zaskakuje mnie Pana postawa, bo przypominam sobie stanowisko Niemiec na początku, gdy wybuchła w 2022 roku wojna. I wtedy, pamiętam doskonale, bo byłem na spotkaniu z Olafem Scholzem w Berlinie, jak reagował i jak Niemcy były wtedy absolutnie bierne, jeżeli chodzi o pomoc dla Ukrainy. Dlatego jak słyszę dzisiaj Pana wypowiedź i pouczanie Polski w tym zakresie, to niestety przychodzą mi złe myśli. Natomiast Pan nie rozumie jednej rzeczy.”
“So the extraordinary thing, as opposed to those people who are living here in peace, is that they are getting bombs on their heads while they are preparing for membership, while they are doing their homework, while they're doing reforms, while they're doing anti-corruption reforms. Yes, not everything is perfect. But before you make accusations like those against those who are fighting against bombs, fighting for the lives of their children, you should make your homework and you should prepare the facts. It's very clear that in extraordinary times and with extraordinary victims that we're seeing, we need to be extraordinary and out of the ordinary in our support for Ukraine. The best accession help is the defence help. This is what the NATO meeting is about. Nothing will justify not helping Ukraine now.”
“Mr President, colleagues, Ms Bryłka was standing here and saying Ukraine is not paying the cost. Ukraine is not paying the cost? Ukraine is doing an extraordinary thing – and this is what this report is about. Ukraine is mastering both: on the one hand ... (Addressing other Members) Can you please stop talking over there? What's going on there? I would like to have new speaking time here. I'm sorry, but if I'm disrupted, I cannot speak. 2-0409-0000”
“From the 3 000 AI large language models in the world, only 30 are European, 0 are compliant and we will have 0 new AI large language models if we do not deregulate. 2-0320-0000”
“(The speaker agreed to take several blue-card questions) 2-0319-0000 Bart Groothuis (Renew), blue-card question. – Thank you, Mr Lagodinsky. You say that regulations in Europe are not a problem for the development of frontier AI models. I beg to differ. The copyright directive is very different from the US and China. But let me just zoom in on one aspect of the GDPR. I'd like to have your opinion on it as an expert. If you make neural networks, you do a hypothesis – in the style of Sergey Lagodinsky, I want to set up a reasoning, which is hard because I'm not you, but AI can do that. In the GDPR, using your data is not allowed to train a model. How are you willing to solve this?”
“Mr President, Madam Vice‑President, thank you so much for this action plan. And yet, OpenAI and Anthropic raise USD 122 billion and USD 30 billion, Mistral raises EUR 3 billion. OpenAI offers the American Government a 5 % stake, in Europe, we have no clear timeline for gigafactories. Washington cuts off access to Fable and Mythos, and the Commission to this day has no access to these models. This town and this House are obsessed about deregulation. Regulation is not the problem. It is about equity. It is about funding. We have now the AI omnibus. Did it change anything on the ground? No. This Commission should convene a meeting between businesses, the big businesses of Europe, and demand that they put on the table trillions of euros in order to invest into our future. Because if they don't, we will not have future at all.”
“Just a small also notice about these very capable AI models which are now coming to the markets: we are also working with a concrete list of actions also, which is needed to address the new cybersecurity threats with these new capable models. 2-0063-0000 Interventions à la demande 2-0064-0000”
“Here I want to encourage Parliament also to proceed with our Digital Omnibus, because we have to also clarify the rules to access to data, because this is needed to train and develop AI models. Also encouraging developments we have seen in the businesses because our AI uptake among our businesses in Europe was increasing already 50 % in last year. But still we have to work, especially with our key industrial sectors and public sector to support them also to uptake and use AI. I want to very much assure you that the technological sovereignty package we have proposed is not only about statement of ambition, it is really a concrete action plan and the work is already ongoing.”
“Also we have 8 000 start-ups which are developing and training AI. But one big obstacle for these companies has been that they haven't had access to computing capacity. That's why it's so important that now we are investing, together with our Member States, in 19 AI factories, and we are able to open up this computing capacity for our start-ups to train AI models in Europe. In a very short time, we will open also the official call for those gigafactories. Then we will be able to have even much more computing power. AI factories are not only about computing power; it's also bringing together high-quality data sets to train AI and also talented people.”
