Category: Russian Federation

  • MIL-OSI Russia: 3 dead, 5 missing in landslides in southern China

    Translation. Region: Russian Federal

    Source: People’s Republic of China in Russian – People’s Republic of China in Russian –

    Source: People’s Republic of China – State Council News

    NANNING, May 23 (Xinhua) — Three people were confirmed dead and five were missing after mountain floods and mudslides hit a village in Longsheng County, capital of Guilin City, south China’s Guangxi Zhuang Autonomous Region, early Friday, local authorities said.

    Rescue operations, which began immediately after the incident, continue, with more than 300 rescuers involved.

    According to official information, ten houses were also damaged as a result of the landslides. –0–

    MIL OSI Russia News

  • MIL-OSI Russia: China urges US not to use Philippines to stir up tension in South China Sea

    Translation. Region: Russian Federal

    Source: People’s Republic of China in Russian – People’s Republic of China in Russian –

    Source: People’s Republic of China – State Council News

    BEIJING, May 23 (Xinhua) — China has called on the United States not to use the Philippines to stir up tensions in the South China Sea, Foreign Ministry spokesperson Mao Ning said on Friday, noting that the Philippines should immediately stop provocations and violations in the Tiexianjiao Reef area of China’s Nansha Islands.

    The Chinese diplomat made the remarks at a press briefing while responding to a media request for comment on a post by the US Ambassador to the Philippines on the social media platform X, which was related to recent law enforcement operations by Chinese Coast Guard ships against Philippine fishing vessels near Tiexianjiao.

    Mao Ning noted that the Philippines has repeatedly carried out illegal landings on Tiejiao, grossly infringing on China’s sovereignty and violating the Declaration on the Conduct of Parties in the South China Sea. She pointed out that China’s corresponding countermeasures are legal and legitimate.

    Mao Ning stressed that China advises the US side to stop using the Philippines to create tension in the South China Sea and not to undermine peace and tranquility in the area.

    “The Philippine side, in turn, must immediately stop its provocations and violations near the Tiexianjiao Reef of China’s Nansha Islands, otherwise China will take decisive retaliatory measures,” she concluded. –0–

    MIL OSI Russia News

  • MIL-OSI Russia: The head of the Russian Foreign Ministry confirmed preparations for the second round of Russian-Ukrainian talks, but the dates and venue have not yet been determined

    Translation. Region: Russian Federal

    Source: People’s Republic of China in Russian –

    Source: People’s Republic of China – State Council News

    Moscow, May 23 /Xinhua/ — The second round of talks between Russia and Ukraine on peaceful settlement will take place, but the dates and venue have not yet been determined, Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov said on Friday, speaking at a conference in Moscow.

    “Yes, we are for negotiations. Yes, there will be a second round. They /Ukrainian authorities/ have confirmed this. This is already a positive development,” TASS quotes him as saying.

    As S. Lavrov stated, the dates and venue of the second round of negotiations with the Ukrainian side have not yet been determined. According to him, the main task now is to prepare a peace treaty with Ukraine, which will ensure long-term peace.

    “The most important task now is to prepare a peace treaty that will be reliable and will ensure a long-term, sustainable, fair peace without creating security threats to anyone, in this case we are interested in the Russian Federation, without any attempts to infringe on the rights of Russians and Russian-speakers in violation of the UN Charter, which prohibits discrimination on religious and linguistic grounds,” said the head of the Russian diplomatic mission.

    S. Lavrov reported that the Russian side’s work on the memorandum on the peace treaty is already at an advanced stage. “The work is underway. I don’t know about that /Ukrainian/ side, but our work is already at an advanced stage, and in any case we will hand over this memorandum to the Ukrainians,” the head of the Russian Foreign Ministry noted. –0–

    MIL OSI Russia News

  • MIL-OSI Russia: Educational projects worth $443.9 million are being implemented in Tajikistan

    Translation. Region: Russian Federal

    Source: People’s Republic of China in Russian –

    Source: People’s Republic of China – State Council News

    ALMATY, May 23 /Xinhua/ — In order to create better conditions for the education and upbringing of teenagers and youth in Tajikistan, 11 state investment projects worth 4.6 billion somoni (about 443.9 million US dollars) are currently being implemented in the country’s education sector, the Khovar news agency reported on Friday.

    As the President of Tajikistan Emomali Rahmon reported in his speech on the occasion of the Youth Day of Tajikistan, through the adoption and implementation of laws on work with youth and sports, the effective implementation of the State Youth Policy Strategy for the period up to 2030 and state programs on work with youth and sports, the organizational and legal basis for the development of the industry has been created.

    The initiatives also include the creation of the National Council for Youth Affairs under the President, the Council for the Development of Physical Culture and Sports, the construction and commissioning of youth centers, educational institutions and sports facilities that meet modern requirements in the cities and regions of the country. –0–

    MIL OSI Russia News

  • MIL-OSI Russia: Iran, US begin fifth round of nuclear talks in Rome

    Translation. Region: Russian Federal

    Source: People’s Republic of China in Russian –

    Source: People’s Republic of China – State Council News

    ROME, May 23 (Xinhua) — The fifth round of talks between Iran and the United States to resolve differences over the Islamic Republic’s nuclear program began in the Italian capital Rome on Friday with the mediation of Oman, Iranian media reported.

    The last round of discussions between the two sides took place on May 11 in Oman. As Italian publications note, since then tensions have arisen between Iran and the United States over the issue of uranium enrichment by the Iranian side.

    The administration of US President Donald Trump reportedly sought to halt all uranium enrichment work in Iran, but Tehran rejected the concept of “zero enrichment” and demanded the lifting of economic sanctions.

    Italian Foreign Minister Antonio Tajani told the media that the Italian government “fully supports these mediation efforts.” However, as the diplomat noted, “these are certainly not easy negotiations.” –0–

    MIL OSI Russia News

  • MIL-OSI Russia: Xi Jinping congratulates N. Dan on his election as President of Romania

    Translation. Region: Russian Federal

    Source: People’s Republic of China in Russian –

    Source: People’s Republic of China – State Council News

    BEIJING, May 23 (Xinhua) — Chinese President Xi Jinping on Thursday sent a congratulatory message to Nicusor Dan on his election as Romania’s president.

    Xi Jinping recalled that Romania is the third country in the world to establish diplomatic relations with the People’s Republic of China. China and Romania have long respected each other and treated each other as equals, he noted, adding that mutually beneficial cooperation between the two countries has been steadily advancing, and the traditional friendship has become stronger over time.

    The Chinese President noted that the world is currently undergoing accelerated changes unseen in a century. As good friends and good partners, China and Romania should strengthen communication, consolidate consensus and deepen cooperation to jointly seize the opportunities of the times and jointly deal with risks and challenges, the Chinese leader said.

    Xi Jinping noted that he attaches great importance to the development of Chinese-Romanian relations and is ready, together with N. Dan, to write a new chapter in the history of interstate friendly cooperation for the benefit of the peoples of both countries. –0–

    MIL OSI Russia News

  • MIL-OSI USA: Cook, A View on Financial Stability

    Source: US State of New York Federal Reserve

    Thank you, Alessandra, for organizing us today, and thanks to you, Veronica Guerrieri, and Marina Azzimonti for initiating this effort seven years ago. I am honored to be with so many friends in macroeconomics at the 2025 Women in Macro Conference. I still read, recommend, and cite your work and am grateful to New York University and the University of Chicago for supporting this conference and this research.1
    How has the arc of mainstream macroeconomic research become more closely integrated with issues related to financial stability? This question is what I would like to discuss today. I applaud the advances in incorporating financial stability into macroeconomic models, which have significantly enhanced our understanding of financial market functioning and its effect on the economy. It is a topic that holds special importance to me as a macroeconomist who has worked at the intersection of macroeconomics and finance since my dissertation and as the chair of the Federal Reserve Board’s Committee on Financial Stability. I would like to then offer my assessment of the stability of the U.S. financial system.
    Financial stability supports the objectives assigned to the Federal Reserve, including full employment and stable prices, a safe and sound banking system, and an efficient payments system. A financial system is considered stable when banks, other lenders, and financial markets are able to provide households, communities, and businesses with the financing they need to invest, grow, and participate in a well-functioning economy—and can do so even when hit by adverse events, or “shocks.”2 Financial instability, by contrast, arises when vulnerabilities—such as asset bubbles, excessive leverage, liquidity mismatches, or interconnected exposures—can build up to such an extent that they can amplify different shocks and threaten the core functions of the system and the functioning of the broader economy.
    Macroeconomic Research and Financial StabilityThe idea that supply creates its own demand, or Say’s law, was the prevailing economic orthodoxy of the 1800s. As a result, the core content of macroeconomics as a separate discipline did not exist. Prolonged periods of involuntary unemployment were considered to be impossible. Money and credit were thought to act as a “veil” with no real effects, so money was seen as neutral and banks and other financial intermediaries as essentially passive, despite what we now know.
    The Great Depression fundamentally put an end to this comforting orthodoxy and prompted decades of work to better understand the causes of, and policy responses to, economic fluctuations. For the first time, financial factors took center stage in economic theory. Directly responding to the failures of economic theory exposed by the Depression, John Maynard Keynes introduced the concept of a “liquidity trap,” in which fear pushes the demand for money so high that the usual corrective measures become ineffective.3 Friedrich Hayek and the Austrian school of economics emphasized the role of unsustainable credit booms, noting that booms in “malinvestment” would lead to fundamental mismatches that would need to be addressed.4 Despite the early focus on panics, credit booms, and extreme dynamics, macroeconomic research evolved in a way that de-emphasized the role of the financial system, likely reflecting technical limitations and, more broadly, the need to develop policy frameworks for the post–World War II economy where the Great Depression seemed less relevant. Modeling financial crises requires addressing complex nonlinear dynamics, feedback loops, and discontinuities, like defaults and bank runs. All of these were analytically intractable and computationally unmanageable with the tools available at the time.
    As a result, the macroeconomic framework that originated from the ideas of Keynes generally assumed stable and frictionless financial markets. The IS-LM, or Investment-Saving Liquidity Preference-Money Supply framework, which describes how the goods market and the money market interact to determine aggregate output and interest rates in the economy, emerged as the central analytical tool for understanding short-run output and interest rate dynamics.5
    However, the neoclassical synthesis was not without its critics. Joan Robinson argued that capital accumulation and investment behavior were inherently volatile and criticized the prevailing framework for overlooking important sources of instability.6 Milton Friedman’s work challenged the Keynesian paradigm by highlighting the importance of monetary policy and the destabilizing effects of monetary mismanagement.7 Even as the rational expectations revolution in macro ushered in explicit modeling of micro foundations and dynamic optimization, financial intermediaries, credit frictions, and the potential for systemic crises remained largely absent. Neoclassical growth models prioritized capital accumulation and technological progress as drivers of long-run growth, and real business cycle models emphasized productivity shocks as drivers of fluctuations in employment and growth.8
    Two papers familiar to many of you here and published in 1983 were instrumental in bringing financial stability considerations back into macroeconomic research. Douglas Diamond and Philip Dybvig showed how banks’ role in providing liquidity makes them vulnerable to runs, while Ben Bernanke demonstrated how bank failures deepened the Great Depression.9 These contributions, which were recognized with a Nobel Prize in 2022, have helped pave the way for researchers wishing to explore both directions of the relationship between financial fragility and macroeconomic outcomes. In parallel, Hyman Minsky’s financial instability hypothesis advanced a dynamic view of systemic risk, emphasizing how periods of sustained economic and financial stability tend to encourage excessive leverage and risk-taking—culminating in what we now call a “Minsky moment.” This phenomenon is when a rapid unwinding of financial positions triggers broader economic distress.10
    Ultimately, it took the Global Financial Crisis to bring home just how deeply the financial system and macroeconomic dynamics are intertwined, as evidenced by the explosion of research on financial stability and financial frictions. Models incorporating financial intermediaries, leverage cycles, and endogenous risk became more central to macroeconomic analysis, while empirical work confirmed the critical role of credit booms in preceding financial crises.11
    Over the past few years, macroeconomic research, to which some of you have contributed, continued to incorporate important financial stability aspects, ranging from endogenous leverage and bank runs to models studying the effects of monetary policy in the presence of heterogenous banks.12 Much of this research is also being done at the Fed, and it has informed our current work in the area. I thought it would be helpful to describe some of that work to you.
    Monitoring Financial StabilityCentral banks around the world routinely monitor the financial system for risks, because financial crises can lead to severe recessions. A cornerstone of the Fed’s work in this area is our framework for monitoring and assessing vulnerabilities. The most recent version of our semiannual Financial Stability Report (FSR) was released last month.13 Our framework distinguishes between two fundamental elements: shocks and vulnerabilities.14 Shocks are adverse events that by their nature are difficult to predict and, unfortunately, are all too frequent. Recent examples include the pandemic, Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, the collapse of Silicon Valley Bank, and many geopolitical events that still warrant headlines. Vulnerabilities, which are aspects of the financial system that would amplify stress, tend to build up over time and can be identified and assessed. We monitor vulnerabilities in four key categories: asset valuation pressures, household and business borrowing, financial-sector leverage, and liquidity and maturity transformation, or funding risks. Policies to build resilience in the financial system are appropriately targeted at reducing vulnerabilities, because they do not require foreknowledge of any particular shocks.
    The financial cycle is recognized as being lower in frequency than the business cycle, with vulnerabilities building over years and typically only to be crystallizing in a short-lived stress event—the classic dynamic of going up by the stairs but down by the elevator.15 Further, as I mentioned earlier, vulnerabilities often build during prolonged expansions as, for example, investor optimism leads to greater tolerance of risk, excess borrowing, and increased leverage. The realization of stress and associated contraction can put these forces into reverse, resulting in decreased vulnerabilities. But the economic and human costs of such an adjustment can be significant.
    Financial Stability AssessmentOur most recent FSR reflects data and information generally available as of April 11, a point when financial market volatility and risk-off sentiment were elevated, with, for example, the S&P 500 having fallen more than 10 percent from its prior peak. Nonetheless, the report echoes many of the themes that we had been highlighting for the previous couple of years. I will discuss our most recent report in the context of some of those themes and illustrate a few lessons from the April volatility.
    Let me start with one theme that is quite encouraging. Generally, businesses and household finances are in solid shape. Most households are able to service their debt, and overall household debt relative to GDP has declined over the past five years. While we are seeing some stress among low-to-moderate-income borrowers and those with subprime credit scores, the risks posed by overall household borrowing remain moderate. Stable balance sheets and solid income have supported the ability of most nonfinancial businesses to service their debt. At the same time, smaller and riskier businesses—which tend to have lower debt service capacity, measured by the interest coverage ratio—are sensitive to income shocks.
    Most households are able to service their debt, and overall household debt relative to GDP has declined over the past five years. While vulnerabilities posed by overall household borrowing remain moderate, we are seeing some signs of stress among borrowers with subprime credit scores, which include many low- and moderate-income households. For instance, auto and credit card delinquency rates for borrowers with subprime credit scores increased substantially in 2022 and 2023 and are at or near their highest levels since the financial crisis. More generally, a sufficiently large income shock could strain the debt-servicing capacity of a broader group of households and push up delinquency and default rates, resulting in more substantial losses for lenders.
    Asset prices have fluctuated significantly over the past several years. Although we do look at asset prices, we tend to focus more on “valuations pressures,” which essentially measure how much prices differ from a variety of benchmarks. For instance, we care whether prices, relative to measures of risk, appear to be out of step with historical experience. In such circumstances, the potential price declines—should risk appetite revert to historical averages—would be larger than normal. Additionally, when the compensation for risk is low, borrowing or leverage could also increase and put further upward pressure on valuations. Coming into the April volatility, valuation pressures were elevated, consistent with the strong economy.
    Allow me to discuss our view of valuation pressures in property markets and come back shortly to the imprint of the April volatility on stock and bond prices. The significant rise in house prices during and after the pandemic has slowed substantially over the past couple of years, but price-to-rent ratios and model-based valuation measures are around the record levels last seen in 2005. Two key differences are that lax underwriting standards do not appear to have driven the increase in house prices and owners’ equity appears to be more solid, using both price- and model-based measures.
    We also noted that commercial real estate (CRE) valuations had been elevated going into 2022 but declined significantly through the period of higher interest rates and deteriorating CRE fundamentals. Prices and fundamentals appear to have moderated, and valuations are closer to historical norms. Given the significant volume of CRE that is maturing and will need to be refinanced, I am continuing to watch this market closely.
    Let me now turn to financial system leverage and funding risks. Capital in the banking system continues to be at historically high levels. However, as you no doubt remember, the intersection of interest rate and liquidity risks played a prominent role in the March 2023 banking-sector stress. High reliance on funding from uninsured deposits was a key vulnerability among some of the most affected banks, including those that failed. When higher interest rates resulted in substantial unrealized losses, we observed rapid outflows of uninsured deposits from a handful of banks. In the April FSR, we describe how over the past couple of years, the share of uninsured deposits relative to total bank funding has decreased for most banks, especially for those that previously relied heavily on uninsured deposits. This outcome is a welcome signal. However, sizable exposure to fixed-rate assets remains, suggesting ongoing exposure to interest rate risk.
    Since 2019, our FSRs have noted another development in markets—a decline in market liquidity. “Market liquidity” refers to the cost of quickly buying or selling a desired quantity of a security and being able to do so without having a significant effect on the market price. During periods of asset-price volatility, it is not surprising that liquidity often declines, so we consider whether market liquidity measures are low given the level of volatility. As discussed in previous FSRs, some evidence indicates that a number of measures of liquidity have shifted down over time, particularly in Treasury markets, where volatility has also been relatively high.16 We have done a lot of work, as have others, to analyze the causes and what lower liquidity in normal times may imply for market functioning during periods of severe stress. One area we are exploring is broker-dealers’ intermediation capacity, which has been affected by a number of factors, including elevated Treasury issuance and increased client demand for secured financing—which is typically collateralized by Treasury securities.
    With that backdrop, let me now turn to last month’s events. The details of the tariff announcements in early April were unexpected. Corporate earnings calls and our own broad-based market outreach suggest three areas of concern among businesses and market participants: One, significantly heightened uncertainty, two, an increased risk of a slowdown in economic activity, and three, prospects for higher inflation. With subsequent announcements some of this uncertainty has ebbed. Nonetheless, the episode offers some insights relevant for financial stability.
    Asset prices fell sharply, particularly in equities, but also in corporate bond and other securities markets. By the second week of April, major stock indices had declined almost 20 percent from their mid-February peaks, with over half of the declines coming in a seven-day period in early April. The Chicago Board Options Exchange’s Volatility Index, the VIX, was extremely elevated through this period, closing at levels not seen since the onset of the pandemic. Some of the decline in equity prices likely reflected a change in the economic outlook, but investor risk appetite likely fell as well, although this is harder to assess because data on changes in earnings expectations arrive with a lag. As we have flagged in previous FSRs, large asset-price declines, whatever the cause, can trigger margin spirals and other feedback loops that are self-reinforcing, if there is excessive leverage or liquidity mismatches in the system.
    Highly leveraged investors, including some large hedge funds, have rapidly unwound positions during past bouts of market volatility. While such dynamics likely contributed to some of the price declines in early April, the overall volumes appear limited. As Roberto Perli, the manager of the Federal Open Market Committee’s System Open Market Account, noted in a recent speech, while there is evidence of some unwinding of the swap spread trade, it was orderly. He said there is no evidence of an unwinding of the cash-futures basis trade, a large and highly leveraged trade that exploits small differences in the prices of Treasury securities and Treasury futures contracts. This stability likely owes in part to the resilience of funding markets through this episode.17
    Large asset-price declines also prompt outflows from open-end mutual funds. Some funds specialize in relatively illiquid assets, such as high-yield corporate bonds or leveraged loans. This is another potential vulnerability we have tracked over time, because a large redemption wave can overwhelm these funds’ cash reserves, leading to fire-sale dynamics in the underlying markets. And redemptions from some funds were quite large in April, particularly given that, in contrast with previous episodes, the general level of interest rates did not fall. Nonetheless, funds were able to handle these redemptions without contributing to stress in corporate debt markets.
    Treasury markets also continued to function in an orderly fashion throughout the episode. To be sure, market depth and other liquidity measures decreased from already low levels, but the decline was in line with what would be anticipated, given the elevated volatility in markets. This outcome is in contrast to what we saw in March 2020, when trading became much more difficult than would have been expected, given the level of volatility because of the broad market dysfunction that characterized the onset of the pandemic.
    The episode provided a real-life example of the large asset-price declines and sudden bursts of volatility that can result from shocks when asset valuations are stretched, as well as the importance of stable and resilient funding markets in absorbing shocks. The experience will surely help us hone our ongoing assessment of financial system vulnerabilities and areas of resilience.
    ConclusionI would like to conclude my remarks with a few examples of research areas that I think would be interesting and helpful to me and, perhaps, to other policymakers.
    First, I understand the difficulty of developing macroeconomic models in which financial risk is endogenously determined by leverage and liquidity mismatch rather than a reliance on exogenous risk shocks. But I hope that the prospect of making highly impactful policy-relevant contributions will induce researchers to dig in on this topic.
    Second, episodes of strain in U.S. Treasury markets over the past several years illustrate the importance of nonbank financial intermediaries, a term that encompasses hedge funds, mutual funds, life insurers, finance companies, and money market funds. This is particularly true in the U.S., where credit is provided by a combination of banks and nonbanks that are often connected through counterparty relationships or common exposure. It would be helpful to have deeper insights into the potential macroeconomic consequences of the shifting interaction between banks and nonbanks.
    Third, relatedly, efforts to incorporate private credit and private equity into macroeconomic models could spur important lines of research. Layered leverage in intermediation chains involving private equity, private credit funds, banks, and businesses can transmit and amplify real-economy shocks to different parts of the financial sector. In addition, private equity and private credit are macro-relevant sectors that can transmit shocks to the real economy.
    I understand that it is easy to throw out a research wish list and walk away, leaving the substantial modeling and operational challenges to others. But I do think it is worth developing new tools and approaches for better characterizing our evolving macro-financial reality. I hope some of you and your graduate students will take up the challenge.
    Thank you again for the opportunity to join you today.

