Sven Mikser
Member of the European Parliament · S&D · EE
“Mr President, Madam High Representative, colleagues, the Russian provocations and drone incursions are becoming more frequent and more severe. They are presenting a threat to civilian lives and infrastructure, and they are also causing disruptions to our normal everyday operations, including civilian air traffic.”
“We also need to improve radically our situational awareness and our detection capabilities, and we must improve our interception capability. That would do the necessary task.”
“Madam President, colleagues, I want to first underscore what my colleague Mr Reuten already said so eloquently: accountability is a precondition for a just and lasting peace, and the best way to achieve full accountability for Russian war crimes is to help Ukrainians win the war.”
“Mr President, Commissioner, EU enlargement is the best way to ensure long‑term security and stability in our continent. It is essential for our economic prosperity and it will result in a stronger Union, better capable of promoting our values and protecting our interests.”
“Madam President, colleagues, Commissioner, for years we have spoken about strategic autonomy as an aspiration. In today's world, autonomy is no longer a choice. It is a requirement for survival. As these two reports make clear, we must move from the era of strategising into an era of delivering.”
“By strengthening our production capacity and supply chains, the EU can improve its strategic autonomy, improve competitiveness and ensure that defence spending delivers stronger collective security. I also welcome the focus on flagship projects.”
The complete record
Every one of 24 lines we hold for Sven Mikser, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account.
“We also need to improve radically our situational awareness and our detection capabilities, and we must improve our interception capability. That would do the necessary task. This requires mobilisation of both national and EU assets, and we can also draw on the vast experience that our Ukrainian friends and allies have acquired over the past four years. 2-0230-0000”
“Mr President, Madam High Representative, colleagues, the Russian provocations and drone incursions are becoming more frequent and more severe. They are presenting a threat to civilian lives and infrastructure, and they are also causing disruptions to our normal everyday operations, including civilian air traffic. But they are also causing emotional stress among the people, and they have a longer-term economic impact by undermining business and investor confidence. We must respond, but obviously there is no single silver bullet and no single installation that we could call 'Drone Wall', so we have to take a very complex and layered approach to our response. We need deterrence. That means that reckless provocations must incur a cost on the perpetrators.”
“Finally, I do believe that only if the Russian people are made to look in the mirror and own up to their own culpability for the crimes that have been committed by their leaders in their name can that nation have a brighter and more decent future. 2-0475-0000”
“Madam President, colleagues, I want to first underscore what my colleague Mr Reuten already said so eloquently: accountability is a precondition for a just and lasting peace, and the best way to achieve full accountability for Russian war crimes is to help Ukrainians win the war. We must not – even in exchange for switching from war to peace – offer war criminals an opportunity to save face or escape accountability. This would be wrong on so many levels. First, because it would not be fair to victims and their loved ones. They have the right to justice. The Ukrainian people deserve justice. But secondly, it would also be detrimental to future peace and stability in Europe, because giving up on our demand for accountability would be an open invitation for future aggressions in our continent.”
“By strengthening our production capacity and supply chains, the EU can improve its strategic autonomy, improve competitiveness and ensure that defence spending delivers stronger collective security. I also welcome the focus on flagship projects. The EU must close the gaps in strategic enablers from integrated air and missile defence to the cyber domain. We need to pool resources, close capability gaps and strengthen our defence industrial base. These large scale pan‑European projects must also deliver to smaller companies from smaller countries, like my own home country, Estonia. 2-0553-0000”
“Madam President, colleagues, Commissioner, for years we have spoken about strategic autonomy as an aspiration. In today's world, autonomy is no longer a choice. It is a requirement for survival. As these two reports make clear, we must move from the era of strategising into an era of delivering. The fragmented nature of our defence spending remains a vulnerability. We cannot continue to rely extensively on external suppliers for our defence sector acquisitions. It is not just a matter of economics, it is about operational independence. If we fail to build a genuine single market for defence, we are going to subsidise the industrial base of our competitors while leaving our own supply chains exposed.”