“Most of this is private money, and it should be made sure that this money will materialise. Number three: standards, standards, standards. We don't want the backlash as we see in the United States with computer centres. Yes, we need computer centres, yes, we need more compute, but it should be sustainable. 2-0062-0000 Henna Virkkunen, Executive Vice-President of the Commission. – Mr President, honourable Members, thank you for this very encouraging and lively debate, because you have illustrated also very well why tech sovereignty is so crucial at this time and age. Many of you were very much underlining how important it is to build up our own capacity on AI. And I very much, of course, agree. We have also great strengths here because we have, for example, 30 % more AI engineers per capita than USA. So we have a great talent pool.”
“Mr President, dear colleagues, dear Vice-President, I think many don't understand that what we saw just a couple of days ago is serious, it was the first time that the 'kill switch' was used. If needed, the United States can switch off 90% of the world from its frontier models. And frontier models are no mere business models, they are war models and defence models, and this must be clear to everyone. So what should we do? Number one: strategy, strategy, strategy. Giga factories: what's happening with them? Do we have special giga factories for defence purposes? How will we deal with the models that will be there at the end? Number two: compute, compute and equity, equity. I applaud the Commission's efforts. I know about the EUR 800 billion which are planned, but where will we get them?”
“A sovereignty package cannot be withdrawn just because the US threatens it. Alliances – we need alliances with geopolitical grown ups, sustainable and democratic. What we have in this House, a global democratic tech alliance. And we need trust – the trust that has been damaged with this White House and big tech, that should be restored. 2-0551-0000”
“Mr President, colleagues, while we debate an AI strategy for EU trade, a trilogue is underway on the EU-US trade deal. And while this report calls for our sovereignty to be upheld, the deal risks coercing us. The Trump administration already threatened to raise new tariffs should the Commission push ahead with the tech sovereignty package, and the Commission withdrew – for the third time. This we cannot accept. And this we will not accept. We need the three conditions: a sunrise clause, a sunset clause, and also an anti-coercion instrument should the US threaten tariffs or interfere like it did this morning. Why does this happen? Because we do not agree on rules of EU engagement globally. First, we need a vision – vision is not fair. Vision is not submission and not subordination.”
“– I fully agree with your assessment that we should not think in silos. In that regard, there is a question when we need also more and more affordable energy. In that sense, will you support also, from your perspective and from your group, for example, more utilisation of nuclear energy in order to achieve all these goals that you have suggested? 2-0024-0000 Sergey Lagodinsky (Verts/ALE), blue-card answer. – I'm sure you would be happy if I said yes, but I think we have other capabilities – the capabilities in renewable that are underused and underutilised now. Especially now, during the Iran crisis, I wonder why so many are not addressing the obvious: that we missed an opportunity to invest more into renewables: sun and wind, but also thermal and water. Then we would not be as vulnerable as we are now.”
“Frankly, the fact that you, Madam Vice-President, are not the Commissioner for defence and that the Commissioner for defence is not you is one of the greatest tragedies of our institutions, because Europe still thinks in silos while the threats against us are converging. We need a European Defence Union also for digital, a strategic command centre for Europe, also for digital, a European Security Council ready to act. We need European AI defence troops and a European AI defence shield – built in Europe, powered by European technologies like Mistral, controlled by democracies. Because a continent that cannot defend itself and its borders – its digital borders – will not control its fate. The time to act is now. (The speaker agreed to take a blue-card question) 2-0023-0000 Davor Ivo Stier (PPE), blue-card question.”
“Madam President, both the Commission and the Council are missing the point. And the point is: a new arms race has begun – not with tanks, not with missiles, with algorithms. If real, Mythos is an algorithm of mass destruction, and it is unfolding now. The line between civilian innovation and instrument of war is disappearing before our eyes. The same AI system that helps you to have algorithms to book your travels in the morning can attack hospitals, power grids and military systems in the evening. EU must initiate a global AI governance regime to address the topic. Let's be frank: in cybersecurity, defence alone is not enough. Deterrence matters. The capability to strike back matters. The capability to make adversaries fear consequences matters.”