    1. The views expressed here are my own and are not necessarily those of my colleagues on the Federal Reserve Board or the Federal Open Market Committee. Return to text
    2. See Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System (2024), Financial Stability Report (Washington: Board of Governors, April). Return to text
    3. See John Maynard Keynes (1936), The General Theory of Employment, Interest, and Money (London: Macmillan). Return to text
    4. See Friedrich A. Hayek (1931), Prices and Production (London: George Routledge & Sons). Return to text
    5. See J. R. Hicks (1937), “Mr. Keynes and the ‘Classics’; A Suggested Interpretation,” Econometrica, vol. 5 (April), pp. 147–59; and Franco Modigliani (1944), “Liquidity Preference and the Theory of Interest and Money,” Econometrica, vol. 12 (January), pp. 45–88. Return to text
    6. See Joan Robinson (1956), The Accumulation of Capital (London: Macmillan). Return to text
    7. See Milton Friedman and Anna Jacobson Schwartz (1963), A Monetary History of the United States, 1867–1960 (Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press). Return to text
    8. See Robert M. Solow (1956), “A Contribution to the Theory of Economic Growth,” Quarterly Journal of Economics, vol. 70 (February), pp. 65–94; and Finn E. Kydland and Edward C. Prescott (1982), “Time to Build and Aggregate Fluctuations,” Econometrica, vol. 50 (November), pp. 1345–70. Return to text
    9. See Douglas W. Diamond and Philip H. Dybvig (1983), “Bank Runs, Deposit Insurance, and Liquidity,” Journal of Political Economy, vol. 91 (June), pp. 401–19; Ben S. Bernanke (1983), “Nonmonetary Effects of the Financial Crisis in the Propagation of the Great Depression,” American Economic Review, vol. 73 (June), pp. 257–76; and Ben S. Bernanke, Mark Gertler, and Simon Gilchrist (1983), “The Financial Accelerator in a Quantitative Business Cycle Framework,” in John B. Taylor and Michael Woodford, eds., vol. 1: Handbook of Macroeconomics (Amsterdam: Elsevier), pp. 1341–93. Return to text
    10. See Hyman P. Minsky (1982), Can “It” Happen Again? Essays on Instability and Finance (Armonk, N.Y.: M.E. Sharpe).  Return to text
    11. See, for example, Mark Gertler and Nobuhiro Kiyotaki (2010), “Financial Intermediation and Credit Policy in Business Cycle Analysis” in Benjamin M. Friedman and Michael Woodford, eds., vol. 3: Handbook of Monetary Economics (Amsterdam: Elsevier), pp. 547–99; Markus K. Brunnermeier and Yuliy Sannikov (2014), “A Macroeconomic Model with a Financial Sector,” American Economic Review, vol. 104 (February), pp. 379–421; Mark Gertler and Simon Gilchrist (2018), “What Happened: Financial Factors in the Great Recession,” Journal of Economic Perspectives, vol. 32 (Summer), pp. 3–30; Òscar Jordà, Moritz Schularick, and Alan M. Taylor (2013), “When Credit Bites Back,” Journal of Money, Credit and Banking, vol. 45 (December), pp. 3–28; Carmen M. Reinhart and Kenneth S. Rogoff (2009), This Time is Different: Eight Centuries of Financial Folly (Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press). Return to text
    12. See, for example, Mark Gertler, Nobuhiro Kiyotaki, and Andrea Prestipino (2020), “A Macroeconomic Model with Financial Panics,” Review of Economic Studies, vol. 87 (January), pp. 240–88; and Marco Bellifemine, Rustam Jamilov, and Tommaso Monacelli (2022), “Monetary Policy with Heterogeneous Banks,” CEPR Discussion Paper No. 17129 (Washington: Center for Economic and Policy Research, March 22). Return to text
    13. See Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System (2025), Financial Stability Report (PDF) (Washington: Board of Governors, April). Return to text
    14. Details of the approach are outlined in the framework developed by Tobias Adrian, Daniel Covitz, and Nellie Liang (2013), “Financial Stability Monitoring (PDF),” staff report no. 601 (New York: Federal Reserve Bank of New York, February; revised June 2014). Return to text
    15. See Claudio Borio (2014), “The Financial Cycle and Macroeconomics: What Have We Learnt?” Journal of Banking & Finance, vol. 45 (August), pp. 182–98. Return to text
    16. See, for example, Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System (2023), Financial Stability Report (PDF) (Washington: Board of Governors, May); and Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System (2024), Financial Stability Report (PDF) (Washington: Board of Governors, November). Return to text
    17. See Roberto Perli (2025), “Recent Developments in Treasury Market Liquidity and Funding Conditions,” speech delivered at the 8th Short-Term Funding Markets Conference, sponsored by the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, Washington, May 9. Return to text

    MIL OSI USA News

  • MIL-OSI Global: Russia is facing fresh sanctions, but Putin is used to dealing with a struggling economy

    Source: The Conversation – UK – By Yerzhan Tokbolat, Lecturer in Finance, Queen’s University Belfast

    The UK and the EU have agreed to hit Russia with a raft of new economic sanctions after hopes of a ceasefire with Ukraine came to nothing. One French minister commented that it is time to “suffocate” the Russian economy.

    Since the country’s fullscale invasion of Ukraine in 2022, that economy has certainly suffered. Sanctions on Russia have already led to a depreciation of the rouble, high inflation, very high interest rates and a stagnating economy.

    But it remains unclear what effect any new measures will have. And Vladimir Putin has a history of riding out economic hardship.

    When he became president of Russia just over 25 years ago, the country’s economy was in dire straits. Attempts by his predecessors Mikhail Gorbachev and Boris Yeltsin to build a more open and capitalist system had not worked well for most Russian citizens.

    Instead, a rapid wave of privatisations, which reformers hoped would build strong institutions, had mostly benefited a small group of oligarchs who exploited a weak and corrupt state to seize key oil, gas and mineral assets.

    Those oligarchs resisted legal reform, moved wealth abroad, failed to invest in the domestic economy, and gradually gained control of major corporations and media, expanding their political influence. By 1995, nearly half of Russians were living in poverty.

    The 1998 crisis worsened the situation, as a global recession and falling commodity prices led to fiscal imbalances and doubts about Russia’s ability to service its debt and uphold the fixed exchange rate. The central bank raised interest rates to 150% to try and stabilise the rouble, but this failed.

    It eventually allowed the rouble to float, and the currency lost about two-thirds of its value. When he came to power in 2000, Putin was then confronted with the challenge of rebuilding the Russian economy.

    Luckily for him, between 2000 and 2008, an oil and gas boom drove GDP growth, increasing incomes, and allowing for early repayment of national debts. Putin – and national pride – received a boost.

    Rising energy revenues helped stabilise the economy and enabled the state to tighten its grip on the energy sector. By 2006, Gazprom accounted for 20% of government tax revenue.

    Putin then shifted his focus to Europe. With German support, the Nord Stream pipeline was completed in 2011, enabling direct gas exports to western Europe while bypassing Ukraine. This increased European dependence on Russian energy.

    But Putin’s oil and gas-driven economic model struggled to sustain growth, and by 2013, his approval ratings had fallen to their lowest point since 2000.

    The annexation of Crimea in 2014, along with a very expensive Winter Olympics in the Black Sea resort city of Sochi, temporarily boosted his popularity.

    Running on empty

    However, these accomplishments did little to address Russia’s core economic problems, particularly its failure to build a diversified economy.

    By 2018, Russia’s economy was again stagnant, with a weak currency and declining living standards, and Putin’s popularity fell in part due to unpopular budget-saving reforms, including raising the retirement age.

    There was widespread doubt about Putin’s model of lasting prosperity, which relied on state-led growth, but was marked by instability, resource dependence and growing geopolitical ambition.

    In this light, Putin’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine in 2022 appeared to be a familiar tactic to boost support. Indeed, his approval jumped to 83% after invading Ukraine, matching levels seen after the 2014 Crimea annexation. His ratings have remained high since, with recent polls still showing approval levels above 80%.

    But the Russian economy will still be a worry. Sustaining a “war economy”, where manufacturing and investment are focused on conflict cannot go on forever, particularly as the manufacturing product is being rapidly depleted as the Russian military uses it the field. And reliance on commodities has amplified the impact of sanctions, hitting key banks and energy firms such as Gazprom and Rosneft.

    Meanwhile, the US has significantly expanded its presence in Europe’s energy market, supplying nearly 50% of the EU’s liquid natural gas imports after tripling exports between 2021 and 2023.

    Major Russian pipeline projects such as Nord Stream 2 and Power of Siberia 2 remain in limbo. And the decline in oil prices in April 2025, the biggest since November 2021, poses further risks.

    If a ceasefire is agreed, a pause in the war could offer Russia the chance to regroup and recover economically. Sanctions are often temporary, and global demand for oil and gas remains strong. Some countries may re-engage in trade.

    But future economic stagnation could once again fuel aggression. Unless Russia undertakes structural reforms and redefines its role in the global economy by reducing reliance on resource exports and engaging more constructively with global markets, the cycle of confrontation may repeat itself, with far-reaching global consequences.

    The authors do not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and have disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

    ref. Russia is facing fresh sanctions, but Putin is used to dealing with a struggling economy – https://theconversation.com/russia-is-facing-fresh-sanctions-but-putin-is-used-to-dealing-with-a-struggling-economy-255732

    MIL OSI – Global Reports

  • MIL-OSI Global: History shows that Donald Trump is making a serious error in appeasing Vladimir Putin

    Source: The Conversation – UK – By Tim Luckhurst, Principal of South College, Durham University

    The policy of appeasement – strategic concessions to an aggressor that are designed to avoid war – is generally most closely associated in the UK with the Conservative leader Neville Chamberlain, prime minister between May 1937 and May 1940.

    When Chamberlain moved into 10 Downing Street, Adolf Hitler’s willingness to ignore international agreements was already apparent, having broken the Versailles treaty with a massive expansion of Germany’s armed forces, the occupation of the Rhineland.

    Faced with the prospect of Germany moving on Czechoslovakia, Chamberlain continued to work to appease Hitler by agreeing to territorial concessions in his favour. He believed that by appeasing the Führer, Europe could avoid war and save lives.

    Chamberlain’s failure, and the subsequent outbreak of the second world war after Germany’s invasion of Poland in September 1939, are recognised as evidence that the appeasement of expansionist nationalists always fails. Such leaders will simply take all that is offered and demand more.


    Get your news from actual experts, straight to your inbox. Sign up to our daily newsletter to receive all The Conversation UK’s latest coverage of news and research, from politics and business to the arts and sciences.


    There are parallels with the relationship between the current US president, Donald Trump, and the Russian president, Vladimir Putin. Trump and his senior officials have also repeatedly suggested that Ukraine should secure a peace deal by acquiescing to Putin’s demands, including for sovereign Ukrainian territory and assurances that Ukraine won’t be allowed to join Nato.

    This makes it seem as if Trump believes that peace can be achieved by appeasing Putin. Like Chamberlain at Munich, Trump has suggested offering the sovereign territory of an independent nation to appease a bully.

    Trump is not the first American president to make this mistake. Franklin D. Roosevelt, who served between March 1933 and April 1945, also tried to appease Hitler. The historian Frederick W. Marks III notes that “the keynote of his approach … beginning in 1933 was appeasement”.

    Before he was inaugurated, Roosevelt sought to persuade Sir Ronald Lindsay, the British ambassador to the US between 1930 and 1939, that Poland should be persuaded to concede the Polish Corridor to Germany. When German troops seized the Rhineland, Roosevelt’s White House made no protest.

    Between 1935 and 1937, Roosevelt made speeches condemning autocracy – but his actions did not match his words. In 1938, he appointed the appeaser Joseph Kennedy as US ambassador to the UK. Kennedy assured the German ambassador in London that he “sympathised not only with Germany’s racial policy but also with her economic goals”.

    In Berlin, the US ambassador, Hugh Wilson, insisted that defence of Czechoslovakia’s borders would be unrealistic. The Czechs should surrender the Sudetenland to Germany. Roosevelt continued his efforts to arrange a compromise peace when German forces seized Poland in September 1939.

    Echoes of the past

    The parallels continue. Confronted by Russia’s invasion of its democratic neighbour and relentless attacks on Ukrainian towns and cities, Trump’s response, shortly after taking office, was to bully the Ukrainian president, Volodymyr Zelensky, and negotiate directly with Russia. This approach signally failed and the killing continued and even intensified.

    Now, following his two-hour conversation with Putin on Monday, Trump has abandoned his insistence on an unconditional 30-day ceasefire. He now insists that the war is not his to fix. The US will step back. It is another hard blow to Ukrainian hopes for negotiation and compromise.




    Read more:
    After another call with Putin, it looks like Trump has abandoned efforts to mediate peace in Ukraine


    To a much greater extent than Roosevelt, Trump appears to treat weakness as evidence of moral inadequacy. In a recent essay, Ivan Mikloš, the former deputy prime minister of Slovakia who has advised successive Ukrainian governments in various capacities, writes of what he sees as Trump’s “affinity for the Kremlin boss”. Miklos believes that Trump admires Putin, and concludes that:

    President Putin, of course, sees that Mr Trump has a soft spot for him. This does not deter him in his maximalist demands, it encourages him even more.

    The US president’s treatment of Zelensky in the Oval Office at the end of February, and repeated statements since, suggest he lacks the patience for diplomacy – a concern that has been widely reported. Trump is said to admire Putin because the Russian president exercises power with minimal restraint.

    Meanwhile, Zelensky must plead for the military and financial support he requires to continue fighting a foe with a population four times larger.

    Lessons from history

    There is scant evidence that Trump pays attention to history. He should, because for Putin, history is central to strategy. A graduate of law who studied at Leningrad State University, graduating in 1975, Putin appears to have embraced an idealist version of his homeland as it operated in his youth as the Soviet Union – under the hardline leadership of Leonid Brezhnev, Yuri Andropov and Konstantin Chernenko.

    That Soviet Union included all of the territory of modern Ukraine. Putin aspires to recapture it. His vision is a Russia restored to a status comparable to that of the Soviet Union during the cold war years of his youth.

    Trump appears to forget that throughout the cold war, the Soviet Union’s powerful armed forces and ideological hostility to democracy cost the US an average of 3.6% of its GDP in defence spending each year. It’s one thing for Trump to demand that the European members of Nato must increase their defence budgets. It’s another to imagine that Nato can immediately provide a reliable deterrent to Russian aggression without US involvement.

    Trump’s newly appointed defense secretary, Pete Hegseth, suggested at a meeting of the Ukraine Defence Contact Group in Brussels in February that the US would reorientate its security policy away from Europe, saying Europe must “take ownership of conventional security on the continent”.

    This is essential, Hegseth said, because China is the real threat, and the US lacks the military resources to face in two directions simultaneously. It was a confession of weakness that places both America and Europe at increased risk.

    The philosopher George Santayana is credited with the warning: “Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it.”. Chamberlain’s version of appeasement failed to prevent Adolf Hitler’s aggression in the 20th century. Trump’s version appears equally incapable of deterring Vladimir Putin’s territorial ambitions in the 21st.

    Tim Luckhurst has received funding from News UK and Ireland Ltd. He is a fellow of the Royal Society of Arts and a member of the Society of Editors and the Free Speech Union

    ref. History shows that Donald Trump is making a serious error in appeasing Vladimir Putin – https://theconversation.com/history-shows-that-donald-trump-is-making-a-serious-error-in-appeasing-vladimir-putin-257252

    MIL OSI – Global Reports

  • MIL-OSI Russia: Large-scale prisoner exchange between Russia and Ukraine to continue in coming days — Russian Defense Ministry

    Translation. Region: Russian Federal

    Source: People’s Republic of China in Russian – People’s Republic of China in Russian –

    Source: People’s Republic of China – State Council News

    Moscow, May 23 /Xinhua/ — A large-scale prisoner exchange between Russia and Ukraine is planned to continue in the coming days, the Russian Defense Ministry reported on Friday.

    “The large-scale exchange initiated by the Russian side is planned to continue in the coming days,” TASS quotes the military department’s statement as saying.

    As part of the agreement reached by the delegations of Russia and Ukraine at the talks in Istanbul on May 16 on the exchange of prisoners according to the formula “one thousand for one thousand people”, 270 Russian servicemen and 120 civilians, including civilians from the Kursk region, were returned from Ukrainian captivity. In response, Russia handed over 270 prisoners of war of the Armed Forces of Ukraine and 120 civilians.

    The Russian Defense Ministry stated that the returned Russian military and civilians are currently in the Republic of Belarus, where they are receiving the necessary psychological and medical assistance. “All of them will be delivered to Russia for treatment and rehabilitation in medical institutions,” the department said. –0–

    MIL OSI Russia News

  • MIL-OSI Russia: More than 18,000 foreign-invested companies were established in China in January-April 2025

    Translation. Region: Russian Federal

    Source: People’s Republic of China in Russian – People’s Republic of China in Russian –

    Source: People’s Republic of China – State Council News

    BEIJING, May 23 (Xinhua) — A total of 18,832 new foreign-funded companies were established on the Chinese mainland in the first four months of 2025, up 12.1 percent year on year, the Ministry of Commerce said Friday.

    As noted by the department, from January to April, the volume of actually used foreign direct investment (FDI) in mainland China amounted to 320.78 billion yuan (about 44.6 billion US dollars), which is 10.9 percent less year-on-year.

    At the same time, the volume of actually used FDI in the manufacturing sector during the reporting period reached 84.06 billion yuan, and another 231.25 billion yuan went to the service sector.

    The actual FDI in high-tech industries rose to 96.71 billion yuan, with FDI in the e-commerce services sector increasing by 137 percent, in the aerospace equipment manufacturing sector by 86.2 percent, in the chemical and pharmaceutical industry by 57.8 percent, and in the medical instruments and equipment manufacturing sector by 4.9 percent.

    According to statistics from China’s Ministry of Commerce, investment from the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) increased by 42.9 percent year-on-year during the period, while investment from Japan increased by 74.2 percent. Investment from Switzerland increased by 68.4 percent, from the United Kingdom by 54.6 percent, from the Republic of Korea by 22.3 percent, and from Germany by 12.3 percent. –0–

    MIL OSI Russia News

  • MIL-OSI Russia: China’s digital sales rise thanks to subsidies

    Translation. Region: Russian Federal

    Source: People’s Republic of China in Russian – People’s Republic of China in Russian –

    Source: People’s Republic of China – State Council News

    BEIJING, May 23 (Xinhua) — China has seen an increase in sales of digital products in recent months, helped by a government-backed subsidy program, the Ministry of Commerce said Friday.

    As of Thursday, more than 48 million consumers had participated in the program, purchasing a total of 51.48 million items worth about 143.3 billion yuan (about 19.9 billion U.S. dollars), according to data released by the department.

    It is indicated that from January to April, the total volume of retail sales of communication equipment in enterprises with a turnover above the established limit increased by 25.4 percent in a year-on-year comparison, taking first place in terms of growth rates among 16 main categories of consumer goods.

    China’s Ministry of Commerce said the policy of subsidizing digital purchases has helped shift demand to mid- and high-priced products. Independent research showed that sales of smartphones priced between 2,000 and 4,000 yuan increased 13 percent year-on-year in the first four months of this year, while sales of smartphones priced between 4,000 and 6,000 yuan jumped 43 percent year-on-year.

    The subsidy program was launched by China in January 2025 as part of a broader effort to boost domestic consumption. Under the program, consumers who purchase smartphones, tablets, smart watches or wristbands priced below 6,000 yuan each are eligible for a subsidy of 15 percent of the sales price, up to a maximum of 500 yuan each.

    The program applies to both domestic and foreign brands. –0–

    MIL OSI Russia News

  • MIL-OSI Russia: A criminal who planned a terrorist attack in Kaliningrad has been detained in Russia

    Translation. Region: Russian Federal

    Source: People’s Republic of China in Russian – People’s Republic of China in Russian –

    Source: People’s Republic of China – State Council News

    Moscow, May 23 /Xinhua/ — The Federal Security Service of Russia has detained a Russian citizen who was planning to commit a terrorist attack in Kaliningrad during the celebration of the 80th anniversary of Victory in the Great Patriotic War, the agency’s press service reported on Friday.

    It was established that a citizen born in 2000 voluntarily joined a terrorist organization banned in Russia. Following an assignment from a Ukrainian curator received in the Telegram messenger, he was preparing to detonate an explosive device on the route of a parade column of military personnel, which is confirmed by his correspondence with a member of the terrorist structure.

    A criminal case has been opened on aiding terrorist and sabotage activities. For all the crimes committed, the detainee faces up to 20 years in prison. –0–

    MIL OSI Russia News

  • MIL-OSI Russia: China Ready to Open New Chapter in Comprehensive Strategic Partnership with Germany – Xi Jinping

    Translation. Region: Russian Federal

    Source: People’s Republic of China in Russian – People’s Republic of China in Russian –

    Source: People’s Republic of China – State Council News

    BEIJING, May 23 (Xinhua) — China is willing to work with Germany to open a new chapter in the history of bilateral comprehensive strategic partnership, promote new progress in China-EU ties, and make new contributions to the stable growth of the world economy, Chinese President Xi Jinping said Friday.

    During a telephone conversation with German Chancellor Friedrich Merz, Xi Jinping once again congratulated him on taking office. He noted that in a world where changes unseen in a century are accelerating and the international situation is volatile and unstable, the strategic and global significance of China-Germany and China-Europe relations is becoming even more noticeable.

    Healthy and stable relations between China and Germany serve the interests of both countries and meet the expectations of various social circles in China and Europe, the Chinese president said.

    The Chinese leader stressed that China and Germany have always developed their bilateral relations based on the spirit of mutual respect, seeking common ground while preserving differences, and cooperation for mutual benefit. Such a fine tradition should be carefully preserved and developed, Xi Jinping said.

    First, the Chinese President called for strengthening political mutual trust. He noted that China regards Germany as a partner, welcomes its development and prosperity, and is ready to strengthen close high-level exchanges with Germany, respect each other’s fundamental interests, and strengthen the political foundation of interstate relations.

    Secondly, Xi called on the two sides to enhance the resilience of bilateral relations. He said that they should not only continue to expand existing cooperation in traditional areas such as automobiles, machinery and chemicals, but also cultivate cooperation in cutting-edge sectors such as artificial intelligence and quantum technology, and strengthen exchanges and cooperation in areas such as climate change and green development, bringing the wisdom and solutions of China and Germany to global sustainable development.