“But on the other hand, the EU and its current Member States must also stick to our end of the bargain. We cannot indefinitely hold back candidates who, by our own assessment, are ready to move ahead. This is not acceptable. So, let us be firm and demanding, but also reliable and honest as a Union. 2-0431-0000”
“Mr President, Commissioner, EU enlargement is the best way to ensure long‑term security and stability in our continent. It is essential for our economic prosperity and it will result in a stronger Union, better capable of promoting our values and protecting our interests. History has taught us that geopolitical grey zones lead to instability and invite aggression. Leaving our partners in Ukraine, Moldova and the Western Balkans in a security vacuum is a price we cannot afford to pay. For the enlargement process to be credible, we have to observe two principles. First, enlargement will have to be merit‑based. There will not be compromises when it comes to the rule of law, judicial independence or democratic accountability, and obviously enlargement cannot put in danger the integrity of the single market.”
“The stark reality is that some of those alliances appear less reliable today than they have been over the past several decades, and the implication is clear and unavoidable: we must urgently build up our own autonomous European defence capability. Moreover, we must also have not only operational autonomy but defence industrial sovereignty. In times like this, obviously, we must speed up production and shorten the innovation cycle in defence. But first of all, we need to put our money where our mouth is and provide – in both Member States and the common EU budget – adequate financial resources to implement our capability initiatives as well as our defence industrial programmes. 2-0101-0000”
“Madam President, Commissioner, dear colleagues, on Ukraine's battlefields, our European values and our freedom are being defended as we speak here. So it's absolutely imperative that we provide the brave Ukrainian fighters all the support they need. At the same time, external threats to EU Member States' security and territorial integrity are not theoretical or hypothetical either. This means we also need real and usable military capabilities to deter and, when necessary, defeat any aggressor. Over the past eight years, we have built strong alliances around the western hemisphere, which – let's be honest – have allowed us Europeans to underspend on our own defence.”
“To become more autonomous and less dependent on American we simply have to take over a significant part of the financial cost involved, and that means starting to spend serious money. 2-0469-0000”
“Mr President, colleagues, we have previously spoken about de-risking in connection to our response to the global rise of China. Today, we need to speak of de-risking also in the context of the transatlantic relations. We have seen how excessive reliance on the US can involve not only benefits but also risks. As a purely transactional administration in Washington can and occasionally does turn these dependencies into a tool of blackmail, even against its traditional allies. If we want to be able to manage those risks, we have to acknowledge that the number one policy area where we have been overly dependent on the US is military defence. It is a very tech-heavy, innovation-intensive, innovation-intensive and expensive policy area.”
“The attack on the Polish rail line was an attack against our security, but also against our logistical support to Ukraine. To defeat these usually low‑cost but often high‑impact threats, more cooperation is needed. We must move urgently from defensive management to proactive deterrence, including by developing the drone wall by 2027. Finally, Russia and its cronies are doing all of this to intimidate our populations and to distract us from standing with Ukraine. The targeting of aid corridors and attempts to sow anti‑Ukrainian sentiment are explicit goals of this hybrid war. We must not be distracted. Instead, we must increase our support to Ukraine and ensure that it prevails because our collective security is inextricably linked to theirs. 3-0239-0000”
“Madam President, dear colleagues, the escalating violations of our airspace and confirmed acts of critical infrastructure sabotage by Russia and Belarus are not to be taken lightly. They are deliberate acts of hybrid war. A grey zone campaign designed to test our resolve and create fear among our citizens. Our response must be united and resolute. When it comes to incursions by manned military aircraft, this is not hybrid. Fortunately, we have robust protocols and NATO capabilities in place. We do not need to reinvent the wheel. However, our response must be fully proportionate and fully coordinated but firm, including by kinetic means if necessary. Second, the threat from drones and physical sabotage is intensifying. We condemn these criminal acts, obviously, but condemnations are not sufficient.”
“Second, drones are a relatively new threat, but it is a rapidly growing threat. The drone wall is a great concept, but we must acknowledge that in real life it is going to be a very intricate combination of different measures and capabilities, and not all of them are there today. So we must proceed with the sense of utmost urgency. And finally, Russia is doing what it's doing in large part to distract us from standing with Ukraine and providing all the support Ukraine needs to fight off Russia's criminal war of aggression. We must not be distracted. Indeed, we must increase our support to Ukraine and make sure it prevails in its just fight against the aggressor. 3-0064-0000”
“Madam President, dear colleagues, Russian violations of our airspace have recently become more frequent and also more provocative. It's clear that Putin is trying to seek out our vulnerabilities, test our resolve and unity, and create confusion and a sense of vulnerability among our citizens. Our response must be united and resolute. Let me make three brief points. First, when it comes to incursions by manned military aircraft, we do have – both nationally and through NATO alliance – most of the procedures and protocols in place to deal with these situations. We also collectively have the capabilities to identify, intercept and, if the threat posed by the invading aircraft requires, to take it down. However, we must be ready to bolster our posture and presence, particularly in the easternmost and most vulnerable Member States.”