“Something that this House has proposed and something that the EPP, together with some representatives of the Commission and with German Government, hijacked yesterday during the negotiations for AI Act omnibus. And this is the unacceptable truth. And this truth has to be changed. We need a ban on nudifiers to combat CSAM. 3-0298-0000”
“Madam President, 18 % of all children. 1 in 6 children are victims of cyberbullying. And this is not normal. It cannot, it may not become the new generational normalcy. We cannot accept this. How do we fix it? Well, not with quick fixes, but with structural solutions. What's the difference? Age verification or social media bans are quick fixes. They are not going into the real solution. And the real solution is the business model. How do we tackle that? By DSA. DSA implementation is what we need. We need to switch off recommender systems by default. We need to crack down on dark patterns. We need to mandate platforms to share their data with researchers. And what we need is a ban on nudifiers.”
“We have brought experience of other affected countries like Moldova, and we have expedited a lot of cooperation, including the process of visa liberalisation – not because it is for the EU, because it is for Armenians themselves. 2-0517-0000”
“Madam President, every time I meet Nikol Pashinyan, the courageous Prime Minister of Armenia, he emphasises an essential point: the pro-European reforms are not for someone else, they are for Armenians. And indeed it is important to remind the voters also in these June elections that democracy is not for someone else, these elections are not for someone else, and the peace deal is not for someone else. It is for Armenians themselves. And this is precisely why all the democratic reforms deserve to be guarded against manipulation. Because interference is for someone else – for Moscow, for Peking, for corruption, a corrupt oligarch or clergy with ties to the FSB. And this is why we, the European Union, will support Armenian democracy. We will activate the mechanism against interference.”
“But justice is not credible if we still pay Russia to kill – billions for gas, oil and nuclear fuel. So no impunity also means no dirty deals with Moscow. 2-0484-0000”
“Madam President, Russia is not just destroying Ukrainian cities – Russia is testing whether justice is alive. While the right wing is going to Moscow to negotiate, as we just heard, every abducted Ukrainian child, every deported Ukrainian prisoner, every tortured Ukrainian civilian is asking us, the EU, one simple question: do crimes still have consequences? Our answer must be very clear: yes they do. As a lawyer, I know, justice is not just a slogan, it is a system. The system must be built, defended, funded, enforced, and that's why I pushed for a permanent tribunal against the crime of aggression here in this House. That's why we must be building a machinery of justice: the tribunal, the International Claims Commission, full support for the ICC and a global coalition that goes beyond Europe.”
“And now Budapest stays stands for more: for betrayal, for cowardice, for something for which Europe does not want to stand. We will help Ukraine and Ukraine will help us. Slava Ukraini! 1-0034-0000”
“Madam President, four years sounds like an abstract number here in Brussels, but in Ukraine it's counted by mornings and shelters, nights in the cold and empty chairs – chairs at kitchen tables that will forever remain vacant. I looked into the eyes of what Russia calls collateral: a geography teacher who teaches her students the world from a basement, who draws Europe on a wall by candlelight, while her own child is learning the sound of drones as the new alphabet. I talked to a medic. He said it's not his dream to survive; his dream is to be remembered. We talked to Putin. We traded with him. We called him stability. Those were our mistakes. We own them; we repair them. But Ukrainians pay for those mistakes. The Budapest Memorandum was a huge mistake.”
“Madam President, to the people of Minneapolis, to the families of Renee Good and Alex Pretti, to every American who believes that power must answer to law: Europe weeps with you, Europe sees you and Europe stands with you. I would like to apologise to you for the fascists here from among ourselves who don't understand that nothing – no policy – is worth the life of a human being. That is what it is about now. Our European Union was built on one radical idea: the state is never above the law. And quite honestly, American friends, we learned it from you and we learned that a principle like this has no passports, no borders, no nationality. So to American citizens: your democracy is the biggest gift you gave to humanity. Cherish it! To senators and congresspeople, our colleagues: this is your moment. Use it.”