    Third, the Chinese President noted that it is important to increase the momentum of cooperation. He assured that China is willing to share with Germany the development opportunities brought by high-level opening up, adding that China hopes that Germany will provide more policy support and promotion for mutual investment, and provide a fair, transparent and non-discriminatory business environment for Chinese enterprises.

    According to Xi Jinping, facts have fully proven that partnership is the correct positioning of China-Germany and China-EU relations, and a stable and predictable political environment is an important guarantee for bilateral cooperation.

    The Chinese president pointed out that the responsibility of major countries is the common mission of both sides. Recalling that this year marks the 50th anniversary of the establishment of diplomatic relations between China and the EU, Xi said the two sides should jointly summarize the successful experience of developing China-EU ties and send a positive signal to safeguard multilateralism and free trade, as well as deepen open and mutually beneficial cooperation. –0–

    MIL OSI Russia News

  • MIL-OSI USA: Zinke Introduces Bill to Modernize Outdated Foreign Military Sales Congressional Notification Process

    Source: US Congressman Ryan Zinke (Western Montana)

    (Washington, D.C.)  As Chairman of the House Foreign Affairs Committee Foreign Military Sales Task Force, Congressman Ryan Zinke has introduced bipartisan legislation to modernize the Congressional Notification (CN) thresholds for Foreign Military Sales (FMS) and Direct Commercial Sales (DCS). Congressman Jimmy Panetta (CA-19) co-sponsored this legislation. Read the full text of the bill here.

    FMS and DCS purchases by allies have surged, however, CN thresholds have remained unchanged for over 20 years. The outdated process delays key defense and diplomatic partnerships, potentially pushing allies toward adversaries like China and Russia.

    Zinke’s bill raises CN dollar thresholds to reflect inflation and global realities, streamlining approval timelines while maintaining rigorous security and human rights reviews by the Department of State and Department of Defense. The legislation also updates reporting requirements under the Arms Export Control Act to improve efficiency and oversight.

    ###

    MIL OSI USA News

  • MIL-OSI Russia: Chinese Defense Minister Meets Thai Armed Forces Chief

    Translation. Region: Russian Federal

    Source: People’s Republic of China in Russian – People’s Republic of China in Russian –

    Source: People’s Republic of China – State Council News

    BEIJING, May 23 (Xinhua) — Chinese Defense Minister Dong Jun met with Thai Armed Forces Chief Songwit Noonpakdee in Beijing on Friday.

    During the meeting, Dong Jun highly appreciated the deep traditional friendship between the two countries, characterized by the concept of “China and Thailand as one family”, as well as the solid foundation and fruitful achievements of military cooperation between the two countries.

    The Chinese defense minister expressed China’s willingness to work with Thailand to fully utilize existing cooperation mechanisms, enhance the level of interaction in areas such as joint exercises and personnel training, and contribute to the construction of a China-Thailand community with a shared future.

    S. Noonpakdee, for his part, noted that Thailand and China are friendly close neighbors. He assured that the Thai side always adheres to the one-China principle. The military leader stressed that the Thai army expects to further strengthen practical exchanges and cooperation with China in various fields, strengthen coordination in multilateral affairs, and jointly maintain regional security and stability. –0–

    MIL OSI Russia News

  • MIL-OSI Russia: The Belarusian Foreign Ministry called the EU’s decision to increase duties on agricultural products and nitrogen fertilizers trade protectionism

    Translation. Region: Russian Federal

    Source: People’s Republic of China in Russian –

    Source: People’s Republic of China – State Council News

    MINSK, May 23 /Xinhua/ — The decision to introduce higher import customs duties of the European Union on Belarusian agricultural products and nitrogen fertilizers is trade protectionism and an expression of unfair competition, said Ruslan Varankov, press secretary of the Belarusian Foreign Ministry, on Friday. The corresponding information was published by the press service of the Belarusian Foreign Ministry on the same day.

    “One can only once again sympathize with the ordinary citizens of the EU member states who will be deprived of access to high-quality, inexpensive and competitive products of Belarusian origin – primarily agricultural products and nitrogen fertilizers,” noted R. Varankov.

    According to him, with such decisions the EU punishes its own producers and consumers, adding fuel to the fire of social discontent instead of fighting the looming economic recession and inflation against the backdrop of a sharp increase in spending on the military-industrial complex.

    “Belarus, as a reliable supplier, will continue to work on export diversification. The rationality of this strategy is confirmed by the growing volumes of deliveries, for example, to Russia, countries in Asia, Africa and the Middle East,” the press secretary of the Belarusian Foreign Ministry said.

    On May 22, the European Parliament approved protective duties on potash fertilizers from Russia and Belarus, despite concerns from major European agricultural producers about the negative impact of this decision on the EU market. –0–

    MIL OSI Russia News

  • MIL-OSI Russia: Fifth round of Iran-US nuclear talks concludes in Rome

    Translation. Region: Russian Federal

    Source: People’s Republic of China in Russian – People’s Republic of China in Russian –

    Source: People’s Republic of China – State Council News

    ROME, May 23 (Xinhua) — The fifth round of talks between Iran and the United States to resolve differences over the Islamic Republic’s nuclear program ended in Rome on Friday, with limited but inconclusive progress made, an Omani negotiator said.

    “The fifth round of Iranian-American talks concluded today in Rome with some, but not final, progress,” Omani Foreign Minister Badr bin Hamad bin Hamoud al-Busaidi wrote on social media X. “We hope to clarify the remaining issues in the coming days, which will allow us to move towards our common goal of achieving a sustainable and dignified agreement,” the diplomat’s post noted.

    The discussions, held at the Omani embassy in Italy, lasted more than three hours. They were led by Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi and US Special Envoy for the Middle East Steven Witkoff. Oman acted as an indirect mediator in the talks.

    As reported by Italian media, the main subject of ongoing tensions in relations between the two countries remains the issue of uranium enrichment by the Iranian side. The administration of US President Donald Trump has once again voiced the demand that Iran curtail all uranium enrichment activities, but Tehran has rejected the American proposal for “zero enrichment” and, in turn, demanded the lifting of economic sanctions against the Islamic Republic. –0–

    MIL OSI Russia News

  • MIL-OSI Russia: European stocks plummet after Trump threatens 50 percent tariffs on EU imports

    Translation. Region: Russian Federal

    Source: People’s Republic of China in Russian – People’s Republic of China in Russian –

    Source: People’s Republic of China – State Council News

    BERLIN, May 23 (Xinhua) — European stocks fell sharply on Friday after U.S. President Donald Trump escalated trade tensions with the European Union by announcing sweeping new tariffs and threatening Apple, reigniting investor fears about the economic impact of a renewed transatlantic trade war.

    D. Trump wrote on a social network that he recommends introducing 50 percent tariffs on all goods imported from the EU starting June 1, explaining this decision by the fact that negotiations with Brussels have reached an impasse.

    “Trade talks are going nowhere,” the American leader said, adding that the EU “was created with the main purpose of benefiting from trade with the United States.”

    Markets reacted swiftly. Europe’s STOXX 600 fell 2.16 percent to 537.39 before paring some of its losses. National indices were also hit hard, with Italy’s FTSE MIB, Germany’s DAX, France’s CAC 40 and Spain’s IBEX 35 all down more than 2 percent. The DAX fell to a two-week low, briefly touching 23,325.5 during the session.

    “This latest threat is worse than the worst-case scenario,” said Fiona Cincotta, senior market analyst at City Index. –0–

    MIL OSI Russia News

  • MIL-OSI Russia: Chinese Premier Congratulates Singapore Prime Minister on Re-Election

    Translation. Region: Russian Federal

    Source: People’s Republic of China in Russian – People’s Republic of China in Russian –

    Source: People’s Republic of China – State Council News

    BEIJING, May 23 (Xinhua) — Chinese Premier Li Qiang on Friday sent a congratulatory message to Singaporean Prime Minister Lawrence Wong on the occasion of his re-election to the post.

    As Li Qiang noted, China and Singapore are friendly neighbors and important cooperative partners with healthy dynamics of development of relations and fruitful results of cooperation in various fields, which has greatly contributed to the advancement of the modernization process in both countries.

    The congratulations said that both sides also maintain coordination and cooperation in international and regional affairs and make positive contributions to peace, stability, prosperity and development of the region.

    The Chinese leader expressed his willingness to work with Liu Wong and take the 35th anniversary of the establishment of bilateral diplomatic ties as an opportunity to further deepen mutual political trust, expand mutually beneficial cooperation, enhance cultural and people-to-people exchanges, jointly safeguard multilateralism and the free trade system, promote new achievements in China-Singapore relations as a comprehensive, high-quality, future-oriented partnership, and strengthen prosperity and stability in the region. –0–

    MIL OSI Russia News

  • MIL-OSI Russia: China’s central government has allocated 30 million yuan to help with the disaster in Guizhou Province.

    Translation. Region: Russian Federal

    Source: People’s Republic of China in Russian – People’s Republic of China in Russian –

    Source: People’s Republic of China – State Council News

    BEIJING, May 23 (Xinhua) — China’s Ministry of Finance and the Ministry of Emergency Management on Friday allocated 30 million yuan (about 4.17 million U.S. dollars) in disaster relief aid for landslide-hit Guizhou Province in southwest China.

    The Chinese Ministry of Finance clarified that the central government’s allocations will be used to support search and rescue operations, relocate affected residents, eliminate risks and identify hidden dangers of secondary disasters in order to minimize casualties and minimize damage.

    As previously reported, a landslide hit Gowa Township in Dafang County, administratively subordinate to Bijie City, Guizhou Province on May 22, trapping 19 people under the rubble.

    The Ministry of Finance has ordered local authorities to ensure the timely distribution of allocated funds to affected areas, strengthen supervision over their management, and ensure that these funds are effectively used to protect people’s lives and property. –0–

    MIL OSI Russia News

  • MIL-OSI Global: How does a person become famous when they’re just a kid?

    Source: The Conversation – USA – By Matthew Pittman, Associate Professor of Advertising and Public Relations, University of Tennessee

    Some ‘kidfluencers’ have huge followings on social media, but the spotlight isn’t always a friendly place. ilkercelik/E+ via Getty images

    Curious Kids is a series for children of all ages. If you have a question you’d like an expert to answer, send it to CuriousKidsUS@theconversation.com.


    How does a person become famous when they’re just a kid? – Anushka, age 9, St. Augustine, Florida


    First, consider what kind of fame you want. Some kids, such as Blue Ivy Carter or Suri Cruise, are known for having famous parents – in their cases, singer Beyoncé and actors Katie Holmes and Tom Cruise. That’s something you can’t really control.

    Maybe you want to be a star athlete, like basketball player Caitlin Clark or skateboarder Sky Brown. If you’re good at a sport, practicing a lot will make you even better, and you might get famous.

    Or maybe you want to be a famous musician. Singer LeAnn Rimes won her first Grammy Award at age 14. Justin Bieber was discovered on YouTube when he was 12. If you work hard at playing an instrument or singing, you increase your chances of getting noticed.

    Skateboarder Sky Brown won her first Olympic medal, a bronze, at age 13 in 2020.

    A newer way to become famous is to be a social media influencer – a person who gets paid, either with money or with stuff, to help sell things on social media. A 2023 survey of 1,000 Gen Zers – people in their early teens to mid-20s – found that 57% wanted to become influencers.

    I study social media and teach a social media class at the University of Tennessee. I also have a side gig as an influencer. My posts have gone viral and been seen hundreds of millions of times all around the world. I post silly and serious things about my life on Instagram and TikTok.

    Here are some things to know about fame at a young age.

    There wasn’t always a youth culture

    Before modern times, people didn’t pay much attention to children in the way that we do now. There were a few exceptions, such as composer Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart, who played music as a child for kings and queens in the 1700s, but they were rare.

    Things changed a lot as the U.S. population boomed after World War II. Businesses realized that young people were a big market, and a new, youth-focused culture developed. Movies, TV shows and songs were increasingly made for young people, featuring young people.

    Opening credits for seasons 3-4 of “The Partridge Family,” a TV situation comedy about a family that forms a pop music band. The show ran from 1970-1974 and turned David Cassidy, who played the oldest son, into a teen idol.

    Now, thanks to social media and the internet, kids can get famous without being star athletes or actors. If you can make videos, sing songs, tell jokes or share art from your phone or computer and people like what you post, they might share it with others. Some kids become famous just by being really good at explaining things or showing their everyday lives.

    For example, Anastasia Radzinskaya, an 11-year-old Russian American girl who shares content about children’s songs and games, has 1.5 million followers on Instagram. Ethan Gamer, a video game influencer, started appearing on YouTube in 2013 at age 7.

    Pros and cons

    Being a famous kid can offer a lot of benefits. You might get to appear on TV or in movies, wear cool clothes, or hang out with famous athletes or celebrities. You might also get to make money that you could use to support your family, pay for a high-quality education or fund causes that you care about, such as protecting nature or feeding hungry people.

    But there also are downsides. Famous kids often have to work a lot and don’t have much time to hang out with friends. Also, people may say hurtful things about you on social media, which is something you can’t control.

    Being famous can pressure people to act or dress in certain ways. Handling attention and criticism from strangers can be stressful for any young person, and fame makes the challenge much harder.

    Should you try to be an influencer?

    For me, influencing can be fun and creative. It’s cool to make a video and know that lots of people around the world are enjoying it.

    Another plus is that the skills you need to be an influencer – communicating clearly, producing digital content and helping other people find cool new products – can be valuable as you grow up, no matter what job you have.

    However, most influencers don’t make enough money to do it full time – they do it as a side gig while working a real job. If you are a kid, school should be your full-time job.

    You also should expect to get rejected a lot before you start developing an audience. This can make you emotionally strong in the long run, but it still hurts when you share your work and no one seems to notice. Most influencers put in years of effort to learn the skills that help make them successful.

    You’re likely to get negative responses that can hurt your feelings. You will need your parents’ help to manage online feedback and know how to react to all kinds of responses, positive and negative.

    It’s definitely possible for kids to be famous today, but that doesn’t mean that every kid should try. What’s important is to do things that you enjoy, even if the whole world isn’t watching.


    Hello, curious kids! Do you have a question you’d like an expert to answer? Ask an adult to send your question to CuriousKidsUS@theconversation.com. Please tell us your name, age and the city where you live.

    And since curiosity has no age limit – adults, let us know what you’re wondering, too. We won’t be able to answer every question, but we will do our best.

    Matthew Pittman’s influencer posts focus on his college teaching and family life. He occasionally receives products or payments in return for promoting toys, teaching tools and family games.

    ref. How does a person become famous when they’re just a kid? – https://theconversation.com/how-does-a-person-become-famous-when-theyre-just-a-kid-255820

    MIL OSI – Global Reports

  • MIL-OSI United Nations: 23 May 2025 Note for Media Seventy-eighth World Health Assembly – Daily update: 23 May 2025

    Source: World Health Organisation

    Controlled medicines, such as opioids, benzodiazepines, barbiturates, amphetamines and dissociative anaesthetics like ketamine, are drugs that have authorized use for medical or scientific purposes. They should be used under careful regulation as they have properties that can increase health risks if used for non-medical purposes and they can be associated with drug use disorders and drug dependence, unless rational use is ensured. But they also have essential life-improving properties, reducing suffering and improving health and well-being when used appropriately for treating specific medical conditions.  

    However, the majority of the world’s population lives in countries with limited or no access to affordable, quality-assured controlled medicines, even when they are proven to be safe and effective for treatment. And there is a major access and equity gap; for example, in 2021, over 80% of the world’s morphine was distributed to high-income countries, which leaves out 5.5 million terminal cancer patients and millions of others suffering from acute illness and end-of-life suffering in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). Studies show that 75% of people living with epilepsy in LMICs do not receive treatment.  

    The updated WHO guideline offers a clear roadmap for Member States to develop and implement balanced national policies that support the medical and scientific use of controlled medicines while protecting individuals and communities from the risks associated with non-medical use. 

    Key highlights include: 

    • ensuring accurate and timely quantification of controlled medicines based on current consumption and projected needs; 
    • banning misleading and unethical marketing practices;
    • strengthening procurement and supply chain systems using appropriate tools and technologies to enhance traceability, reduce stockouts and waste, and ensure equitable distribution; 
    • enabling local production where feasible; 
    • facilitating continuous access to opioid agonist treatment in all clinically needed settings; and 
    • promoting robust training for health-care professionals and public education campaigns for safe, informed use.  

    The rapid communication announced today will be followed by the full document of the “WHO guideline on balanced national controlled medicines policies to ensure medical access and safety” to be released online in June 2025. 

    Related document: 

    Related links:

    Landmark resolution on lung health approved 

    Member States approved a landmark resolution on lung health, recognizing the urgent need to tackle respiratory diseases and their major risk factors, including air pollution and tobacco use. The Resolution aims to strengthen national and global actions to prevent, diagnose, and manage common lung conditions such as asthma, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), lung cancer, pneumonia and tuberculosis. 

    The Resolution calls for improved access to affordable care, greater investment in clean air policies, and integrated strategies linking lung health with broader efforts on noncommunicable diseases (NCDs) and climate resilience. This milestone reaffirms global commitment to protecting respiratory health and preventing millions of avoidable premature deaths each year.  

    Related link:

    Assembly approves first-ever resolution on kidney health  

    The first-ever WHA resolution on kidney health, led by Guatemala and co-sponsored by multiple Member States, was approved today – recognizing  kidney disease as a growing global public health issue.  

    It urges countries to integrate kidney care into national health strategies, expand prevention, early detection and treatment efforts, and strengthen primary health-care services. This Resolution represents a major step forward in reducing the global burden of kidney disease as part of the efforts to address NCDs and advancing universal health coverage (UHC). 

    Related link: 

    Resolution calls for scaling up eye, hearing care and prevention 

    Today’s Resolution on primary prevention and integrated care for sensory impairments, including vision impairment and hearing loss, calls for improved services needed for at least 2.2 billion individuals affected by vision impairment, and 1.5 billion individuals by hearing loss.  

    The burden of unaddressed vision impairment and hearing loss remains disproportionately high in low- and middle-income countries, Small Island Developing States, and settings affected by different emergencies.  

    Recent technological advancements help improve the screening and detection of vision impairment and hearing loss, and the availability of cost-effective and good-quality interventions. These include cataract surgery and assistive technologies such as eyeglasses, hearing aids, implants, and rehabilitative services as well as sign language interpreters, and Braille literacy, which can reduce the barriers people with sensory impairments experience to actively participate in society.  

    The new resolution invites countries to adopt or adapt and implement the recommendations outlined in the World report on vision and World report on hearing. Doing so can help incorporate comprehensive eye, vision, ear and hearing care across the life course as a core element within national health plans and primary health-care initiatives towards universal health coverage. 

    Related document:

    World Cervical Cancer Elimination Day announced as official health campaign 

    Today, the Assembly reaffirmed its commitment to cervical cancer elimination and established World Cervical Cancer Elimination Day, to be marked on November 17, annually. 

    Cervical cancer –  the fourth most common cancer in women – could become the first cancer to be eliminated if sufficient global action and support is mobilized. The disease claims the lives of 350 000 women each year, and an additional 600 000 women are diagnosed with cervical cancer each year. 

    In support of the Global strategy to accelerate the elimination of cervical cancer as a public health problem, launched by WHO Director-General Dr Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus in 2020, World Cervical Cancer Elimination Day will promote actions to end the disease and protect the health of women and girls. Critical measures include vaccination against human papillomavirus (HPV), which is the major cause of cervical cancer, alongside efforts to step up screening and treatment of pre-cancerous lesions and management of cancer cases. 

    In addition to strengthening global advocacy and accountability, the commemoration of the World Cervical Cancer Elimination Day will further support service delivery and encourage resource mobilization to expand health-care services for cervical cancer elimination as a benchmark for health equity and access. 

    Related document:

    Countries agree to extend timeline for global action plan on dementia  

    Countries have endorsed a decision to extend the Global action plan on the public health response to dementia from 2025 to 2031, following a recommendation from WHO’s Executive Board. The revised timeline brings it in line with the Global action plan on epilepsy and other neurological Disorders 2022–2031, supporting a more coherent approach to the global response to neurological conditions. 

    The extension comes amid rising concern over the global burden of dementia. Dementia is the seventh leading cause of death worldwide and a major driver of disability among older people. In 2021, 57 million people were living with dementia, over 60% in low- and middle-income countries. Every year, there are 10 million new cases that occur. Alzheimer disease, the most common form of dementia, accounts for the majority of cases. 

    The extension gives countries space to accelerate national responses, invest in care and support systems, and integrate dementia into broader public health and ageing agendas. 

    Related documents: 

    Related links:

    Countries commit to improve nutrition for mothers and young children 

    In a Resolution endorsed today at the World Health Assembly, countries recommitted to tackling malnutrition in mothers, infants and young children, and agreed to new indicators to advance progress in critical areas like diversifying diets and breastfeeding. This Resolution also extended the deadline for meeting the targets of the current global comprehensive plan until 2030. 

    Since the plan was first adopted in 2012, there has been notable progress, including a decline in childhood stunting (being too short for one’s age) and to a lesser extent in wasting (being too thin for one’s height), while exclusive breastfeeding rates increased. However, little progress has been made against targets for reducing the prevalence of low birth weight and anaemia among women, making these critical areas for action.  

    More ambitious goals were set for improving breastfeeding and reducing the proportion of children who are overweight – noting that the initial targets were nearly achieved in these areas. The 2030 targets are: 

    1. A 40% reduction in the number of children under five years of age who are stunted, compared to the 2012 baseline.
    2. A 50% reduction in anaemia in women of reproductive age, compared to the 2012 baseline.
    3. A 30% reduction in low birth weight, compared to the 2012 baseline.
    4. Reduce and maintain overweight in children under five years of age to less than 5%.
    5. Increase the rate of exclusive breastfeeding in the first six months up to at least 60%.
    6. Reduce and maintain wasting in children under five years of age to less than 5%. 

    Malnutrition has long-term effects on the development, health, and economic growth of individuals, communities and nations. Almost half of child deaths are linked to undernutrition. This new Resolution seeks to unify countries in their efforts to tackle these persistent issues. 