“Let's be honest: this has happened in the past, so there needs to be a unity of effort between our two organisations. Second, I don't think that any one of us can or could call the NATO summit a success unless a strong pledge is made to continue and indeed increase our support to Ukraine. This is the outstanding security crisis and we must meet this challenge. Finally, I think it's imperative that NATO remains a values-based alliance, an alliance where every member state sees mutual defence of democracies as their own vital national-security issue, that we do not allow the alliance to morph into a purely transactional organisation where security of fellow members is seen as a service to be provided for cash. 3-0021-0000”
“Hea Kaja. Tähtsad asjad kõigepealt. Palju õnne sünnipäevaks! Dear colleagues, let me make three brief points. First of all, on defence spending, I think it's absolutely imperative that our leaders at the NATO summit agree on substantially increasing our defence spending. But when this agreement has been reached, implementation is key. I vividly remember the NATO summit in Wales in 2014, when agreement was reached to ramp up defence spending to 2 % of GDP. And now, fast-forward 11 years and more or less two thirds of the members have met that commitment. So implementation is key. Also, I think we need to avoid a situation whereby our leaders meet around the NATO table and make a pledge and then a few weeks later they meet around EU tables and act as if they have never heard about that pledge.”
“It has been said that we need to spend smarter and do more together, but it is obvious it's inevitable that we also need to start spending more, both at EU level, but also in our national budgets, where, let's be honest, the bulk of our defence spending and also capability generation will continue to happen. We must be open to considering all novel ways of financing our ambitious programmes, both public and private sources. But while it may be tempting to think that at this critical time everything except defence can be put on the backburner, this is not the case, because there are two types of challenges our democracies face, both external – of military nature – but also internal. We must not provide additional fodder for the pro-Putin illiberal sentiment. 2-0374-0000”
“Madam President, colleagues, the fragile entire security situation around us makes it absolutely imperative that we improve our ability to deter our adversaries, but also, if and when necessary, fight and win wars. The dramatic reversal, of course, by our traditional American allies further underscores the need to achieve European strategic autonomy and industrial sovereignty. It actually underscores that some dependencies that we used to regard as security guarantees may, in this changed situation, prove to be vulnerabilities instead. A stronger focus on defence and defence industrial base is not merely expenditure. It actually provides a boost for our economic competitiveness and economic activity. But it's also important to see that this additional impetus to our economic growth be shared equitably across our Union.”
“If we fail in Ukraine, if Ukraine falls, then we will not merely be back to square one, we will be in a much, much darker place, starting to rebuild Europe's security from shambles. We must not let this happen. 2-0041-0000”
“Madam President, colleagues, a wise person once said that tactics is the art of using personnel and arms to win battles, whereas strategy is the art of using battles to win wars. Much has been said about how we need to rebuild European defence and security in the medium- to long-term, and I agree with most of it. Meanwhile, the decisive battle for Europe's future is playing out on the front lines in Ukraine and needless to say, following the very dramatic reversal, of course, by our American allies, the outlook has changed to worse. So we need to step out, and we need to fill the gap left by Americans. And we need to do it now. It's not a matter of months or years, it's a matter of hours, days, maximum weeks.”
“This underscores the need to protect and strengthen our democratic structures, which in turn underscores the need for just and responsible social policies in Europe, for democracy and social stability at home are directly linked to our ability to provide sufficient support to Ukraine. 2-0105-0000”
“Mr President, dear colleagues, three years into this war, the fundamentals have not changed. The consequences for European security of a potential Russian victory look as dire today as they did three years ago. So we have to get our act together and start giving Ukraine what it needs in quantities it needs to win this war. And we should admit to ourselves that whatever the resolution of the war in Ukraine, Russia will remain a clear and imminent threat to Europe's security, so we also have to dramatically improve our defences, including our defence industrial capability. One thing has changed, though: pro-Russian populists are in a stronger position today than they were three years ago, both in this august chamber as well as in an increasing number of European capitals.”