“Not by force, not by silence, but by law, by unity, and by standing with Venezuela's democratic forces in their diversity and their feeling and longing for freedom. 2-0400-0000”
“Madam President, colleagues, this moment in Venezuela is not just about one abduction, it's not about one regime, and it's not about one country. It is a test for the rules that protect all of us. Yes, the capture of Maduro may feel right today. And, honestly, my heart rejoiced with many Venezuelans when I heard the news. But feelings do not build order. Rules do. If international law becomes optional for the strongest, it vanishes for the weakest. And that's a problem. Yes, some prisoners were released ‑ too few, too selectively ‑ but repression remains. The system remains, and squeezing oil out of a despotic regime is no better than ruling by despotism. The truth is this: this was never about democracy. It was about power. And that is why Europe must lead. We must be the other, the better continent.”
“I am really pleased to hear that this group has finally recognised that the threat is coming from Russia – thank you very much. Number two, we have plenty of instruments for cooperation. We have an agreement between Denmark and the United States, as I already mentioned, and we have the Arctic mission of NATO that was already exercised this week. Yes, there were not so many soldiers and troops on the ground, but, come on, there are only 150 American troops on the ground. In fact, this number was reduced by the Americans. The Americans have neglected this issue for many years, well, now they woke up, and so did we. So let's join forces and do it together. Instead of playing the card of blackmailing and of market deals that Trump wants to do with us. So cooperation and not military threat. 2-0204-0000”
“Europe, colleague Madison, needs a Security Council. We need one united voice, fast decisions and a lot of military capacity. That's the conclusion that we draw for ourselves. (The speaker agreed to take a blue-card question) 2-0202-0000 Petras Gražulis (ESN), pakėlus mėlynąją kortelę pateiktas klausimas. – Ar jūs gyvenate... ar jūs, ponai, nematote realybės? Juk puikiai žinote, kad Grenlandijai, kiek kalba Trumpas, yra grėsmė tiek Rusija, tiek Kinija. Europa nesugeba apginti Ukrainos. Aš manau, kad Europa nesugeba ir savęs apginti. Tai būdama Grenlandija Jungtinių Amerikos Valstijų ne tik užtikrins saugumą Grenlandijai, bet ir pačiai ir Europai. Tai aš manau, kad mes turime atsipeikėti ir suprasti realybę. 2-0203-0000 Sergey Lagodinsky (Verts/ALE), blue-card answer. – First of all, thank you very much.”
“Mr President, dear American friends – my plea is to you. I came to the United States at 14 straight from the Soviet Union, and I became a believer in American openness, democracy and leadership. Now I speak to you as a European, as a friend: wake up, speak up. Your leadership is undoing what America has built in the last century. It replaces a hemisphere of freedom with a hemisphere of blackmail. Greenland is not the issue. The United States can already use military access as it wants. The agreement with Denmark dates back to 1951. The story is not about new security threats. Denmark is your ally, the EU is your ally, Greenland is your ally and not for sale. Blackmail among allies is not security, it is a betrayal. The consequences for all of us are also clear. Europe needs a new foreign policy doctrine.”
“It's about how to treat generative AI under the AI Act in such cases, whether we designate them a core platform service under the DMA, what the status of generative AI is under the DSA – these are questions, these are uncomfortable questions, but hell, uncomfortable questions are being put by those who are sanctioned, and they are courageous enough. So let's be as courageous as they are to ask those questions and to answer them. 2-0043-0000”
“Madam President, yes, colleague Hahn, AI is just a tool, but hell, it's a powerful one. What is happening now, what we're experiencing, is precisely what we have been warning about. What we are experiencing is precisely why we fought for a powerful AI Act, for the DSA, for the DMA. We have the instruments; we need leadership, we need vision and we need enforcement. And it is not about reviewing and revising, it's about action. Last week, Vice-President, I asked you, what do we do with such generative AIs? It's not about marking fakes or marking deep fakes.”