    Related document:

    Related link:

    Global digital health strategy extended to support health system transformation 

    In a decisive move to advance digitized health systems, Member States agreed to extend the Global Strategy on Digital Health 2020–2025 through to 2027. They also approved a decision for the development of a new Global Strategy on Digital Health for 2028–2033, ensuring alignment with efforts such as the UN Pact for the Future and the Sustainable Development Goals. These steps reflect the growing momentum and critical importance of digital health in achieving equitable, resilient, and people-centred health systems. 

    Originally endorsed at the Seventy-third World Health Assembly (WHA73) in 2020, the Strategy has catalysed significant progress in equitable digital health implementation across all WHO regions. These include: 

    • 129 countries have established national digital health strategies.
    • Over 1600 government officials from more than 100 countries have received training in digital health and artificial intelligence.
    • Transformative initiatives such as the Global Digital Health Certification Network have been launched, benefiting 1.8 billion people across 80 countries.
    • Critical guidance on artificial intelligence in health has been issued, including the Ethics and Governance of Artificial Intelligence for Health, with global workshops supporting Member States in ethical AI implementation.
    • 130 Member States have conducted digital health maturity assessments using the Global Digital Health Monitor.
    • Government-to-government collaboration on digital health has been established in four WHO regions, with 40 Member States joining the Global Digital Health Partnership.
    • Global collaboration has been strengthened through the Global Initiative on Digital Health, the WHO Innovation Hub and regional frameworks led by WHO, ITU, the African Union, PAHO and other key partners. 

    This extended Strategy is about accelerating action and launching a new critical phase in global efforts where digital health can be purposefully scaled and equitably integrated into every health system.  

    Related document:

    Related link:

    Global Strategic Directions for Nursing and Midwifery extended to 2030 

    Delegates welcomed WHO’s recommendation to extend the Global Strategic Directions for Nursing and Midwifery to 2030, underlining the essential role of nurses and midwives in delivering health services and strengthening systems.  

    The recently launched State of the world’s nursing report 2025 reveals that nurses account for approximately 39% of the global health workforce shortage, emphasizing the urgent need to address nursing deficits to achieve universal health coverage. The Assembly’s decision marks a critical step forward in advancing health workforce priorities and ensuring health systems are equipped to meet current and future demands. 

    Related document:

    Related link:

    Member States commit to urgently address social connection  

    A historic resolution adopted by the World Health Assembly today recognized the crucial role that social connection plays in health and well-being for people of all ages. The Assembly agreed that social connection, which is characterized as the ways people relate to and interact with others, needs to be addressed as a public health priority, based on growing evidence linking it to improved health outcomes and reduced risk of early death. This phenomenon is becoming increasingly relevant in the context of rapid technological shifts and long-term social trends. 

    Social connection, an important determinant of health, is linked to other social, economic and environmental determinants, and its cumulative effects help shape people’s health across the life course. A lack of social connection is often associated with cardiovascular disease and mental health conditions, including depression, dementia and other types of cognitive decline. These impacts are felt not only by individuals but also by communities and societies.  

    Quality social connection, on the other hand, can prevent and reduce social isolation and loneliness, enhancing physical and mental health, extending lifespans, and supporting healthy behaviours. The Resolution – the first in the history of the WHA – urges Member States to develop and implement evidence-based policies, programmes and strategies to raise awareness and promote positive social connection for mental and physical health. WHO also announced a new campaign “Knot Alone” to promote social connection for better health. 

    The resolution also requests the Director-General to: 

    • integrate social connection into WHO’s public health agenda;
    • provide technical assistance and capacity building support to Member States; and
    • report on the outcomes of the WHO Commission on Social Connection and the implementation of the Resolution at the World Health Assembly in 2027, with further progress reports due in 2029 and 2031. 

    Related document:

    Related link:

    Sustain polio eradication through stronger health systems 

    Member States reaffirmed support for a polio-free world, commending progress in stopping a wild poliovirus outbreak in several countries in Africa and addressing remaining challenges in Afghanistan and Pakistan. They welcomed advances in ending variant outbreaks, including success in Madagascar, while noting persistent risks in regions such as Nigeria, Democratic Republic of the Congo, Somalia and Yemen. Emphasis was placed on vaccine trust, gender equity, and humanitarian access, exemplified by successful campaigns in Gaza. Members stressed the urgency of sustaining eradication through strong health systems, containment, and strategic transition of polio assets. They backed the extended strategy to 2029, calling for innovative, diversified funding and continued political and financial commitment. 

    Related documents: 

    Related link: 

    Report on smallpox eradication: destruction of variola virus stocks 

    Although smallpox was eradicated in 1980, the virus is held in two locations under WHO supervision to enable research, one being in the Russian Federation and the other in the United States of America. Delegates noted the report, recalling the importance of achieving smallpox eradication, and their commitment to the responsible destruction of variola virus, while recognizing the importance of ongoing essential research with transparency and international oversight.  

    The report also laid out progress made in responding to mpox outbreaks in Africa and around the world (mpox is currently a public health emergency of international concern), and for which the outcomes of variola virus research have been crucial. Delegates stressed the need to ensure equitable access to diagnostics and treatments for all Member States, as access to these measures remain challenging in low and middle-income countries.  

    Related documents:

    Related link: 

    Enhancement of laboratory biosafety 

    Delegates noted a report on efforts towards enhancement of laboratory biosafety. Laboratories require stringent measures to safely contain high-consequence and other impact microbiological agents and toxins. Delegates highlighted the importance of laboratory safety to safeguarding public health and welcomed the publication of the 4th edition of the WHO’s Laboratory Biosafety Manual and the release of a risk assessment mobile tool among others. While considerable achievements were made across the world, delegates recognized that challenges remain in regulatory oversight, funding gaps and engineering support. 

    Related documents:

    “,”datePublished”:”2025-05-23T17:50:17.0000000+00:00″,”image”:”https://cdn.who.int/media/images/default-source/who-governance/world-health-assembly/wha78—2025-(19-27-may)/world-health-assembly-committee-b-2025.jpg?sfvrsn=b168d0ab_3″,”publisher”:{“@type”:”Organization”,”name”:”World Health Organization: WHO”,”logo”:{“@type”:”ImageObject”,”url”:”https://www.who.int/Images/SchemaOrg/schemaOrgLogo.jpg”,”width”:250,”height”:60}},”dateModified”:”2025-05-23T17:50:17.0000000+00:00″,”mainEntityOfPage”:”https://www.who.int/news/item/23-05-2025-seventy-eighth-world-health-assembly—daily-update–23-may-2025″,”@context”:”http://schema.org”,”@type”:”NewsArticle”};
    ]]>

    MIL OSI United Nations News

  • MIL-OSI USA: Q&A: Ukraine Update

    US Senate News:

    Source: United States Senator for Iowa Chuck Grassley
    Q: Why did you write to Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth about Ukraine?
    A: As a Pentagon watchdog, I’ve dedicated decades of congressional oversight to track taxpayer dollars appropriated for national defense, including military dollars assigned to help our allies. From government purchase cards  to $10,000 toilet seat lids and sloppy accounting that allowed a years-long $103 million embezzlement scheme, I keep my nose to the grindstone to root out wasteful spending, mismanagement and defense contractor fraud that run rampant at the Pentagon, no matter who’s in the White House. Under seven administrations, I’ve worked in the U.S. Senate to fix lax financial controls, including my bipartisan bill that would require the Department of Defense (DoD) to pass a full, independent audit. Astonishingly, the Pentagon is the only federal agency that’s been unable to earn a clean opinion on its audit, despite federal law requiring all federal agencies to conduct annual audits since 1990.
    At my annual 99 county meetings, Iowans have shared concerns about the amount of federal spending in support of Ukraine. Since the war started in 2022, Congress has appropriated $175 billion to help Ukraine defend itself from the Russian invasion, support allies in the region and to help avoid World War III. While I strongly support pushing back against Russian aggression, I’m also a relentless taskmaster to ensure scarce taxpayer dollars aren’t squandered once they leave the federal treasury. That’s why I’m asking Defense Secretary Hegseth to account for payments made with money Congress appropriated in national security supplemental bills. While the Pentagon does not send any money to Ukraine, it has received significant funds to replace military stocks delivered to Ukraine and to conduct a range of activities to help Ukraine and our European NATO allies in the region defend themselves. The Pentagon must ensure taxpayer dollars are accounted for and used as Congress intended, but the same problems with poor accounting systems at DoD were evident with the funds from the national security supplemental bills. Last October, the DoD Office of Inspector General (IG) published a report examining how the Pentagon expended the money for Ukraine. Its audit raised alarm bells, and I’ve asked the Secretary of Defense to track down the money trail left behind by the Biden administration. Specifically, the IG’s report revealed that of the 479 disbursements it reviewed, DoD didn’t provide documentation to support the accuracy of 323 transactions. We’re not talking peanuts and cracker jacks. The amount of undocumented expenditures exceeds $1 billion. Without supporting documentation, we don’t know how that money was used. What’s more, as federal auditors conducted the investigation, the Biden administration flunked fundamental fiscal stewardship responsibilities. According to the DoD’s watchdog, the audit team’s requests for information faced noncooperation and insufficient responses, allegedly providing insufficient responses to 52 requests and no response to 14 requests to document where the dollars went. I’m not ever going to let up on my efforts to improve the Pentagon’s financial controls. Protecting taxpayer dollars and strengthening military readiness, including U.S. strategic stockpiles, are too important to allow the Pentagon to go unchecked.
    Q: How are you standing up to Putin on behalf of innocent Ukrainian children?
    A: It’s been more three years since Russia started its unprovoked invasion of Ukraine, the deadliest conflict in Europe since World War II. The senseless killing of civilians and casualties on the battlefield have led to needless human suffering and geopolitical ramifications around the world. One of the war’s atrocities has far-reaching consequences for Ukrainian society. Russia has abducted tens of thousands of Ukrainian children through unlawful deportations and forced transfers to Russify them. The goal is to erase from memory the children’s Ukrainian names, language and identity. What’s more, the State Department’s 2024 Trafficking in Persons Report found Russia recruits or uses child soldiers, has state-sponsored policy or pattern of human trafficking and is among the worst hubs for human trafficking in the world. In March, I called upon Secretary of State Marco Rubio to continue supporting investigations that are seeking to unravel the whereabouts of these innocent children and bring them back home. As President Trump leads efforts to secure a peace agreement to end the war, I’m leading a bipartisan resolution in the U.S. Senate that calls for the return of kidnapped Ukrainian children before any final peace agreement is reached. It condemns Russia’s abduction and forcible transfer of innocent young children to brainwash them and wipe away their heritage. The mass kidnapping of Ukrainian children by the Russian regime is yet another example of Vladimir Putin’s diabolical mission to restore the former Soviet empire. History shows this is a page out of his KGB-playbook when Stalin’s Soviet regime sent women and children from the Baltic countries to Siberia. The United States ought to demand the innocent children of Ukraine are returned before any agreement to end the war is reached so the Russians cannot use them as bargaining chips.

    MIL OSI USA News

  • MIL-OSI Europe: Text adopted – Deliberations of the Committee on Petitions in 2023 – P10_TA(2025)0114 – Thursday, 22 May 2025 – Brussels

    Source: European Parliament

    The European Parliament,

    –  having regard to its previous resolutions on the outcome of the Committee on Petitions’ deliberations,

    –  having regard to Articles 10 and 11 of the Treaty on European Union (TEU),

    –  having regard to Articles 20, 24 and 227 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU) on the right of EU citizens and residents to bring their concerns to the attention of Parliament,

    –  having regard to Article 228 TFEU on the role and functions of the European Ombudsman,

    –  having regard to Article 44 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union concerning the right to petition the European Parliament,

    –  having regard to the provisions of the TFEU relating to the infringement procedure and, in particular, to Articles 258 and 260 thereof,

    –  having regard to the concluding observations of the UN Committee on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities of 21 March 2025 on the combined second and third periodic reports of the European Union,

    –  having regard to Rules 55 and 233(7) of its Rules of Procedure,

    –  having regard to the report of the Committee on Petitions (A10-0063/2025),

    A.  whereas the purpose of the annual report on the outcome of the Committee on Petitions’ deliberations is to present an analysis of the petitions received in 2023 and of relations with other institutions, as well as to present an accurate picture of the objectives achieved in 2023;

    B.  whereas in 2023, Parliament received 1 452 petitions, which represents an increase of 16,2 % compared to the 1 217 petitions submitted in 2022 and of 4,0 % compared to the 1 392 petitions registered in 2021; whereas the total amount of petitions received continues to be significantly lower than the peak reached in 2013 and 2014, when Parliament received 2 891 and 2 715 petitions, respectively;

    C.  whereas in 2023, the number of users supporting one or more petitions on Parliament’s Petitions Web Portal was 26 331, which represents a considerable increase compared to the 22 441 users recorded in 2022 (both numbers are considerably lower than the 209 272 supporters recorded in 2021); whereas the number of clicks in support of petitions also increased slightly in 2023, reaching a total of 29 287 (compared with 27 927 in 2022 and 217 876 in 2021);

    D.  whereas however, the overall number of petitions remains modest in relation to the total population of the EU, revealing that efforts still need to be stepped up to increase citizens’ awareness of their right to petition and the possible usefulness of petitions as a means of drawing the attention of the institutions and the Member States to matters that affect and concern citizens directly; whereas in exercising the right to petition, citizens expect the EU institutions to provide added value in finding a solution to their problems;

    E.  whereas the criteria for the admissibility of petitions are laid down in Article 227 TFEU and Rule 232(1) of Parliament’s Rules of Procedure, which require that petitions must be submitted by an EU citizen or by a natural or legal person who is resident or has a registered office in a Member State and is directly affected by matters falling within the EU’s fields of activity;

    F.  whereas of the 1 452 petitions submitted in 2023, 429 were declared inadmissible and 13 were withdrawn; whereas the high percentage (29,55 %) of inadmissible petitions in 2023 confirms that there is still a widespread lack of clarity about the scope of the EU’s areas of responsibility; whereas in order to reduce the number of inadmissible petitions, efforts still need to be made to clarify further the scope of the EU’s fields of activity;

    G.  whereas the Committee on Petitions (PETI) played a significant role in combating discrimination against Romanian and Bulgarian citizens during the period in which their countries had not yet joined the Schengen area; whereas PETI made a key contribution in advocating equal treatment and addressing the unjustified barriers faced by these citizens; whereas the starting point was Petition 0004/2023, submitted by Răzvan Eugen Nicolescu on behalf of the ‘Asociația pentru Energie Curată și Combaterea Schimbărilor Climatice’, as well as the subsequent plenary resolution on accession to the Schengen area, adopted under Rule 227(2) of the Rules of Procedure(1);

    H.  whereas the right to petition Parliament is a fundamental right of EU citizens, offering both citizens and residents an open, democratic and transparent mechanism to address their elected representatives directly; whereas this essential tool empowers citizens to actively and effectively participate in the life of the Union; whereas through petitions, EU citizens can complain about failures to implement EU law and help detect breaches of EU law;

    I.  whereas Parliament is the only EU institution directly elected by EU citizens; whereas the right to petition the European Parliament is one of the fundamental rights of EU citizens and residents and it allows them to address their elected representatives directly; whereas many persons with disabilities lack equal access to information and communication due to the limited availability of accessible formats and due to the fact that national sign languages are not recognised as part of the EU’s multilingualism; whereas Parliament has long been at the forefront of the development of the petitions process internationally and has the most open, democratic and transparent petitions process in Europe, allowing petitioners to participate actively and effectively in its activities, whereas in exercising the right to petitions, citizens expect the EU institutions provide added value, cooperating with the Commission and Member State authorities, in solving their problems;

    J.  whereas the information submitted by petitioners in their petitions and during committee meetings, along with the Commission’s assessments and the replies from the Member States and other bodies, also provide valuable input for the work of other parliamentary committees, given that admissible petitions are forwarded to the relevant committee for an opinion or for information; whereas, therefore, petitions can also play a role in the legislative process, providing concrete feedback on the impact of EU policies and enabling policies to address emerging needs;

    K.  whereas the activities of the Committee on Petitions are based on the input provided by petitioners, enabling Parliament to enhance its responsiveness to complaints and concerns relating to respect for fundamental EU rights and compliance with EU legislation in the Member States; whereas petitions are therefore a useful source of information on instances of misapplication or breaches of EU law, enabling an assessment of the application of EU law and its impact on the rights of EU citizens and residents; whereas in 2023 fundamental rights were one of the three most important concerns of all petitioners; whereas, in the context of the structured dialogue with the Commission, the Committee on Petitions called on the Commission to fight discrimination in the European Union, including through initiatives to guarantee equal rights and to strengthen measures against all forms of discrimination, including those based on sex, racial or ethnic origin, disability, age, religion or belief and sexual orientation;

    L.  whereas according to Article 17 TEU the Commission should ensure the correct application of the Treaties and of measures adopted pursuant to them; whereas the Commission’s strategic approach to addressing issues raised in petitions must be fully consistent with the Treaties in order to ensure the most effective follow-up of petitions, aiming at guaranteeing full and timely protection of citizens’ rights arising from EU law;

    M.  whereas each petition must be considered and examined carefully, efficiently, impartially, fairly and transparently, in line with the standards set in Article 41 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union on the Right to good administration; whereas all petitioners have the right to receive a reply informing them about the decision on admissibility and follow-up actions taken by the committee within a reasonable period of time, in their own language or in the language used in the petition; whereas timely and effective responses by the Commission and Member States to the issues raised in the petitions, along with solutions for redress, where appropriate, contribute to strengthening the trust citizens place in the Union and its policies;

    N.  whereas the Committee on Petitions attaches the utmost importance to the examination and public discussion of petitions at its meetings; whereas petitioners have the right to present their petitions and frequently take the floor in the discussion, thereby actively contributing to the work of the committee; whereas in 2023, the Committee on Petitions held 10 committee meetings, at which 191 petitions were discussed with 114 petitioners present and actively participating by taking the floor;

    O.  whereas the main subjects of concern raised in petitions submitted in 2023 related to the environment, fundamental rights, personal matters and justice;

    P.  whereas when adopting its meeting agenda, the Committee on Petitions pays attention to petitions and topics with a high degree of relevance for discussion at EU level and to the need to maintain a balanced geographical coverage of topics according to the petitions received;

    Q.  whereas 82,4 % of the petitions received in 2023 were submitted via Parliament’s Petitions Web Portal, which is a slight increase compared to 2022 (79,05 %), thus reconfirming it as by far the most used channel for citizens to submit petitions to Parliament;

    R.  whereas in February 2023, the Petitions Web Portal was revamped and relaunched to align it with current expectations and make it easier for residents of the Member States to exercise their right to submit petitions to Parliament; whereas the updated Petitions Portal 2.0 integrated seamlessly with Parliament’s web publishing tool, enabling faster and simpler content updates and new features (including seven ‘Quick Start Guides’ that provide clear, step-by-step instructions for submitting, tracking and supporting petitions); whereas a new search engine powered by elastic search technology enhanced the user experience by delivering more accurate results efficiently leading to the new portal’s prioritising a truly citizen-centred approach; whereas during 2023 all petitions were prepared and published in a timely manner, within a few days of their adoption, and all internal and external requests for support on the use and content of the Petitions Portal were replied to successfully, in a timely manner and in all languages;

    S.  Whereas in 2023, the Committee on Petitions (PETI) held four fact-finding visits, during which Members travelled to Romania to examine the management and the protection of the brown bear population and illegal logging, to Donegal (Ireland) to investigate the use of defective mica blocks in construction in Ireland and to Catalonia (Spain) to assess in situ the language immersion model in Catalonia; whereas PETI members were also part of a joint delegation from the Committee on Employment and Social Affairs, the Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs and PETI that travelled to New York to attend the 16th session of the Conference of States Parties to the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (CRPD COSP);

    T.  whereas under Parliament’s Rules of Procedure, the Committee on Petitions is also responsible for relations with the European Ombudsman, who investigates complaints about maladministration within the institutions and bodies of the EU; whereas the previous European Ombudsman, Emily O’Reilly, presented her annual report for 2022 to the Committee on Petitions at its meeting of 27 June 2023;

    U.  whereas the Committee on Petitions is a member of the European Network of Ombudsmen, which also includes the European Ombudsman, national and regional ombudsmen and similar bodies in the Member States, the candidate countries and other European Economic Area countries, and which aims to promote the exchange of information about EU law and policy, and to share best practice;

    1.  Emphasises Committee on Petition’s fundamental role in protecting and promoting the rights of EU citizens and residents by ensuring that petitioners’ concerns and complaints are examined in a timely, effective and appropriate manner and that petitioners are informed about the actions taken and progress made on their petitions; recalls that all petitions are treated through an open, democratic and transparent petition process;

    2.  Commends the essential work done by the Committee on Petitions on the petitions concerning the Akamas Peninsula, the most biodiverse area in Cyprus, which has for decades experienced repeated systemic violations of the Habitats Directive(2) and the Birds Directive(3), in an overall context of a lack of effective and legally binding measures to protect this area and in view of recent plans brought forward by the Cypriot competent authorities, with devastating effects on the area’s very fragile natural ecosystems, in violation of EU environmental legislation; underlines that, following the Committee on Petitions’ work on this matter, on 13 March 2024 the Commission decided to bring Cyprus before the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) for the Cypriot authorities’ failure to comply with the Habitats Directive; regrets that in the time that has passed since that decision – over one year – the Commission has not submitted a file to the CJEU, and has thus failed to officially start legal proceedings;

    3.  Underlines the key work performed by the Committee on Petitions on the protection of workers’ rights against discrimination and the abuse of fixed-term contracts in the public sector in Italy; appreciates that the Commission took into due account the very sound legal documents provided by the petitioners, which were carefully assessed in various meetings of the Committee on Petitions, when it decided to bring Italy before the CJEU for failing to end the abusive use of fixed-term contracts and discriminatory employment conditions, in breach of Council Directive 1999/70/EC;

    4.  Commends the PETI Committee for considering Petition 1168/2023, submitted by Mihai Igna on behalf of the Association ‘Together We Bring Prosperity’, which calls for the restitution of Romania’s national treasure and historical archives currently held in Russia; emphasises the profound historical significance of this debate for all Member States that have been historically impacted by Russia’s acts of looting, particularly in the context of the ongoing war in Ukraine, as it highlights the broader challenges related to cultural preservation and safeguarding national heritage during times of geopolitical conflict; stresses that the PETI Committee’s engagement with this issue demonstrates its commitment to upholding the rights of EU citizens and Member States, and protecting Romania’s historical legacy and supporting its legitimate claims on the international stage; recalls the subsequent plenary resolution concerning the return of Romanian national treasure illegally appropriated by Russia(4);

    5.  Reiterates the importance of a continuous public debate on the EU’s fields of activity in order to ensure that citizens are properly informed about the scope of the Union’s competences and the different levels of decision-making; calls for an EU-wide enhanced structured information and communication campaign to be carried out without additional cost (i.e., by using the current resources of the European Parliament Liaison Offices) in all EU official languages in collaboration with national and regional ombudsmen, NGOs, and educational institutions to increase awareness of petition rights among citizens from all Member States, particularly addressing rural and disadvantaged communities and marginalised groups, as well as remote islands and regions; proposes an expansion of outreach efforts free from additional costs through social media and local community events; emphasises the need for broader public awareness and awareness-raising campaigns, through the active involvement of communications services, to help increase citizens’ knowledge about their right to petition, as well as the scope of the EU’s responsibilities and the competences of the Committee on Petitions, with a view to reducing the number of inadmissible petitions and enhancing citizen engagement in the decision-making process; recommends improving the digital accessibility of the Petitions Portal, including through adaptations for people with disabilities and higher quality translations into all official EU languages; recommends exploring the potential of the existing IT tools in order to increase citizens’ support on the portal, including through redirecting options to relevant complaint mechanisms;

    6.  Recalls the European dimension of the Committee on Petitions, which can be addressed by citizens from all 27 Member States on issues that fall within the scope of the EU Treaties and EU law; believes that the Committee has a special responsibility to uphold this European dimension and to demonstrate the added value of European unity and integration to citizens; underlines that the European dimension must be based on solidarity, the promotion of social and economic rights, the protection of minority languages and cultures, and the active fight against climate change;

    7.  Points out that petitions constitute a unique opportunity for Parliament and the other EU institutions to directly connect with EU citizens and maintain a regular dialogue with them, particularly in cases where they are affected by the misapplication or breach of EU law; stresses the need for enhanced cooperation between the EU institutions and national, regional and local authorities on inquiries regarding the implementation of, and compliance with, EU law; believes that such cooperation is crucial to address and resolve citizens’ concerns over the application of EU law and that it contributes to strengthening the democratic legitimacy and accountability of the Union; calls, therefore, for the participation of Member States’ representatives in committee meetings and for timely and detailed responses to requests for clarification or information sent by the Committee on Petitions to national authorities; notes the increase in the number of petitions received in 2023 addressing structural disparities, including in remuneration and retirement income among population groups; calls for these concerns to be systematically analysed and addressed through coordinated action with the relevant committees and the Commission; further calls for enhanced protection and support for individuals exposed to abuse or exclusion who face obstacles in accessing appropriate support mechanisms and justice;

    8.  Recalls that petitions contribute considerably to the exercise of the Commission’s role as the guardian of the Treaties by providing citizens with an additional tool to report alleged breaches of EU law; stresses that constructive cooperation between the Committee on Petitions and the Commission through timely and detailed answers from the Commission, which are based on thorough examinations of the issues raised in petitions, is essential to ensure the successful treatment of petitions;

    9.  Reiterates its call on the Commission to provide legal clarifications on the key criteria underpinning its strategic approach to enforcing EU law and to regularly update the Committee on Petitions on developments in infringement proceedings and to ensure that the Committee on Petitions gets access to the all relevant documents on EU Pilot and infringement procedures and legislative initiatives that were launched based on petitions received; is of the opinion that increased transparency and regular feedback on the handling of ongoing infringement procedures by the Commission would be beneficial for the Committee’s follow-up of open petitions; welcomes the recent Commission initiative to include petitions in the search system of the infringement register of the Commission; stresses that it is important for the Commission to conduct timely investigations into petitions, highlighting violations of rights affecting a large number of citizens and residents within the EU and to consult, where appropriate, the relevant national ombudsman; expresses its concerns about the way the Commission is handling some infringement procedures launched against Member States, including those related to issues raised in many petitions; encourages the Commission to put in place all necessary measures to improve transparency and effectiveness of its management of infringement procedures, which can be perceived as opaque by citizens;

    10.  Calls on the Commission to assess whether the national authorities are taking the necessary measures to respond to citizens’ concerns, as expressed in their petitions, where cases of failure to comply with EU law occur, and to launch infringement procedures where necessary; emphasises that timely and proactive action by the Commission in cases of breaches of EU law is crucial to prevent such breaches, which could undermine citizens’ trust in European institutions, becoming systemic in nature;

    11.  Recalls that freedom of expression is a fundamental pillar of European democracy; condemns any attempt to censor, marginalise or intimidate citizens or their elected representatives on the basis of their political opinions; stresses also that respect for the results of elections, at national and European level, is essential for maintaining citizens’ trust in the democratic process;

    12.  Emphasises the need for enhanced and more active cooperation between Member States and the Committee on petitions in order to unblock those petitions requiring prompt responses and reactions from the national authorities; recalls that the delayed responses of the Member States could have an impact on the timely resolution of issues raised by citizens and negative consequences for the solution of breaches of Union law; notes that the Member States should guarantee responses to petitions within the three-month deadline requested; stresses that improved coordination and dialogue would facilitate a more efficient handling of citizens’ concerns, prevent unnecessary delays and strengthen the effectiveness of the petition process;

    13.  Notes with concern that the recommendations issued by the Committee on Petitions in its report of 19 March 2024, following its mission to Catalonia, have not yet been fully implemented by the relevant educational authorities, particularly those concerning the protection of linguistic rights for all students and their families; expresses deep regret over the tensions encountered by members of the Committee during their visit to Barcelona from 18 to 20 December 2023, and calls for respectful dialogue and cooperation among all stakeholders to ensure that democratic institutions can carry out their mandates in a climate of mutual respect and understanding;

    14.   Strongly condemns the harassment and intimidation to which the official members of the Delegation of the Committee on Petitions were subjected during their fact-finding visit to Barcelona from 18 to 20 December 2023, with the aim of assessing in situ the language immersion model in Catalonia, its effects on families moving to and residing in the Autonomous Community, as well as on multilingualism and non-discrimination and the principle of the rule of law;

    15.  Regrets that the competent education authorities in the region have not implemented the recommendations issued by the Committee on Petitions in its report of 19 March 2024 following the mission, aimed at protecting the linguistic rights of students and their families;

    16.  Recalls that the e-Petition database is an essential internal tool that allows the members of the Committee on Petitions to access all necessary information in order to follow up on the state of play of each petition and to be able to make informed decisions on the treatment of the petitions; notes that the e-Petition database also plays an important role in communication with petitioners;

    17.  Recalls the Commission’s commitment to create an interinstitutional IT tool, together with Parliament, with which to share information and documents on all follow-up actions taken on petitions, such as infringement procedures, legislative proposals or replies by national authorities, thus enhancing the transparency and efficiency of the treatment of petitions, which, in a wider context, would contribute to increasing citizens’ trust in the EU institutions and the European project;

    18.  Recalls that cooperation with other committees in Parliament is essential for the comprehensive treatment of petitions, paying particular attention to petitions on gender equality, family diversity, environmental justice and the linguistic rights of minorities; notes that in 2023, 34 requests for opinion (corresponding to 31 petitions) and 223 requests for information were sent to other committees; notes that of the 34 opinions requested, only 25 answers were received by the end of 2023 (in 14 cases an opinion was provided, while in 10 cases the committee decided not to draft an opinion and on four occasions no official decision has been communicated); recalls that petitioners are informed of decisions to request opinions from other committees for the treatment of their petitions; underlines that parliamentary committees should step up their efforts to actively contribute to the examination of petitions by providing their expertise so as to enable Parliament to respond more swiftly and comprehensively to citizens’ concerns;

    19.  Believes that the petitions network is a useful tool for facilitating the follow-up of petitions in parliamentary and legislative work; trusts that regular meetings of the petitions network are crucial in order to ensure more visibility for the Committee on Petition’s activities and a better understanding of its work and mission, as well as to strengthen cooperation with the other parliamentary committees;

    20.  Underlines that the Committee on Petitions expressed its position on important issues raised in petitions by adopting its report on the outcome of the Committee on Petitions’ deliberations during 2022(5);

    21.  Highlights a slight decrease in the number of petitions submitted on external relations issues compared to 2022; notes that this could be explained by the new geopolitical context in 2023 and in particular a decrease in the number of petitions on the war in Ukraine and a significant increase in petitions dealing with the new conflicts in the Middle East; notes that the Committee on Petitions took account of citizens’ concerns about sanctions, security, conflict resolution, visa policy, progress of EU candidate countries, among other issues, putting on its agenda a number of petitions dealing in particular with questions related to the situation of refugees, in particular of children and on the situation of Venezuelan refugees in the EU; acknowledges the efforts of the committees already actively addressing these issues and emphasises that the Committee on Foreign Affairs and the Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice, and Home Affairs should take note of these petitions in their deliberations;

    22.  Takes note that health, which was one of the main areas of concern for petitioners in 2022, appeared to continue to play an important role in 2023; notes, in particular, that the Committee on Petitions examined and discussed petitions on the ban on chemicals and heavy metals in children’s toys, on support for healthy and environmentally friendly food systems and lifestyles and on the implementation of EU regulations on added sugars in foods intended for infants and young children;

    23.  Draws attention to the significant number of petitions submitted and discussed in relation to citizens’ concerns over the reintroduction of border checks between some Member States raising the problematic aspect of limitation of the free movement of persons within the EU and other aspects such as the strengths and the weaknesses of the extension of the Schengen area; recalls that Member States may reintroduce internal border controls(6) in the event of a serious threat to public policy or internal security, or under exceptional circumstances threatening the overall functioning of the Schengen area; appreciates the significant role played by the Committee on Petitions, in particular the host of activities carried out, the adoption in committee of a short motion for a resolution on the accession to the Schengen area on 27 June 2023 and the related Parliament resolution, to strongly support the enlargement of the Schengen area to include Romania and Bulgaria the organisation of the public hearing on Schengen Borders on 18 July 2023 in association with the Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs; welcomes the unanimous decision by the Council for the full membership of both countries of the Schengen area as of 1 January 2025 allowing the full exercise of the fundamental freedoms of the EU Single Market; emphasises that preventing Member States from joining the Schengen area despite fulfilling all necessary requirements was a discriminatory decision that lacked legal justification and severely affected many EU citizens;

    24.   Takes note of the sudden increase in petitions of Spanish origin in the second half of 2023 concerning the risks to the rule of law in Spain as a result of the Spanish Government’s intention to adopt an Amnesty Law contrary to constitutional and European law; deplores the attacks on the rule of law and the separation of powers carried out by the Spanish Government;

    25.  Underlines the work of the Committee on Petitions in connection with petitions relating to common rules on a single standard for hand luggage dimensions, highlighting citizens’ concerns about the inconvenience and discomfort caused by inconsistent rules on airline carry-on luggage and the resulting hidden costs; emphasises its call for compliance with a relevant European Court of Justice ruling in the context of the revision of EU air services legislation; points, in this regard, to the short motion for a resolution on standardised dimensions for carry-on luggage adopted by the Committee on Petitions on 20 September 2023 followed by the adoption of a resolution by single vote of the European Parliament on 4 October 2023; welcomes the fact that in November 2023 the Commission put forward a review of the passenger rights framework and a series of proposals designed to improve the experience of passengers and travellers, including the requirement of a limited number of common sizes and weights to reduce the confusion; notes with regret that passengers with disabilities are still facing too many barriers while travelling, especially in case of multimodal journeys; regrets that the public transport systems of many Member States do not comply with the requirements of United Nations Convention on the Rights for Persons with Disabilities (UNCRPD);

    26.  Notes that environmental issues remained an area of serious concern for petitioners in 2023 with more than 21 % of petitions dedicated to environmental issues; regrets that some of these petitions allege incorrect implementation of EU legislation by the Member States, with some Member States already facing infringement procedures for the breach of EU environmental laws; notes that numerous petitions describe complaints about air quality, noise pollution, waste management/treatment, the deterioration of natural ecosystems and violation of the Habitats Directive in different Member States; highlights the public hearing on the state of implementation of the Habitats Directive organised on 24 May 2023; notes the work the Committee on Petitions continued to carry out in 2023 on the impact of climate change in different fields, not only in the environmental area, but also in the use of land, putting a number of petitions received on these topics on the agenda; points to the workshop on the impact of climate change on social security and the most vulnerable groups organised on 22 March 2023 and also to the presentation of the study on compensation for victims of climate change disasters on 18 July 2023;

    27.  Draws attention to the workshop organised by the Committee on Petitions on 25 January 2023 on transparency of pricing and reimbursement of medicinal products, which discussed transparency from the perspectives of patients and consumers, producers of medicinal products, and academic research; notes that the discussions focused on research and development costs of companies and information available on the prices paid for medicines, underlining the importance of transparency on these issues;

    28.  Stresses the importance of delivering on EU citizens’ expectations regarding the protection of the environment and urges the Commission, together with the Member States, to ensure the correct implementation of EU legislation in the environmental field, in particular in the field of illegal logging; points to the petitions on environmental issues, which reflect a growing public concern about the implications of climate change, requiring consistent enforcement of the existing EU environmental legislation by both the Commission and the Member States; stresses that addressing EU citizens’ expectations regarding the protection of the environment should be considered as important as taking into account the economic realities of each Member State; underlines that excessive regulations have a negative impact on emerging economies; highlights, therefore, that each Member State should be allowed to make decisions about its transition process and that environmental legislation should not hinder economic competitiveness;

    29.   Acknowledges the positive effects of the fact-finding visit to Romania from 15 to 18 May 2023 on the management and protection of the brown bear population; notes with regret, however, that there are still too many fatal accidents caused by brown bears in connection with humans and livestock, making further monitoring and cooperation with the national authorities necessary; underlines that the protection of human lives and security should always be the priority;

    30.   Following the fact-finding visit to Romania, stresses the need for a balance between wildlife protection and the citizens’ safety; underlines that each Member State should be allowed to take measures, including population control of the species, in order to prevent threats to the lives and property of its citizens;

    31.  Stresses the commitment of the Committee on Petitions to protect the rights of persons with disabilities; recalls the annual workshop of held by the Committee on Petitions on 29 November 2023 on the rights of persons with disabilities; recalls that its first part focused on how persons with disabilities dealt with the recent crises (energy costs, war, high inflation, etc.) and how EU measures helped to overcome these obstacles while the second part addressed the issue of how the European institutions have built inclusive communication with citizens with disabilities; also highlights, in this context, the adoption by the Committee of an opinion in the form of a letter on establishing the European Disability Card and the European Parking Card for persons with disabilities on 29 November 2023; stresses that access to social security benefits for persons with disabilities falls under national responsibility and social coordination schemes, and that disputes should also be addressed through and respected by the judicial mechanisms in place and their competencies via the obligation of the exhausting of legal remedies, rather than through direct intervention by the Commission, in respect of the principle of subsidiarity; underlines as well in this context the imperative need for a full and consistent transposition of the European Accessibility Act and calls on the Member States to avoid further delays that hinder the rights of persons with disabilities; recalls that the Accessibility Act aims at improving the life of at least 87 million persons with disabilities, facilitating their access to, inter alia, public transport, banking services, computers, TVs, e-books and online shops;

    32.  Stresses the important contribution made by the Committee on Petitions to the protection of the rights of persons with disabilities, as revealed by its treatment of a number of petitions on this sensitive topic; acknowledges, in this context, the efforts of Parliament’s services and notes that not just the best technical but the most accessible solution for deaf citizens must be found in order to communicate with them in their own mother tongue, in national sign languages; requests the modification of the Rules of Procedures in close cooperation with the Committee on Constitutional Affairs (AFCO) in order to eliminate the mandatory exclusively written communication with citizens who are sign language users, deaf or hard of hearing so that, upon their request, they can use their sign language during the procedure; also highlights, in this context, the adoption by the Committee of an opinion in the form of a letter on establishing the European Disability Card and the European Parking Card for persons with disabilities on 29 November 2023;

    33.  Underlines, furthermore, the specific protection role played by the Committee on Petitions within the EU in the framework of the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities through its capacity to hear petitions and highlights the committee’s important ongoing work on petitions concerning disability-related issues; while noting a slight decrease in the number of petitions on disability in 2023 compared to 2022, stresses that the number nearly doubled compared to 2021; further points out that discrimination and access to public transport and employment, continue to be major challenges faced by persons with disabilities and emphasises the Committee’s special attention to the request for the European Disability Statute to recognise the rights of people with autism; welcomes the adoption of a short motion for a resolution on harmonising the rights of autistic people, emphasising the need to improve access to diagnosis, healthcare, education, employment, accessibility and provision of reasonable accommodation, legal capacity and lifelong community support including as regards culture and sport; draws attention, furthermore, to the particular role of the Committee on Petitions in safeguarding the rights of children and their parents, acknowledging numerous petitions received on children’s rights, which require special attention and action; recalls, in this context the provisions of the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights, in particular the Article 24 thereof on the rights of the child, to allow every child to maintain a personal relationship and direct contact with both of his/her parents, unless that is contrary to the child’s interests; reiterates as well the risk that families with autistic children are being targeted by offers of unproven, potentially harmful and illegal therapies and interventions which may amount to serious physical abuse of children;

    34.  Recalls the fact that relations with the European Ombudsman represent one of the responsibilities conferred on the Committee on Petitions by Parliament’s Rules of Procedure; welcomes Parliament’s constructive cooperation with the European Ombudsman, with whom the Committee on Petitions shares the objectives of ensuring the transparency, professionalism and integrity of the EU institutions vis-à-vis European citizens, as well as its involvement in the European Network of Ombudsmen; stresses the need to step up cooperation with the European Ombudsman in order to ensure a swift, impartial and transparent response to citizens’ complaints about any administrative malfunctioning within the EU institutions;

    35.   Underlines the key work performed by the Committee on Petitions on the protection of workers’ rights; underlines that several petitions received in this area were followed up by further actions such as the debate on the use of fixed-term contracts, as well as that on the European citizens’ initiative-turned petition ‘Good Clothes, Fair Pay’ focusing on the harmful situation of workers in the global garment and footwear industry, or the Parliamentary Question for Oral Answer on the Working conditions of teachers in the European Union, also having as its basis a petition received on this subject; reiterates the importance of ensuring fair working conditions and greater protection of workers in the EU, calling on the Member States and the Commission to effectively address concerns raised in petitions related to labour rights and trade unions; 

    36.   Recalls the European Parliament study on Homelessness in the EU which was commissioned by the Committee on Petitions and presented at its meeting in November 2023; notes that this study made an important contribution on this pressing social and economic challenge, which represents one of the most severe forms of societal exclusion, highlighting the need for a public policy change towards preventing homelessness in the first place, inter alia by providing secure and affordable housing; recalls that illegal squatting cannot be considered a solution to homelessness, as the right to property is enshrined in Article 17 of the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights; underlines that Member States should seek real solutions rather than promoting illegal squatting, as housing policy falls under the exclusive competence of the Member States;

    37.  Acknowledges the European Ombudsman’s regular contributions to the work of the Committee on Petitions throughout the year; firmly believes that the Union’s institutions, bodies and agencies must ensure consistent and effective follow-up to the recommendations of the Ombudsman;

    38.  Stresses that European citizens’ initiatives (ECIs) represent an important instrument for active citizenship and public participation; welcomes the discussion in some meetings of unsuccessful ECIs, which were sometimes subsequently reformulated as petitions, giving citizens the opportunity to present their ideas and hold a constructive debate, while contributing to their participation in the EU’s democratic processes; takes note of the significant number of new ECIs registered by the Commission in 2023, which shows that citizens are seizing the opportunity to use participatory instruments to have a say in policy and lawmaking processes; calls on the Commission to better engage with citizens and give adequate follow-up to successful ECIs; welcomes the important effort put in place to organise, in association with other committees, four public hearings on successful ECIs, which allowed the organisers to present the initiative’s objectives and engage with Members of the European Parliament and representatives of the European Commission; underlines that the Commission’s commitment to responding to valid ECIs is essential to maintaining citizens’ trust in the ECI as the most significant instrument of participatory democracy;

    39.   Urges the Commission to give due consideration to the parliamentary resolutions adopted on European Citizens’ Initiatives (ECIs) and to enhance its engagement with citizens, particularly by ensuring appropriate and effective follow-up to successful ECIs, thereby reinforcing the democratic process and ensuring that citizens’ voices are adequately reflected in EU policymaking;

    40.  Underlines that the Petitions Web Portal is an essential tool for ensuring a smooth, efficient and transparent petitions process; welcomes, in this regard, the improvements to data protection and security features that have made the portal more user-friendly and secure for citizens; stresses that efforts to make the portal more accessible must be continued, including making it more accessible for sign-language users and persons with disabilities; notes that the Petitions Web Portal has been one of the European Parliament’s most visited websites, thus serving as a first point of contact with Parliament for many EU citizens;

    41.   Recalls the European dimension of the Committee on Petitions, which can be addressed by citizens from all 27 Member States on issues that fall within the scope of the Union’s activities; believes that the Committee has a special responsibility to uphold this European dimension and to demonstrate the added value of European unity and integration to citizens and continue addressing issues related to violations of EU law, as well as loopholes and shortcomings in the provisions of existing EU law; believes that timely avoidance of petitions with clear national competences along with comprehensive explanations and instructions about alternative courses of action, where appropriate, could contribute to a constructive approach and an enhanced citizens engagement considers, in this context, that the European Parliament should increase its efforts to promote the role and work of its Committee on Petitions and raise awareness among all EU citizens of the possibility to address a petition to the European Parliament; recalls that due to the limited time allotted to committee meetings, most petitions are treated through written procedure; recalls, in this context, that all petitions received, including those in the area of international affairs, should be handled with the necessary transparency and impartiality; is of the opinion that the selection of petitions for discussion in committee should reflect a geographical and political balance of submissions received; believes, moreover, that geographical balance should also be sought when organising the committee’s fact-finding visits, yearly and over the course of each legislative term;

    42.  Welcomes the adoption of the short motion for a resolution on the creation of a European Capital of Local Trade(7) at the plenary session of January 2023; underlines that this achievement is an excellent result for the Committee on Petitions, noting that this project has been successfully included as a preparatory action in the 2024 budget, with a total budget of EUR 3 million; recalls that the project to create a European Capital of Small Retail (ECSR) was officially presented by the Commission in Barcelona in December 2023;

    43.  Instructs its President to forward this resolution and the report of the Committee on Petitions to the Council, the Commission, the European Ombudsman, and the governments and parliaments of the Member States, their petitions committees and their national ombudsmen or similar competent bodies.