“And now, very briefly, to Ukraine: there is only one security guarantee for Ukraine which is effective, and it's not the blurry Article 5, it's Article 42 of our Treaty. That's why EU membership now! 3-0042-0000”
“Madam President, dear colleagues, something extraordinary is happening. The new US national security strategy states it plainly: certainty is over, alliances are no more given. I am a transatlanticist, but transatlanticism doesn't mean blindness. When rhetoric across the Atlantic turns against the European Union, we must act, invest in our own capacities, and build our new decision-making bodies. The times when Orbán or Mr Deutsch determines how fast we decide is over. The times when Mr Fico decides how much we act is over. The times when Putin determines how fast we act is over. We need new solutions, making decision-making easier. Not sometime, but now. I propose introducing a European Security Council that would decide fast about our existential questions.”
“Zweitens: Wir müssen den Schutz kritischer Infrastruktur prioritär behandeln. Deutschland kommt da eine ganz große Verantwortung zu als einer industriellen Nation Europas. Drittens: Wir müssen an unserer Haltung arbeiten. Es muss klar sein: Die Angriffe finden schon jetzt statt. 3-0236-0000”
“Frau Präsidentin, liebe Kolleginnen, liebe Kollegen! Europa wird nicht irgendwann angegriffen. Die Angriffe finden jetzt statt: Wir sehen sie, wir lesen über sie, wir sind betroffen. Ganz ehrlich, bisher haben wir keine überzeugende Antwort auf diese Angriffe gefunden – weder technisch noch strategisch. Eine Drohnenwand, ja, irgendwann, 2030 oder so. Irgendwann? Nein, irgendwann ist keine Lösung – wir müssen jetzt handeln! Dafür drei Vorschläge: Erstens: Wir müssen von den Ukrainerinnen und Ukrainern lernen. Kein Land in Europa hat unter größtem Druck mehr Drohnen abgeschossen als die Ukraine. Deshalb muss die Ukraine schon jetzt bereits in künftige europäische Verteidigungskooperationen integriert werden, und das haben wir mit dem European Defence Fund oder auch EDIP geschafft. Das sind die ersten Schritte, die anderen müssen folgen.”
“We must unite for peace: Europe must act now, decisively. Enlargement is the biggest currency we have. We must send a clear message, and the clearest we have is an accelerated path for Ukraine, including Article 42, which would protect Ukraine as a member of the European Union. We must do it for Ukraine. We must do it for ourselves. 3-0053-0000”
“Mr President, colleagues, those who want peace do not impose it on an occupied country. Those who want peace do not blame victims for the assault. Those who want a lasting peace do not normalise criminals. And those who want peace do not coach the aggressor via phone on how best to cheat on European and American people. Today, Europe faces a truly defining moment. And yes, I – and we – welcome the proactive stance of leaders like Merz, Macron, Meloni, Stubb and others. But where is President Costa? Where is the one who represents all of them together? Where is the European Union united? We must unite for peace: this means sanctions cannot be lifted while a single Russian boot stands on Ukrainian soil. We must unite for peace: this means accountability cannot be negotiated away. International law is not a bargaining chip.”
“So when President Trump calls this an attack against American institutions? No, it's about Europe standing tall. President von der Leyen said our digital rules are not for sale – I hope all the commissioners agree with her. 1-0122-0000”
“Mr President, colleagues, funny, isn't it? In Europe, even a press conference about Google can be hijacked, but the commissioner showed our democracy will not be. The EUR 3 billion fine is not about the money – it's pocket change for Google – it's about the message: Europe will not bow to digital giants. We write our own rules in this House and we enforce them in yours. Fair competition needs courage, not excuses. Digital sovereignty means we decide, not Silicon Valley. Let me repeat it again and again because it matters: we are not for sale. Our values are not for sale, our democracy is not for sale. The DMA is not for sale, the AI act is not for sale, the DSA is not for sale, nor is the GDPR. This is something that I hope also your colleagues, like Commissioner Virkkunen, will know when they bring the omnibus into this House.”