    (1) OJ C, C/2024/3999, 17.7.2024, ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/C/2024/3999/oj.
    (2) Council Directive 92/43/EEC of 21 May 1992 on the conservation of natural habitats and of wild fauna and flora (OJ L 206, 22.7.1992, p. 7, ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/dir/1992/43/oj).
    (3) Directive 2009/147/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 30 November 2009 on the conservation of wild birds (OJ L 20, 26.1.2010, p. 7, ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/dir/2009/147/oj).
    (4) OJ C, C/2024/6559, 12.11.2024, ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/C/2024/6559/oj.
    (5) Adopted by Parliament as its resolution of 23 November 2023 on the outcome of the Committee on Petitions’ deliberations during 2022 (OJ C, C/2024/4220, 24.7.2024, ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/C/2024/4220/oj).
    (6) Articles 25 to 30 of Regulation (EU) 2016/399 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 9 March 2016 on a Union Code on the rules governing the movement of persons across borders (Schengen Borders Code) (OJ L 77, 23.3.2016, p. 1, ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/reg/2016/399/oj).
    (7) OJ C 214, 16.6.2023, p. 2.

    MIL OSI Europe News

  • MIL-OSI Europe: At a Glance – Plenary round-up – May II 2025 – 23-05-2025

    Source: European Parliament

    The second May plenary session in 2025 opened with Nataša Pirc Musar, President of the Republic of Slovenia, addressing Parliament in a formal sitting. Following her call for European solidarity, Members then debated the EU’s response to the Israeli government’s plan to seize the Gaza Strip, the urgent need for humanitarian support and for all hostages to be freed. Members also debated the Hungarian government’s drift to Russia-style repression, including threats to freedom of expression and democratic participation, and approved new tariffs on agricultural goods from Russia and Belarus. Members also debated and voted on a report on the Committee on Petitions’ activities in 2023.

    MIL OSI Europe News

  • MIL-OSI Europe: Debates – Thursday, 22 May 2025 – Brussels – Revised edition

    Source: European Parliament

    Verbatim report of proceedings
     253k  688k
    Thursday, 22 May 2025 – Brussels

       

    PRESIDENZA: ANTONELLA SBERNA
    Vicepresidente

     
    1. Opening of the sitting

       

    (La seduta è aperta alle 09:00)

     

    2. Choose Europe for Science (debate)

     

      Ekaterina Zaharieva, Member of the Commission. – Madam President, honourable Members, thank you for the opportunity to present our Choose Europe for Science initiative.

    As President von der Leyen stated in the Sorbonne in Paris a few weeks ago, Europe is determined to start a new age of invention and ingenuity. We are making a clear choice to place research and innovation at the heart of our societies and economies. Europe is choosing science.

    Today, this choice is more urgent than ever. Science is a source of prosperity, but it is also fundamental to our sovereignty and economic security, our resilience, democracy and leading role on the global stage. For example, scientific leadership in AI or quantum is directly linked to the ability of protecting our society and our values. We need talent to progress in those crucial technology domains.

    Countries understand this. Global research and development has recently surpassed EUR 2.5 trillion per year. At the same time, we also see science exploited for political ends, and academic freedom is under pressure.

    Last month, we had the opportunity to discuss developments on the other side of the Atlantic. Their universities, and fields like vaccine science and climate research, are being targeted by funding cuts.

    But it is not only in the United States. Elsewhere in the globe, scientists are instrumentalised, at best, and openly attacked, at worst. In conflict zones, schools and universities are not spared. In Ukraine, Putin’s war has physically damaged over 1 400 science-related buildings, constituting 30 % of all research institutions, and displaced 20 % of the country’s researchers.

    In this context, Europe must do more than hold its ground. We must become the best place in the globe to do research, the place our young people choose for their careers, and the place global talent comes to help us tackle global challenges.

    This is the ambition of Choose Europe for Science. It builds on four dimensions. First: scientific freedom. Europe must remain the global leader in free and open research. We need a research and innovation union where knowledge flows as freely as goods, services and capital. This is why we commit to protecting freedom of scientific research through law with the new European Research Area Act. This is in line with the European Parliament’s resolution of January 2024 on protecting the freedom of scientific research.

    Second: funding. Horizon Europe is already the largest international research programme. It is a global magnet that received applicants from 194 countries, with 90 countries associated and more wanting in.

    In addition, earlier this month, President von der Leyen announced a EUR 500 million package for the programming period 2025–2027. It will include a new seven-year super grant under the European Research Council. We will support the brightest researchers regardless of their origin.

    We are also expanding our Marie Skłodowska-Curie Actions with a new pilot starting in October. It will build on the attractive conditions offered by Marie Skłodowska-Curie Actions, with longer contracts and more secure professional perspectives to support excellent early-career scientists choosing Europe.

    For established researchers, we are doubling the top-up funding for grantees moving in Europe. We also work with Member States to reach our 3 % GDP target for R&D by 2030.

    Furthermore, the European Regional Development Fund is spending around EUR 35 billion to increase research and innovation capacity across the Union. This will help reduce the innovation divide by strengthening regional R&I ecosystems. Member States and regions are improving their innovation performance and cohesion, and thus retain their talents and attract new ones. Under the next Framework Programme, we will put forward ambitious proposals on research and innovation funding.

    Third: fast-tracking innovation. We must ensure our excellent research can be translated into breakthrough innovation, so that our citizens can benefit from science. Horizon Europe beneficiaries already submitted over 600 patent applications, and we are going further. Next week I will present Europe’s first start-up and scale-up strategy. Retaining and attracting talent will be a crucial dimension of this strategy. Next year we will table a new European Innovation Act, further simplifying and accelerating the path to market.

    Finally: global talent. If you want the best minds to choose Europe, we need to make it easier for them to come and live here. We are working to make the legal framework for researchers more effective, and to speed up entry to the EU. At the same time, we will strengthen our EURAXESS platform, which already links global researchers with thousands of opportunities across the EU.

    Honourable Members, to achieve this ambition, we also need mobilisation at national level. In the past weeks, we have witnessed our Member States opening their doors to talent, from the Welcome to Poland initiative and Choose France for Science, to Estonia’s Mobilitas 3.0 or Czechia’s Junior Star, and many more.

    Here we need a true Team Europe approach to maximise our efforts. As the European Commission, we stand ready to promote this coordinated approach, including through enhanced public communication, starting from tomorrow’s Competitiveness Council. I wish to thank the Polish Presidency for its leadership on this subject.

    To conclude, the aim of Choose Europe for Science is clear: to make Europe the leading destination for researchers on Earth. We can achieve this together as a Union with the active commitment from the Member States and, of course, with the crucial support of this House. The European Parliament has long championed scientific excellence and academic freedom. Your leadership has paved the way to our action today. So thank you very much and I look forward to working together.

     
       

     

      Christian Ehler, on behalf of the PPE Group. – Madam President, Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen, I think Choose Europe for Science, the initiative announced by President von der Leyen, is an important signal for Europe and the world, but luckily it had been accompanied also by a press conference where the President had been announcing that there will be a stand‑alone research programme, which necessarily is the base for that ambition.

    I think we should also emphasise that this is not that we want to attract the most talented in the world, it is that we stand in also for the freedom of science. Much smaller programmes, like the programme for researchers at risk, are an expression for that stand-in. Yes, we want to be attractive for the world, but we also are the safe haven for researchers, women researchers in Afghanistan, researchers under pressure in other parts of the world – we are the safe haven for them. So it’s both: our expression for excellence or ambition for excellence, but also our expression for standing in for the freedom of science.

    Basically, we all know that it’s just going to work if we have a strong research programme. We can appeal to the world, but if we do not have a higher ambition in terms of research, it’s not going to be attractive. What we need is, simply put, more money. The last programme had been designed for a budget of EUR 120 billion and we ended up with EUR 80 billion. So, research budgets are in constraints and that is in complete opposition to what our formulated ambition had been – that at least 3 % of the GDP of Europe should be allocated to research and innovation.

    So in a way, ambitions should follow also with the political courage to prioritise research and innovation in Europe. If I may conclude: now that the Commission and even the President have fully recognised the importance of science for the future of Europe, we also expect the Commission’s proposal for FP10 to be a Commission which also chooses science for Europe.

     
       

     

      Giorgio Gori, a nome del gruppo S&D. – Signora Presidente, signora Commissaria, onorevoli colleghi, negli ultimi mesi l’amministrazione Trump ha attaccato l’autonomia del sistema educativo e universitario degli Stati Uniti, ha ridotto i finanziamenti agli atenei e limitato la libertà accademica. Queste scelte indeboliscono l’attrattività degli Stati Uniti per ricercatori e talenti globali. La rivista Nature ha rilevato che le domande di lavoro all’estero degli scienziati statunitensi sono cresciute del 32% tra gennaio e marzo 2025 rispetto all’anno precedente.

    La Commissione europea ha colto questa opportunità annunciando un piano da 500 milioni di euro, per il periodo 25-27, volto ad attrarre ricercatori internazionali. Tra le misure previste, una super sovvenzione di sette anni gestita dal Consiglio europeo della ricerca che offre stabilità e incentivi raddoppiati per chi si trasferisce in Europa. Questa iniziativa è un passo nella giusta direzione per rafforzare la posizione dell’Europa nella ricerca scientifica globale.

    Tuttavia, è essenziale fare di più. Negli ultimi venti anni l’Europa ha perso molto terreno rispetto ad altre regioni del mondo – su tutte Cina e Stati Uniti – riguardo alla capacità di attrarre investimenti per la ricerca e di coltivare talenti e progetti nei settori dell’innovazione più avanzata. E questa è una delle cause del declino della competitività europea.

    Non basta, quindi, l’iniziativa della Commissione: gli Stati membri vanno spinti a costruire un quadro legislativo in grado di valorizzare e sostenere stabilmente la capacità dei ricercatori, di quelli che sono emigrati e vogliamo che tornino, di quelli che vogliamo attrarre e, soprattutto, di quelli che sono rimasti ma che vivono e lavorano in condizioni di precarietà.

    Vanno aumentati i finanziamenti nazionali e i salari dei ricercatori, vanno progettati percorsi di carriera solidi e trasparenti e per chi sceglie di venire in Europa vanno semplificate le procedure di visto. Solo così la ricerca potrà fiorire in Europa, diventando motore di innovazione e di ricerca.

     
       

     

      Catherine Griset, au nom du groupe PfE. – Madame la Présidente, chers collègues, à la Sorbonne, haut lieu de la culture française, Emmanuel Macron et Ursula von der Leyen ont organisé une mise en scène européiste: faire passer des activistes américains pour des martyrs de la liberté académique. Soyons clairs: ces chercheurs ne sont pas persécutés, ils sont sanctionnés pour avoir transformé les universités en foyer idéologique, où la science cède la place à la propagande.

    Alors qu’on leur déroule le tapis rouge, que devient la recherche en Europe? Elle est noyée sous des financements pour des projets sur le genre, la race ou la déconstruction. Erasmus+ subventionne même des universités islamistes. «Horizon Europe» est devenu un guichet pour l’idéologie. Quant à la Hongrie, elle est exclue, non pour des raisons scientifiques, mais parce qu’elle ose penser autrement. Voilà la liberté académique selon Bruxelles: un outil politique.

    Comme si cela ne suffisait pas, on efface désormais la France, jusque dans sa propre langue. Pour cette opération de communication, le français a été remplacé par un «globish» fade et sans racine. Les identités sont gommées, les cultures sont nivelées et l’Europe est standardisée à coups de slogans creux. C’est plus qu’un renoncement, c’est une soumission culturelle assumée. Cette opération n’a rien de scientifique: il s’agit d’un plan de rééducation idéologique et nous la combattrons.

     
       

     

      Piotr Müller, w imieniu grupy ECR. – Pani Przewodnicząca! Widzimy na świecie w tej chwili wyścig nauki w różnych miejscach, w różnych dyscyplinach, ale przede wszystkim w takich obszarach, jak sztuczna inteligencja, rozwój energetyki, biotechnologii, najnowszych technologii informatycznych. W tych obszarach Unia Europejska powinna poczynić wszystko, aby stanąć w tym wyścigu jak równy z równym, w szczególności w kontekście konkurencji ze Stanami Zjednoczonymi czy z Chinami.

    Jest to tylko możliwe wtedy, gdy faktycznie środki finansowe skoncentrujemy na tych najważniejszych obszarach i faktycznie na nich się skupimy. Z racji tego, że oczywiste jest, że zasoby podatkowe, zasoby finansowe, którymi dysponuje Unia Europejska i państwa członkowskie, są ograniczone, musimy podjąć taką decyzję. I musimy też odważnie powiedzieć, że wydatkowanie środków finansowych na lewicowe, ideologiczne badania jest po prostu stratą środków finansowych. Jest stratą nadziei na postęp nauki w takich obszarach, o których przed chwilą powiedziałem. I dzisiaj odważnie lewica musi wybrać, czy chcecie, aby finansować wasze lewicowe pomysły, badania na temat tego, czy jest 30 czy 35 płci, czy chcecie, żeby Europa podążała w wyścigu w zakresie rozwoju sztucznej inteligencji, energetyki czy innych obszarów, które przełożą się na jakość życia obywateli.

    Szanowni Państwo, to nie jest kwestia dyskusji o wolności nauki, bo każdy może prowadzić badania naukowe, jakie sobie chce. Może decydować o tym samodzielnie. To jest decyzja o tym, gdzie idą pieniądze podatników. A pieniądze podatników powinny iść tam, gdzie efekty przełożą się na lepsze życie obywateli.

     
       

     

      Valérie Hayer, au nom du groupe Renew. – Madame la Présidente, Madame la Commissaire, chers collègues, «le réchauffement climatique est un canular inventé par les Chinois pour nuire à l’industrie américaine», «le bruit des éoliennes cause le cancer», «le pacte vert pour l’Europe est un manifeste communiste», «un désinfectant est plus efficace qu’un vaccin contre la COVID-19», «l’huile de foie de morue réduit la mortalité liée à la rougeole», «les professeurs sont l’ennemi, nous devons attaquer agressivement les universités». Ces déclarations sont l’œuvre de Donald Trump et de son administration qui ont fait de la science et des scientifiques des ennemis de l’Amérique.

    Mes chers collègues, ce n’est pas seulement aux États-Unis, mais partout dans le monde où les extrêmes progressent, que la liberté scientifique est menacée. L’initiative «Choose Europe for Science» promeut cette liberté scientifique. Elle vise à renforcer l’attractivité des carrières scientifiques en Europe. Elle veut accélérer l’innovation en facilitant le passage de la recherche fondamentale au marché.

    Madame la Commissaire, le groupe Renew Europe soutient pleinement cette initiative. Il est à vos côtés pour faire de l’Europe ce pôle d’attraction pour la science. Il est à vos côtés pour défendre notre identité, celle d’une démocratie européenne qui nous protège de tout obscurantisme. Alors travaillons ensemble pour octroyer davantage de moyens aux scientifiques européens et étrangers et pour faciliter le retour des chercheurs européens expatriés.

    Je le dis aux scientifiques du monde entier: entendez cet appel et choisissez l’Europe pour continuer à travailler. Des financements, un environnement favorable, des facilités administratives, la mobilisation d’un budget de 500 millions d’EUR, ainsi que le soutien inconditionnel à la liberté et à l’excellence scientifique sont là pour vous. L’Europe est généreuse, car elle a besoin des scientifiques.

    Chers collègues, sans recherche, sans innovation, nous ne parviendrons pas à répondre à l’enjeu de notre compétitivité. C’est l’une des conditions pour faire de l’Union européenne une puissance politique pleine et entière. L’équation est posée. Alors avançons.

     
       

     

      Anna Strolenberg, on behalf of the Verts/ALE Group. – Madam President, the plan to attract scientists to Europe is called Choose Europe. But what does it mean to choose Europe? It means to choose academic freedom, to choose a continent that still believes in climate change – and thank God for that – it means to choose diversity being a strength instead of a weakness.

    Choosing Europe also means long and difficult visa procedures. It also means having your diplomas recognised in one country, but not in the other. To choose Europe means to talk about researchers and professors that we want, but sometimes forgetting about the nurses, truckers and caregivers that we need.

    Choose Europe also means that sometimes we don’t use our full workforce potential because refugees and women don’t always find a job. I want the best talent to come to Europe, but I also want the best for talent in Europe, and I believe we can do both if we invest in the people here and if we see labour migration as an opportunity.

    So why don’t we train the people in Ljubljana but also look for them in Lagos? Why don’t we help women in Düsseldorf to find a job, but also look for them in Delhi? Why don’t we pay our professors and teachers in Saint-Étienne a fair wage, but also look for them in San Francisco?

    I would say, let’s not ask why people would choose Europe, but let’s ask ourselves, how can we make Europe the destination of choice for all talent?

     
       

     

      Ilaria Salis, a nome del gruppo The Left. – Signora Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, mentre negli Stati Uniti di Trump la libertà accademica è apertamente sotto attacco, anche in Europa non possiamo dormire sonni tranquilli. L’abbiamo visto nella repressione delle sacrosante proteste contro il genocidio a Gaza e contro l’occupazione coloniale della Palestina: studenti e ricercatori manganellati, conferenze annullate e accuse infondate e pretestuose di antisemitismo. È un segnale grave, gravissimo.

    L’iniziativa Choose Europe for Science è importante e la sostengo: l’Europa dovrebbe sempre essere un rifugio, un luogo di libertà, cooperazione e speranza. Sarebbe bello – aggiungo – se lo fosse anche per migranti e richiedenti asilo, che fanno altri lavori e provengono da altre parti del mondo; ma non lo è.

    Apriamo le porte solo alle eccellenze, come se il sapere non fosse sempre frutto di un lavoro collettivo, spesso invisibile e quasi sempre sottopagato. È una visione miope, che tradisce un’idea elitaria della conoscenza: l’idea capitalistica. L’Università va difesa nella sua interezza, come comunità, come luogo di sviluppo condiviso e non come vetrina di merito individuale.

    In Italia chi fa ricerca è spesso un lavoratore povero, intrappolato in una precarietà cronica, costretto a una mobilità imposta, con conseguenze materiali e psicologiche devastanti. I posti di lavoro sono pochi, le prospettive pesanti, spesso solo all’estero. L’Università non si costruisce selezionando pochi eccellenti ma garantendo a tutte e tutti l’accesso al sapere.

    Pertanto servono politiche pubbliche ambiziose, inclusive, di massa. Servono veri investimenti nella ricerca, perché la produzione di sapere è il miglior valore aggiunto che possiamo generare, non solo sul piano economico ma, soprattutto, sul piano culturale, sociale e democratico.

     
       

     

      Marc Jongen, im Namen der ESN-Fraktion. – Frau Präsidentin! Choose Europe for Science. Warum sollten junge Wissenschaftler das tun? Doch nur, wenn sie sich zum Komplizen der politischen Lebenslüge unserer Eliten machen, dass Europa noch immer für Exzellenz, für akademische Freiheit und für Wohlstand steht. Die traurige Wahrheit ist doch: Es gibt heute Hexenjagden gegen kritische Wissenschaftler in ganz Europa, die nicht hundertprozentig dem linksliberalen Mainstream folgen, wie vor Kurzem gegen den jungen Historiker Hasselhorn in Deutschland. Lesen Sie das mal nach, Herr Brandstätter! Und Frau von der Leyen hat es in Paris in ihrer Rede Anfang Mai ja gesagt: Diversity is the lifeblood of science. Trump räumt gerade in den USA mit ideologischen Diversitätsprogrammen auf. Und wer deshalb von dort flüchtet, der ist sicher kein exzellenter Forscher, sondern Ideologe, den wir nicht noch mit teuren Programmen nach Europa locken sollten. Wir müssen aufhören, Agendawissenschaften wie Gender, Critical Race usw. in Europa zu fördern, und endlich auch einen freien Diskurs in der Klimaforschung zulassen. Nur dann werden wir wieder Exzellenz herstellen, und dann werden auch die pathetischen Worte von Macron und von der Leyen an der Sorbonne, die ja sehr schön waren, aber leider heuchlerisch, wieder der Wahrheit entsprechen.

     
       

     

      Letizia Moratti (PPE). – Signora Presidente, signor Commissario, onorevoli colleghi, la scienza è uno degli strumenti più potenti che abbiamo per migliorare la vita dei nostri cittadini. È grazie agli studi, alle ricerche, alle competenze e alle eccellenze del nostro continente se oggi possiamo contare su terapie innovative contro il cancro o su vaccini che hanno sconfitto la poliomelite e la pandemia da COVID-19.

    L’intelligenza artificiale sta aprendo nuove frontiere: potenzia la ricerca, accelera le scoperte e rende le nostre industrie più competitive a livello globale. La scienza dunque non è astratta: è concreta, genera soluzioni, crea futuro.

    Eppure in Europa il trasferimento tecnologico rimane una delle nostre maggiori debolezze. Abbiamo ottimi ricercatori, ma non sempre riusciamo a trasformare la ricerca in valore sociale ed economico. Gli investimenti pubblici in ricerca nell’Unione europea – fondamentali investimenti che vanno potenziati – sono pari al 2,2 percento del PIL, mentre negli USA sfiorano il 3,5 percento. Anche gli investimenti privati sono ancora troppo bassi: solo l’1,5 percento del PIL contro il 2,2 percento degli Stati Uniti.