“Now it's time to build alliances: new alliances with US states, with cities, with civil societies, with people who walk on the street against Trump and with global partners as an alternative to the US. 3-0274-0000”
“Mr President, dear colleagues, let's be honest: this isn't just a trade dispute anymore. It's pressure. It's coercion. It's dealmaking of the worst sort. It's an attempt to put a price on what we are. It's time to say it out loud, and it pains me to say this as someone who's been a committed transatlanticist all his life, the EU is not for sale. We are not for sale. Our values, our rules, our integrity are not for sale – not our digital regulation, not our standards. Trump's approach is a challenge, no doubt, and the Commissioner knows it firsthand. But it's also an opening – an opening for Europe to lead and to be clear, not by escalating, but by standing firm and by considering countermeasures, by implementing countermeasures, by being firm on rules, on trust, on democratic principles.”
“Wenn Amerikaner und Russen mit uns verhandeln wollen, dann müssen Ukrainer und wir mit am Tisch sitzen, und dann werden wir über das Schicksal dieses Geldes entscheiden. Aber entscheidend ist: Wir müssen bereit sein, das Geld auch zu konfiszieren. 3-0392-0000”
“Und kann man vor dem Hintergrund allen Ernstes guten Gewissens hier solche Reden schwingen, wenn man weiß, dass man es am Ende aus dem eigenen Haushalt zurückzahlen muss, denn die Ukraine wird dazu nicht in der Lage sein? 3-0391-0000 Sergey Lagodinsky (Verts/ALE), Antwort auf eine Frage nach dem Verfahren der „blauen Karte“. – Das kann man sehr wohl, Herr Kollege. Das liegt daran, dass wir eine selbstbewusste Seite sind, und weil wir bereit sind, die 300 Milliarden auch einzusetzen, muss auch mit uns gesprochen werden. Und die Amerikaner müssen sich entscheiden: Es kann nicht sein, dass noch vor zwei Monaten Trump verlangt hat, dass wir dieses Geld konfiszieren, und jetzt wollen sie dieses Geld an Russland wieder zurückschenken – das spielen wir nicht mit.”
“We must prepare now to confiscate USD 300 billion in frozen assets, so we can act in the moment as needed. This means the EU must find a legally secure solution to make the frozen assets of the Russian central bank available to Ukraine and to us. (The speaker agreed to take a blue-card question) 3-0390-0000 Maximilian Krah (NI), Frage nach dem Verfahren der „blauen Karte“. – Den Wandel – interessant zu sagen, wegen der amerikanischen Haltung müssten wir jetzt konfiszieren. Der amerikanische Außenminister hat heute erklärt, dass die Freigabe der russischen Finanzmittel Teil eines Friedensdeals sein wird. Besteht damit nicht die Gefahr, dass aufgrund einer internationalen Konferenz – und nur die wird dies am Ende entscheiden – die EU, wenn sie diese Mittel konfisziert, sie Russland erstatten muss?”
“Mr President, colleagues, let me be blunt. I have not been an outspoken proponent of confiscating frozen Russian assets in the past due to its legal sensitivity. But times have changed. In our new world, where the United States is joining the side of Moscow and stepping back, the EU has no other choice but to take responsibility. We cannot afford to be hesitant. The EU needs to fill the void. The calculation is very simple. What we have is not enough – not for Ukraine, not for our own security – and the responsibility of Moscow will probably never materialise if Washington joins and supports them. The compensation will probably never come. The tribunal will now materialise, but the damages remain. Under those circumstances, the solution is clear.”
“Madam President, Mr Vice-President, Mr President, our challenges are monumental; our instruments are outdated. But the idea that unites us all – our Europe – it is not. I believe in the power of Europe because, frankly, what other choice do we have in the world divided between Trumps and Xis and Putins? Ideas inspire, but actions define our future. We need real European capabilities, not grand promises; real European money, not 800 billion of hot air that was promised by the Commission. We need a strategic decision-making centre and we need an opportunity to leave spoilers like Orbán behind. We need a decision-making centre, not 27 passionate speeches per meeting – a core Europe for defence that should emerge with the big and bold, with the committed and capable. France and Germany, yes, but also Estonia and Latvia and Lithuania.”