    Dobbiamo agire per colmare questi gap. Serve facilitare la ricerca di spin-off e start-up universitarie, promuovere partnership pubblico-privato, creare un ecosistema favorevole che attragga investimenti, acceleri il trasferimento tecnologico e quindi attragga i migliori ricercatori.

    L’Unione europea deve essere protagonista nell’affermare una scienza libera che non solo scopre ma costruisce per il bene dei propri cittadini. E questo significa anche sostenere con forza la sua applicazione industriale ed economica: è una sfida che dobbiamo vincere.

     
       

     

      Lina Gálvez (S&D). – Señora presidenta, señora comisaria, en un momento en el que, por un lado, Europa necesita mejorar su competitividad, pero, por el otro, la libertad académica y la ciencia están siendo también cuestionadas en otros lugares del mundo, la iniciativa Elige Europa para la ciencia es más importante que nunca.

    Europa debe posicionarse como refugio para las y los investigadores que buscan desarrollar sus ideas en un entorno de libertad y de respeto por la diversidad, por el pensamiento crítico que inspira el propio método científico, y Elige Europa para la ciencia es un paso en la dirección correcta, pero debe ser un proyecto verdaderamente europeo para evitar crear desigualdades. No podemos permitir que esta medida beneficie solo a algunos territorios: esa no es la Europa que queremos.

    Queremos que Europa sea un lugar donde puedan investigar en libertad y abordar los desafíos globales, donde puedan colaborar con personas expertas de todo el mundo y donde se puedan aprovechar bien las oportunidades de financiación. Y para eso debemos garantizar, principalmente, dos cosas: primero, un presupuesto fuerte, y segundo, un programa europeo de ciencia e innovación autónomo. Afortunadamente, la presidenta de la Comisión el otro día anunció que así sería.

    Tenemos que convencernos de que, sin ciencia, no hay ni competitividad, ni democracia, ni proyecto europeo.

     
       

     

      Annamária Vicsek (PfE). – Elnök Asszony! A kutatás és innováció kulcsfontosságú Európa versenyképességének megőrzésében, ezért üdvözlendő a Bizottság célkitűzése, hogy megállítsa, sőt visszafordítsa az agyelszívást. A válassza Európát, válassza a tudományt elnevezésű kezdeményezésben viszont egy súlyos ellentmondást láthatunk. Miközben Brüsszel tengerentúli kutatókat csábít, addig egyes uniós kutatókat kizár a közös programokból. A magyar kutatók már három éve nem férnek hozzá a Horizon Europe forrásaihoz. Nem tudományos vagy adminisztratív hibák miatt, hanem politikai okokból.

    Az Európai Bizottság a magyar kutatói közösség kizárásával akarja büntetni a magyar kormányt, pedig ezzel pont azt fogja eredményezni, amit elvileg meg akarna akadályozni, az agyelszívást. A magyar kutatók ma nemcsak az uniós, hanem már harmadik országbeli kollégáikkal szemben is hátrányban vannak. Ez a kirekesztés nemcsak igazságtalan, hanem Európa versenyképességét is gyengíti. A kiváló magyar kutatók megérdemlik, hogy az egységes kutatási térséghez tartozzanak.

     
       

     

      Marion Maréchal (ECR). – Madame la Présidente, chers collègues, Emmanuel Macron et Ursula von der Leyen se sont livrés à la Sorbonne à un drôle de numéro: les voilà donc ardents défenseurs d’une recherche académique libre et indépendante contre l’obscurantisme de l’administration Trump.

    Pour l’occasion, le président français n’a pas eu honte de proposer 100 millions d’euros pour attirer les chercheurs américains, alors que dans le même temps, le budget français dévolu à l’enseignement supérieur et à la recherche s’est vu retirer 1 milliard d’euros en 2025.

    Pendant que les États-Unis consacrent plus de 3,5 % de leur PIB à la recherche et au développement, l’UE, elle, peine à dépasser les 2,2 %. L’Europe, en effet, peine à garder ses chercheurs, puisque, depuis 2010, le taux de départ des docteurs européens vers les États-Unis est d’environ 20 %.

    Alors, avant de vouloir faire venir les chercheurs américains anti-Trump en Europe, commençons déjà par comprendre et faire en sorte de garder nos propres chercheurs en Europe grâce à une rémunération et à des crédits dignes de ce nom.

    Profitons-en aussi pour nous interroger sur les orientations budgétaires de la recherche publique dans nos pays qui, en France par exemple, avec le CNRS, est devenu le paradis des sciences molles pour militants woke au détriment de la recherche scientifique qui, elle, crée de la richesse et de l’emploi.

     
       

     

      Christophe Grudler (Renew). – Madame la Présidente, Madame la Commissaire, fin mars, nous alertions déjà sur la situation aux États-Unis: coupes budgétaires massives, recul des libertés académiques, licenciements. Aujourd’hui, ses scientifiques cherchent un refuge. L’Europe a donc une opportunité unique: devenir le nouvel eldorado de la science libre.

    À cet égard, je salue l’initiative «Choose Europe» et l’annonce d’une enveloppe de 500 millions d’euros jusqu’en 2027, mais soyons clairs: les 22 millions d’euros du programme pilote, via l’action Marie Curie, ne suffiront pas. Ce programme pilote doit ouvrir la voie, oui, mais l’ouvrir vite, avec des procédures d’accueil simplifiées, une sélection rapide des projets et des perspectives de long terme pour celles et ceux qui veulent reconstruire ici leur avenir scientifique.

    Par ailleurs, l’excellence scientifique n’est pas incompatible avec l’agenda stratégique de l’Union, bien au contraire. Les projets portés dans ce cadre peuvent, par leurs résultats, contribuer aux priorités de l’Union, du climat à la santé en passant par les technologies critiques et de rupture.

    Enfin, j’en appelle à toutes les universités, académies et centres de recherche européens: rejoignez le mouvement, ouvrez vos portes.

     
       

     

      Vladimir Prebilič (Verts/ALE). – Gospa predsedujoča! Spoštovane kolegice in kolegi! Kot profesor iz prve roke poznam preobrazbo na moč znanosti, ki mora biti svobodna, odprta za sodelovanje in ima intelektualno dostojanstvo.

    V času, ko so ogrožene akademske svoboščine v Združenih državah Amerike in drugje, kjer so dejstva spolitizirana, akademiki pa utišani, mora Evropa dajati zgled. Biti moramo upanje za tiste, ki iščejo resnico in ne nadzora. Za tiste, ki iščejo sodelovanje in ne cenzure. Zato moramo odpreti vrata svetu z novimi programi, kot so Erasmus+ za Indijo in Afriko, ter vzpostaviti nova partnerstva s tretjimi državami.

    To niso le programi mednarodne izmenjave, ampak so lahko tudi rešilni čoln za tiste, ki so danes ogroženi na Harvardu, Columbiji in drugje. Evropa mora sprejeti bistre ume iz vsega sveta. Naj jasno povem, če verjamete v svobodno misel in dostojanstvo znanja, potem izberite Evropo za znanost.

     
       

     

      Catarina Martins (The Left). – Senhora Presidente, Senhora Comissária, este debate é um desfile de horrores.

    Um grupo da extrema-direita chega e defende cortar o financiamento a universidades que se posicionam contra o genocídio na Palestina. Logo a seguir, outro dos grupos da extrema-direita vem defender cortes na investigação científica sobre mulheres. Como se não chegasse, vem o terceiro grupo de extrema-direita deste Parlamento e propõe adotar o conceito fascista de ciência: só se investiga o que lhes der razão.

    A questão da liberdade académica não é um problema só nos Estados Unidos, onde a administração de Donald Trump está a perseguir as universidades e os cientistas. A interferência e a ameaça contra as universidades, o desrespeito completo pela autonomia, a falta de conhecimento — onde sobram racismo, misoginia e homofobia, elevados a critérios da ciência, que se pode ou não produzir —, também já estão na Hungria. Já está à espreita em tantos países europeus. E não foi, afinal, o que ouvimos aqui hoje?

    A iniciativa Escolhe a Europa para a Ciência tem o objetivo de atrair cientistas de outras partes do mundo para fazer ciência na Europa. E é bom que a Europa o queira fazer, que se queira abrir ao mundo e que perceba que a ciência é fundamental.

    Mas olhemos para o que está a acontecer: orçamento para a ciência insuficiente, xenofobia no centro da política de imigração e, mais, com a cobertura crescente que populares e liberais dão à extrema-direita um pouco por toda a Europa, quem acolherá os investigadores americanos, europeus, seja onde for, quando a perseguição, aqui, também se tornar a regra?

     
       

     

      Zsuzsanna Borvendég (ESN). – Elnök Asszony! A kutatás-fejlesztés erősítése a versenyképesség egyik kulcsa, de a célok kijelölése tagállami hatáskör. Központosítással durva aránytalanságok állhatnak elő, és komoly problémák léphetnek fel. Már a bolognai folyamat is színvonalesést eredményezett az egyetemeken, de figyelmeztető jel az is, hogy a Covid-diktatúra idején boszorkányüldözést folytattak azon tudósok ellen, akik megkérdőjelezték a WHO diktátumait.

    A tudományos szabadság nem tűri a politikai és ideológiai nyomásgyakorlást, ezért káros, hogy a tervezet eleve kiemeli a zöld átállást, a gender-tanokat, és kiemelt figyelmet fordít az ukrán kutatókra, ezzel kvázi meghatározva a támogatás politikai feltételeit. A mobilitás túlhangsúlyozásával az európai kutatók hátrányba kerülhetnek a harmadik országból érkezőkkel szemben. Vagyis rejtetten a migrációt segíti a tervezet, ráadásul nehezíti a kutatók visszatérését saját hazájukba, ezzel az Unión belüli agyelszívást fokozzák, ami a kevésbé gazdag tagállamokat súlyosan érinti.

     
       

     

      Diana Iovanovici Şoşoacă (NI). – Doamnă președintă, da, vorbim despre cercetare. Este foarte frumos, aveți intenții foarte bune, vă gândiți la bani, vă gândiți să aduceți cei mai buni cercetători din Statele Unite ale Americii, ăia de care America nu mai are nevoie, dar nu vă uitați la cercetătorii din Europa și, bineînțeles, fiind româncă, vreau să-mi laud cercetătorii din România: cercetători care au pus bazele Institutului de la Măgurele de Fizică Atomică, pe care îl lăsați în paragină; cercetători care au pus bazele celui mai important institut, „Cantacuzino” – datorită căruia n-am mai fi avut nevoie de vaccinuri COVID cu cercetări pe care nu știu pentru cine le-ați făcut, poate pentru Auschwitz, pentru că au omorât și omoară și acum, nu știu ce cercetători au fost – Institut „Cantacuzino” care nu mai există, iar cercetătorii au fost puși să se ducă la adunat de legume prin țările dumneavoastră; Institutul de Geriatrie „Ana Aslan”, cea care a inventat elixirul tinereții.

    Nu faceți absolut nimic pentru Europa. Vă bateți joc! Aduceți doar vaccinuri care au efecte secundare și omoară oameni. Ideologii de gen, asta este cercetarea europeană. Când veți învăța să respectați Europa și cercetătorii europeni, atunci veți avea excelență.

     
       

     

      Angelika Niebler (PPE). – Frau Präsidentin, Frau Kommissarin, liebe Kolleginnen, liebe Kollegen! Europa ist ein hervorragender Standort für Wissenschaftler aus der ganzen Welt. Die Freiheit der Lehre, der Forschung, der Wissenschaft ist für uns in Europa ein ganz hohes Gut. Dafür zu werben und Anreize zu setzen, dass Talente nach Europa kommen, ist genau das Richtige. Ich begrüße das neue Förderprogramm für Spitzenforschung, Spitzenforscher und internationale Talente. Ich begrüße diese Superfinanzhilfe für den Europäischen Forschungsrat. Ich begrüße die bessere finanzielle Ausstattung für Marie-Curie-Stipendien. Das alles, meine lieben Kolleginnen und Kollegen, sind doch hervorragende Initiativen, und sie helfen auch, eben unseren Standort noch weiter attraktiv zu machen.

    Woran wir wirklich noch arbeiten müssen, ist, dass wir hier auch die Rahmenbedingungen für die Talente, die nach Europa kommen, erleichtern. Ich höre aus der Wissenschaftscommunity, dass es immer noch Riesenprobleme in den Mitgliedstaaten bei der Erteilung von Visa gibt, dass es beim Start schwierig ist – auch in dieser neuen Umgebung. Das ist jetzt nicht in erster Linie Aufgabe der Kommission, aber vielleicht kann man doch auch darauf hinwirken, dass die Talente, die zu uns nach Europa kommen wollen, sich hier auch wirklich willkommen fühlen. Und das beginnt damit, dass wir bei der Visaerteilung Erleichterungen schaffen.

     
       

     

      Sofie Eriksson (S&D). – Fru talman! Det vi ser i USA just nu är ett systematiskt sönderfall, en demokrati som monteras ner bit för bit, en president som föraktar rättsstaten, som underminerar vetenskapen, som bara verkar bry sig om att berika sig själv och andra superrika, som gärna vill hålla folkflertalet utan utbildning och förnekar dem utbildning eftersom att vi vet att en bildad befolkning kommer att ifrågasätta auktoriteter.

    Men vi hör ju samma rop här i denna sal här i dag från extremhögern som hånar vetenskap, som förnekar klimatförändringarna, som vill bygga makten på rädsla och förakt. Det duger inte.

    Därför måste Europa svara, inte med tystnad utan med mod. Det är nu som vi måste ta ställning. Vi ska vara den självklara platsen i världen där kunskapen får andas, där sanningen inte är till salu. Därför är det här initiativet från kommissionen viktigt. Men det behövs mer än ord. Det krävs handling, det krävs förnuft. För låt det nu inte bli så att vi skrumpnar till torra, bruna, orangea och sura apelsiner, utan låt oss vara stolta i Europa där vetenskapen alltid har en plats.

     
       

     

      Jana Nagyová (PfE). – Paní předsedající, paní komisařko, bylo nebylo, Evropa kdysi bývala centrem pokroku, místem, kam lidé upírali oči v naději na lepší budoucnost. Ta doba je však pryč. Svým přesvědčením, že jsme ti nejlepší, svou nabubřelostí a byrokracií jsme nechali mnoho mozků a vynálezů utéct do třetích zemí. Problémy jsou nad slunce jasné, odliv mozků, o třetinu nižší výdaje na výzkum a vývoj a jen čtvrtina registrovaných patentů ve srovnání s USA a Čínou. Uvádění inovací na trh podle reálné situace je ještě horší. Není divu. Zásadním krokem pro Evropu je totiž splnění úkolu, který zde zůstává nedokončený již téměř sedmdesát let od doby Římských smluv, a to je realizace čtyř svobod. Roztříštěnost trhů stojí Evropu každý rok přes 200 miliard EUR a přitom my hledáme nové finanční zdroje. Máme je na talíři.

    Člověk však musí věřit, že bude lépe. Proto věřím, že poslední kroky Evropské komise, a to je program Choose Europe for Science a příslib samostatného programu Horizont přinesou své ovoce. Jen doufám, že přístup do něj bude nastaven tak, aby i menší státy měly reálnou šanci z toho čerpat. Jinak bude platit „Poslední zhasíná“.

     
       

     

      Diego Solier (NI). – Señora presidenta, señora comisaria, hay dos cosas raras de ver: una patera yendo hacia un país comunista y un investigador pensando en quedarse en Europa. Europa quiere ser el hogar de la ciencia, pero para eso tiene que ser un lugar donde vivir, trabajar y crear no sea un deporte de riesgo.

    Somos un continente con democracias sólidas: sanidad, educación, movilidad… Sí, pero ¿puede un joven e investigador pagar un piso en Ámsterdam, Múnich o Madrid con un contrato de tres años? Financiamos ciencia con Horizonte Europa, pero llenamos a los investigadores de papeles y formularios. Los científicos pasan más tiempo acreditando que investigando.

    Además, no podemos permitir que nuestros investigadores vivan en la precariedad. Necesitamos más vínculos con las empresas, más empleabilidad y más sinergias. Si queremos que elijan Europa, hagamos de Europa una elección real, no una apuesta inestable. La ciencia necesita libertad, continuidad y estabilidad. Sin ciencia no hay Europa.

     
       

     

      Oihane Agirregoitia Martínez (Renew). – Señora presidenta, estamos en un momento en el que presidentes de distintos Estados son invitados a la Casa Blanca con intención de ser ridiculizados, se dispara contra diplomáticos y civiles de todos los bandos cuando se quiere presionar ante violaciones de derechos humanos y actuaciones inhumanas y la plutocracia y extremismos ganan terreno, limitando libertades fundamentales y pensamientos críticos. Hagamos de Euskadi y de Europa un espacio de oportunidad para quienes quieran mejorar sus condiciones de vida desde el respeto a los valores europeos y un lugar de desarrollo profesional para quienes quieran sumar sus capacidades investigadoras a las nuestras y nos ayuden a reducir dependencias a partir de la innovación y el desarrollo. De eso va el programa Elige Europa para la ciencia.

    En este nuevo tablero geopolítico, el liderazgo científico e innovador proporciona una ventaja competitiva cada vez mayor. Y eso, en el medio y en el largo plazo, se traduce en nuevos y mejores puestos de trabajo, más autonomía estratégica y menos desigualdades.

    Por lo tanto, en una Euskadi que siempre ha apostado por la investigación y el desarrollo, por la libertad científica y el fomento del talento, esperamos que esos más de 1 250 millones de euros sirvan para hacer crecer nuestro espacio de oportunidad y nuestro país.

     
       

     

      Anthony Smith (The Left). – Madame la Présidente, Madame la Commissaire, c’est formidable, formidablement hypocrite! Mme von der Leyen et M. Macron s’érigent en défenseurs des libertés académiques et politiques en octroyant l’accueil aux scientifiques étasuniens, par exemple, persécutés pour leur engagement en faveur de la Palestine.

    Ce sont les mêmes qui, ici, s’enlisent dans des circonvolutions pour ne pas dénoncer le génocide en cours à Gaza. Les mêmes qui, ici, frappent d’anathème les militants et les étudiants dénonçant les massacres de Tsahal; les mêmes qui, ici, accusent d’antisémitisme toute personne critiquant le gouvernement d’extrême droite de M. Netanyahou.

    Depuis que M. Macron est au pouvoir, le budget de l’enseignement supérieur par étudiant a baissé de 15 % en France. Une destruction méthodique de l’université publique a lieu sous nos yeux. Les universités ne parviennent plus à boucler leur budget et la précarisation des personnels et des étudiants atteint des niveaux records.

    Assez de cette hypocrisie et de ces plans de communication obscènes! Nous défendrons toujours les libertés politiques et académiques et les moyens nécessaires à leur expression, tout comme nous défendrons toujours l’accueil des réfugiés, peu importe leur origine.

     
       

     

      Hélder Sousa Silva (PPE). – Senhora Presidente, Senhora Comissária, caros colegas, só teremos uma Europa desenvolvida, próspera e soberana se colocarmos a ciência e a inovação no centro do nosso projeto comum. A iniciativa Escolhe a Europa para a Ciência é um passo crucial nessa direção.

    Pela primeira vez, os investigadores terão não só financiamento robusto e direto da União Europeia, mas também a garantia de contratos prolongados por parte das instituições e a necessária continuidade da carreira científica.

    Além disso, com a exigência de cofinanciamento que esta iniciativa impõe, devemos garantir que todas as instituições sediadas em regiões com menos recursos possam realmente participar sem deixar ninguém para trás.

    Mas precisamos de sonhar mais alto. Precisamos de garantir que esta iniciativa posiciona a União Europeia como líder global em ciência e inovação, oferecendo um ambiente de investigação aberto, bem financiado, coeso e com forte ligação ao setor empresarial. É muito importante que tal aconteça.

    (O orador aceita responder a uma pergunta «cartão azul»)

     
       

     

      Bruno Gonçalves (S&D).Dear President, colleagues, Commissioner, o futuro da indústria e da competitividade europeia não se constrói com salários baixos nem com desregulação sem limites; constrói-se com uma estratégia para a inovação, estratégia que nos faltou.

    A iniciativa Chose Europe, agora apresentada, acrescenta 500 milhões EUR, que permitem valorizar os nossos jovens qualificados e novos centros de investigação. Mas o aumento de financiamento abre também portas ao recrutamento dos melhores cientistas que já não estão na Europa.

    Falo daqueles que, nos Estados Unidos e noutros países, sofreram cortes no apoio ao seu trabalho e que sentem a ciência ameaçada por parte dos mesmos que em Gaza ameaçam crianças, mas que no mundo ameaçam a verdade.

    Esta é uma oportunidade única para reinventar a Europa como líder de uma nova era do conhecimento na descarbonização, na inteligência artificial ou nas biotecnologias de saúde. Mas, sejamos claros, o futuro não vai esperar por nós. E é por isso que, mais do que é importante apresentar, é urgente fazer. Essa deve ser razão suficiente para que o Velho Continente volte a ser o mais iluminado.

    (O orador aceita responder a uma pergunta «cartão azul»)

     
       

     

      João Oliveira (The Left), Pergunta segundo o procedimento «cartão azul». – Senhor Deputado Bruno Gonçalves, quero fazer-lhe duas perguntas.

    Primeiro, como é que Portugal sai da situação de dependência dos países mais fortes, das grandes potências da União Europeia, no acesso aos fundos para a ciência? A União Europeia acaba de anunciar um conjunto de medidas com grandes fundos associados. Portugal continua sempre numa posição de dependência, porque, para aceder a esses fundos, as nossas unidades de ciência e de investigação precisam sempre de encontrar alguma espécie de consórcio com unidades de países mais importantes, mais fortes, para conseguir aceder aos fundos.

    A segunda pergunta é esta: como é que o PS resolve a contradição do seu discurso e do seu posicionamento, defendendo, por um lado, o investimento na ciência e na investigação, mas, por outro lado, estando de acordo com todas as restrições e condicionamentos orçamentais que a União Europeia nos impõe, nomeadamente através do Pacto de Estabilidade?

    Precisamos de fazer o investimento em ciência e tecnologia, e isso não é compatível com a aceitação das restrições orçamentais que a União Europeia nos impõe.

     
       

     

      Bruno Gonçalves (S&D), Resposta segundo o procedimento «cartão azul». – Se eu pudesse responder com uma venda, eu diria que esta intervenção vem de um partido profundamente europeísta, preocupado com a Europa e com a forma como os fundos europeus são alocados ao nosso país. Não é o caso.

    E, portanto, responderei sendo de um partido profundamente europeísta, de um partido que criou, em Portugal, a Fundação para a Ciência e a Tecnologia, de um partido que aprofundou a integração europeia também no conhecimento, e que já na última legislatura — não na última legislatura do governo AD, mas do governo do Partido Socialista — criou clusters em Portugal que não só permitiram aceder a mais fundos, mas permitiram aceder a mais fundos entre empresas e universidades portuguesas.

    E, portanto, essa visão cética sobre a Europa é algo que caracteriza bem a bancada de onde o senhor deputado vem, mas não é algo que seja refletido nos dados públicos, que nos demonstram que, hoje, temos pessoas mais qualificadas, mais inovação — e muito mais do que tínhamos antes da integração europeia.

     
       

     

      Kris Van Dijck (ECR). – Voorzitter, mevrouw de commissaris, ik ben blij dat het besef er is dat investeringen in onderzoek en innovatie een absolute noodzaak zijn voor ons concurrentievermogen. Ik ben ook trots dat Vlaanderen hierin een koploper is en zelfs de ambitie uitspreekt om van 3,5 % naar 5 % van het bbp te evolueren.

    Het gemiddelde in de Europese Unie ligt nu rond de 2,2 % en dat is ruim onvoldoende. Onze productiviteit lijdt hieronder. Zo kunnen we de wereldwijde concurrentie niet aangaan en dreigen we aan welvaart in te boeten. Dus goed dat de Commissie actie onderneemt. Maar sta me toe, mevrouw de commissaris, drie belangrijke kanttekeningen te maken:

    1) laat fundamenteel onderzoek niet vallen. Dat brengt het Europese concurrentievermogen op lange termijn immers in gevaar;

    2) behoud de zeer waardevolle bottom-upbenadering in het Marie Curie-programma. Hierin is politieke sturing niet wenselijk;

    3) let op met het reguleren van academische vrijheid, want het enige kader ter bescherming van de academische vrijheid is net dat er geen kader is.

    Conclusie: kiezen voor onderzoek en innovatie is kiezen voor de toekomst.

     
       

     

      Jüri Ratas (PPE). – Austatud president! Head ametikaaslased, komisjon. Toetan tugevalt ideed, et teadus peab olema Euroopa poliitika keskmes, kui me tahame tagada meie tulevikku ja konkurentsivõimet. Teadus on nagu voolav jõgi, mis toidab kogu meie ühiskonda, meie majandust ja meie tulevikku. Kui me ei hoolitse selle jõe eest, siis ta kuivab ja koos sellega takerdub ka meie edasiminek. Me ei saa lubada, et see teema jääb Euroopa Liidus vaid tühjaks hüüdlauseks. Peame kiiresti jõudma tegudeni. Euroopa teadus on tähtis meie konkurentsivõime, julgeoleku ja heaolu jaoks. Euroopast peab saama teaduse liider. Peame olema innovatsiooni esirinnas ja toetama ka teiste riikide teadlasi Euroopas tegutsemas. Tean seda ka Eesti kogemusest. Meie teaduse maastik on maailmatasemel, kuid meie teadlased, ülikoolid ja teadusasutused vajavad kindlamat tuge, suuremaid investeeringuid, et nad saaksid jätkata Euroopas tipptasemel lahenduste väljatöötamist ja viiksid siin oma unistused ellu. Ma tänan!

     
       

     

      Elena Sancho Murillo (S&D). – Señora presidenta, señora comisaria, la ciencia y la innovación son nuestro presente y nuestro futuro y, por eso, Elige Europa para la ciencia debe ser la hoja de ruta para afrontar los retos de los próximos años.

    ¿Qué hubiera sido de nuestra historia sin Marie Curie, la española Margarita Salas, Charles Darwin o Grace Hopper? Os aseguro que la historia tal y como la conocemos no hubiera sucedido. Continuemos rompiendo barreras en defensa de la ciencia y de la tecnología y rompiendo, además, techos de cristal para que las mujeres también seamos líderes y estemos presentes en esta transformación de la innovación y de la ciencia.

    El desarrollo en I+D, la tecnología, la inteligencia artificial y la digitalización deben reforzarse como herramientas de avance, de libertad, de seguridad y de competitividad europea frente a las amenazas de los oligarcas estadounidenses como Donald Trump o Elon Musk.

    Elige Europa para la ciencia debe ser el compromiso por el liderazgo de Europa en innovación para que nuestros jóvenes elijan venir y quedarse en Europa. La inversión anunciada son buenas noticias, pero debemos seguir siendo ambiciosos. Debemos seguir atrayendo talento a Europa a través de más inversión y buenas condiciones laborales. Si queremos el avance científico de Europa, debemos estar del lado de los científicos y científicas.

     
       

     

      Eszter Lakos (PPE). – Elnök Asszony! Európa vezet a tudományos publikációk számában és a nemzetközi együttműködésekben, de a globális versenyképességhez innovatívabb, befogadóbb tudományos ökoszisztémákra van szükségünk. Olyanokra, amelyek bevonzzák a legbrilliánsabb elméket. Először is vonzó hellyé kell válnunk a legjobb kutatók számára. Ez kiszámítható, hosszútávú finanszírozást, külön keretprogramot, világos és vonzó karrierutakat, jó munka-magánélet egyensúlyt jelent, különösen a nőknek és a fiatal kutatóknak, valamint egy olyan kutatási kultúrát, amely a kiválóságra, a nyitottságra és a bizalomra épül.

    Nem feledkezhetünk meg a kutatási innovációs szakadék csökkentéséről sem. Erős európai kutatási térséget kell kiépítenünk, kiváló infrastruktúrákkal, amelyek minden régiót és tagállamot bevonnak, beleértve Magyarországot is, amely a jövőben, amikor majd mi, a Tisza leszünk kormányon, visszaadjuk az Akadémia szabadságát, és majd ismét élénk tudományos ökoszisztémává válhat, ahol a tehetség valóban kibontakozhat. Európának erősítenie kell tudományos szuverenitását, nem csak a csúcstechnológiába kell befektetnie, hanem az azt létrehozó emberekbe is.

     
       

       

    Procedura “catch-the-eye”

     
       

     

      Liudas Mažylis (PPE). – Pirmininke, komisare, kolegos. Dabartinė JAV administracija ruošiasi nurėžti finansavimą nuo, pavyzdžiui, NASA, nuo Ligų kontrolės, prevencijos centro. Būdamas mokslininkas, žinau, per kokius sunkiai įveikiamus biurokratinius brūzgynus tenka brautis formuojant, pavyzdžiui, sveikatos duomenų registrus. Tokių duomenų nepalaikant, ta unikali sukaupta globali vertybė nueina niekais. Tad Komisijos pirmininkės pasiūlytas pusės milijardo paketas apskritai yra laiku ir vietoj. Tai turi aprėpti mokslininkus iš įvairių trečiųjų valstybių, įskaitant, pavyzdžiui, Ukrainą. Tiesa, septynerių metų „super grantai“ gali kelti nelygybės pavojų tarp jau egzistuojančių ir dar tik besiformuojančių kompetencijos centrų. Tačiau džiugina požiūris į jaunus mokslininkus ir jog nepamirštama parama jiems. Dar pridurčiau apie būtinybę į finansavimą įtraukti dvigubos paskirties tyrimus. Dėkoju.

     
       

     

      Vytenis Povilas Andriukaitis (S&D). – Madam President, Commissioner, you know very well, Manuel Heitor’s report – align, act, accelerate. The report is based on the Letta Report proposing a fifth freedom, but a fifth freedom for research and development requires infrastructure and an ecosystem at pan-European, supranational level.

    And of course, Draghi mentioned the necessity to build a research and innovation union. A union requires a lot of effort and a whole-of-Commission approach and a whole-of-government approach. We are just proposing to establish a pilot project using European reference networks, using artificial intelligence fabrics, using a health data space, using biobanks and one million genomics to build an ecosystem and a reduction in the area of rare diseases, rare cancers and low prevalence diseases.

    It would be a good example to have pan-European infrastructure. I will send you our proposals.

     
       

       

    IN THE CHAIR: VICTOR NEGRESCU
    Vice-President

     
       

     

      Helmut Brandstätter (Renew). – Mr President, some right-wing colleagues told us that Trump wants to chase away just the ‘woke’ scientists. That’s wrong. I have here the editorial of The Lancet, a well-known publication of science. What they’re writing is that Elon Musk’s department slashed federal budgets and awards, interrupting investigations into paediatric cancer, diabetes, HIV, prematurely ending at least 113 clinical trials and withholding funds from more than 200 universities. PhD projects have been cancelled, graduate admissions rescinded and infrastructure investment foregone. The visas of foreign-born American students and faculty have been revoked.

    So that’s the situation. In the United States, they can’t work freely anymore. So please, Commissioner, go there, get them. We really have to do something. They have great talent and they should come to Europe.

    One more thing: yesterday, we had a conference about the mental health of the children of Ukraine. They are refugees – 20 000 of them were stolen and brought to Russia. They need a lot for mental health. Please think about them as well. Let’s do something for them.

     
       

     

      João Oliveira (The Left). – Senhor Presidente, Senhora Comissária Zaharieva, o desenvolvimento científico e tecnológico é um aspeto absolutamente essencial para o desenvolvimento de qualquer país. E as assimetrias e as desigualdades de desenvolvimento entre os países da União Europeia são um problema grave, que tem de ser combatido — e, por isso, é absolutamente essencial que as opções da União Europeia em matéria de ciência e tecnologia deem um contributo decisivo para esbater, para eliminar essas diferenças e essas desigualdades de desenvolvimento entre cada país.

    Mas as opções que têm sido feitas são exatamente no sentido contrário. Não apenas nas políticas económicas, que determinam, para alguns países, melhores condições de desenvolvimento científico e tecnológico e de incorporação da ciência e da tecnologia na sua atividade produtiva, mas também porque, no acesso aos fundos, as condições de acesso entre países não são iguais, e os países menos desenvolvidos têm mais dificuldades em aceder aos fundos da União Europeia para poderem garantir melhores condições para o desenvolvimento científico e tecnológico.

    Os países menos desenvolvidos têm mais dificuldades também em fazer o investimento com os seus próprios recursos orçamentais, porque as limitações e os condicionamentos da União Europeia pesam mais.

    É preciso inverter essas opções para garantir que haja verdadeiramente coesão dentro da União Europeia.

     
       

     

      Lukas Sieper (NI). – Herr Präsident, liebe Kollegen! Ich bin Ihnen sehr dankbar für diese Debatte, die mir erneut vor Augen geführt hat, was der Unterschied zwischen Politikern und Wissenschaftlern ist. Ich denke, Choose Europe for Science ist eine sehr wichtige Initiative, die aber nicht genug auf das eigentliche Ziel eingeht, das wir damit verfolgen. Jeder weiß, dass es dabei am Ende des Tages um die Einführung einer fünften Grundfreiheit geht: der Wissenschaftsfreiheit. Aber das sollte in diesem Programm ausdrücklich erwähnt werden. Wir sollten in der Lage sein, mit unserer Wissenschaftsfreiheit Visionen für die Zukunft zu schaffen, und nicht nur kleinteilig das Jetzt zu regeln. Und das Gleiche gilt auch im Kleineren. Es ist richtig und wichtig, was im Einzelnen hinsichtlich der Anerkennung von Forschungsabschlüssen und der Erleichterungen für Visa darin steht. Aber wir gucken zu wenig auf diejenigen, die noch keine Forscher sind, nämlich diejenigen, die jetzt gerade in der Schule sind. Wir brauchen europaweit harmonisierte Schulfächer, wie zum Beispiel Digitalkompetenz und Medien, damit jene, die in Zukunft in Europa exzellent forschen können, dafür alle nötigen Kompetenzen mitbringen.

     
       

       

    (End of catch-the-eye procedure)

     
       

     

      Ekaterina Zaharieva, Member of the Commission. – Mr President, honourable Members, I’m really grateful for your intervention. I felt really broad support for the Choose Europe for Science initiative, which confirms that uniting us is one of the most powerful attitudes that science has. It goes beyond the national and party borders and I think that’s precisely why Europe’s research is open to all of those who share our values.

    Today, already 42 % of our young doctoral and postdoctoral researchers that we support through Marie Skłodowska-Curie Actions come from outside the EU and 80 % of our publications that we fund through Horizon Europe are open access. I think that we have to be proud of our European model that we have for research. In Europe, science is free. In Europe, we celebrate both questions and our diverse academic traditions. In Europe, people are at the centre of scientific research and we should be proud of that.

    I heard a lot of you who said we have to improve the conditions of European researchers who are already here and that we have to create a true union of science and research. This was actually one of my number one priorities. In the five minutes at the beginning, I unfortunately wasn’t able to present the full package of Choose Europe for Science, but I can reassure you that we are working on everything that you mentioned, like improving career development, improving conditions for scientists in Europe, visa facilitation – we worked with Commissioner Brunner and with the Member States on that – and all the other questions that were raised and proposals that I heard today.

    I want to share with you one concrete number: now, with only 5 % of the world’s population, Europe is already home to one fourth of scientists in the world. In a decade, the number of European researchers will have grown by 45 %, which is significant. That means that young people choose science and choose to become scientists despite disinformation and science scepticism on the rise. They embrace science and for those young people who choose science, we are obliged to continue to do our best for Europe to remain the best place to do science in the world. I am committed and I rely on your support to work to achieve this.

     
       

     

      President. – Thank you, Commissioner Zaharieva, for your statement and your involvement.

    The debate is closed.

     

    3. Deliberations of the Committee on Petitions in 2023 (debate)

     

      Peter Agius, deputising for the rapporteur. – Mr President, the Committee of Petitions is about giving a voice to citizens. It is the committee of the citizens. Through us, citizens can put pressure on the Commission, on the Member States to make sure that from laws we pass to rights.

    Because after all, this is what citizens really care about. They do not care about laws; they care about rights reaching them and their families. During the year 2023, the Committee of Petitions received 1 452 petitions representing a 16 % increase over previous years, but we believe there is room for much more. We believe there should be much more awareness about this important tool for citizens.

    The main topics of the petitions were the environment, internal market and fundamental rights. We received, for instance, many petitions on the Data Protection Regulation and its breaches in various Member States. We received petitions on the rule of law and democracy and a lot of petitions on environmental concerns. In fact, it’s fair to say that there is no Petitions Committee hearing without matters on environmental protection discussed in the committee, including wildlife conservation, forest policy and breaches to the Habitats Directive.

    We received many petitions also in the area of health, and this clearly shows that citizens want more out of Europe in this area. And in many discussions we had in the committee, it is with pride that I say that a lot of our discussions lead to changes, lead to implementation, lead to enforcement, lead to investigations. Of course, we need more of this. We need the Commission to dedicate even more resources to following up, to responding to petitions and to implementation.

    In 2023 we organised also four public hearings, some jointly with other committees, and these covered a wide range of petition-driven issues, including the Schengen border concerns, the impact of climate change on social security and vulnerable groups. The committee and the Commission maintain a very solid ongoing cooperation and we need, as we said, more involved Commission services and dedication to responding to petition concerns.

    Nixtieq nagħlaq bil-messaġġ bil-Malti billi nenfasizza r-rabta ċara li hemm bejn id-drittijiet tagħna bħala ċittadini Ewropej u ż-żmien li ndumu biex neħduhom id-drittijiet. Bl-Ingliż ngħidu Justice delayed is justice denied. U hawn nieħu eżempju minn Malta, l-elettorat tiegħi. F’Malta suppost għandna standards Ewropej għal baħar nadif imma tiltaqa’ ma’ familji bit-tfal, jgħidulek: “Jien ma nistax ingawdi l-bajja għax hemm id-drenaġġ ħiereġ fil-bajja”. Fil-fatt, meta tara l-istorja tara li l-Kummissjoni Ewropea ilha għaxar snin tibgħat l-ittri. Is-sena l-oħra kellna sentenza tal-qorti li fl-aħħar qalet li għandna bżonn ninfurzaw il-liġi Ewropea. Però, sadanittant, dawk it-tfal saru adulti u ma gawdewiex il-bajja. Ejja nagħmluha aktar, kollha kemm aħna, biex niffukaw fuq l-implimentazzjoni. Għax wara kollox l-implimentazzjoni twassal għad-drittijiet.

    Aħna fil-kumitat tal-petizzjonijiet ser nagħmlu l-biċċa tagħna billi nagħtu l-vuċi liċ-ċittadini li ħafna drabi m’għandhomx triq oħra ħlief li jiġu quddiemna. Għalhekk nagħlaq billi nirringrazzja lill-kollegi tal-gruppi politiċi kollha u anki MEPs bla grupp, tal-ħidma dedikata immens f’dan il kumitat u nħares ‘il quddiem għal djalogu interessanti llum u vot b’saħħtu u koerenti għar-riżoluzzjoni li għandna quddiemna.

     
       

     

      Glenn Micallef, Member of the Commission. – Mr President, honourable Members, on behalf of the Commission, I would like to welcome Mr Falcă’s report, which offers a comprehensive overview of the activities of the Committee on Petitions in 2023.

    As Mr Agius has just said, petitions are an effective channel for direct contact and open dialogue on problems affecting the daily lives of Europeans.

    As mentioned by Commissioner Šefčovič last week in the structured dialogue with your committee, the Commission remains committed to providing timely and pertinent contributions to the European Parliament’s response to these concerns.

    A clear signal of this commitment is that, throughout 2023, Commission representatives were present at all meetings of the Committee on Petitions, including at the highest political level. For example, Vice‑President Šefčovič was with you in February 2023 for a structured dialogue in accordance with the Framework Agreement on relations between our two institutions, and Commissioner Dalli took part in the annual workshop on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities in November 2023.

    According to your report, in 2023, you sent us 557 new petitions for opinion. In total, we provided on 984 petitions. The Commission continues to deploy the resources necessary to ensure that all petitions you send are properly addressed.

    Looking at the petitions received in 2023, the main topics raised were the environment, the economy and fundamental rights. These concerns remain valid today and broadly align with the priorities of this Commission, as outlined in President von der Leyen’s political guidelines and reflected in the 2025 Commission Work Programme adopted earlier this year, which focuses on bold action to bolster our security, prosperity and democracy.

    I would like to reiterate our commitment on addressing petitions that raise concerns on the implementation of EU law – a core priority under this mandate, and something crucial to maintaining the credibility of the EU institutions.

    In February, we adopted a communication on implementation and simplification, setting out our vision for fast and visible improvements for Europeans and European businesses.

    When it comes to the enforcement of EU law, the Commission takes action where necessary, using the infringement procedure. But the infringement procedure is not designed to offer concrete solutions for individuals or ensure individual redress. Rather, it is aimed at addressing systemic problems affecting a large amount of people, often across Member States.

    Petitioners pointing to the incorrect application of EU law in individual cases would benefit more from the mechanisms available at national level, such as the national courts, regulatory bodies or ombudsman. If the problem has a cross‑border dimension, the Solvit network may offer quick and flexible remedies.

    We have heard your calls for more transparency and better information‑sharing with regard to the Commission’s enforcement actions. We publish decisions on every step of an infringement procedure on the Europol webpage.

    In the current version of the Infringement Register, the public can search for cases, with a link to the petition portal of Parliament. Tools such as this make it easier to track the progress of specific infringements, and to verify if there is any petition linked to any ongoing investigations.

    The petitions portal now also links to the Infringement Register, allowing those who intend to file a petition to check whether an infringement procedure is already in progress.

    In addition, the Commission has recently published a new Europol webpage to give user‑friendly information on infringement cases, the transposition of directives and EU pilot dialogues.

    Finally, I want to commend your committee for your work on the European Citizens’ initiatives, in particular for advocating to increase the impact of European Citizens’ initiatives and for contributing to the organisation of public hearings for successful initiatives.

    Several legislative acts in recent years have been triggered by successful European Citizens’ Initiatives, such as the revised Drinking Water Directive, the Regulation on the Transparency and Sustainability of EU Risk Assessment in the Food Chain and the Nature Restoration Law.

    The next public hearing will be on the successful European Citizens’ Initiative on Cohesion Policy for the equality of the regions and the sustainability of regional cultures.

     
       

     

      Rosa Estaràs Ferragut, en nombre del Grupo PPE. – Señor presidente, señor comisario, la labor central de la Comisión de Peticiones es defender los derechos fundamentales de los ciudadanos, protegerlos y hacer un seguimiento de sus peticiones para que puedan participar activamente en la vida de la Unión Europea.

    El examen de esta Comisión de Peticiones de 2023 se ha hecho con eficacia, atención, imparcialidad, equidad y transparencia. Los ciudadanos han enviado peticiones sobre muchos temas, como ha comentado el ponente, pero me gustaría referirme especialmente a la preocupación sobre la situación del Estado de Derecho en España: se han presentado más de cuarenta peticiones sobre este tema, básicamente por los ataques a los jueces, las colonizaciones de las instituciones y la reducción de las penas por delitos de corrupción.

    Entre las misiones realizadas, me gustaría destacar las de Irlanda, Rumanía y España y, más concretamente, esta última, de la que debo resaltar y lamentar los ataques y tensiones que allí se vivieron. Yo estuve presente y nos insultaron diciendo: «Fuera, fascistas, de estos barrios. No metan las narices donde no les llaman». Creo que esta no debe ser la actitud.

    También me preocupa que no se haga un seguimiento de las recomendaciones que formulamos, pues lo hacemos para poder proteger los derechos de los ciudadanos. Por último, quiero poner en valor el trabajo tan magnífico que se ha hecho desde esta comisión.

     
       

     

      Sandra Gómez López, en nombre del Grupo S&D. – Señor presidente, desde el Grupo S&D lamentamos profundamente el resultado de la votación en la Comisión de Peticiones. A pesar del trabajo constructivo que realizamos con el ponente y de los compromisos alcanzados con los grupos proeuropeos, seguramente por influencia y por imposición del Partido Popular español ‑que es quien realmente politiza y manosea esta comisión‑, la Comisión de Peticiones decidió romper el consenso y aliarse con la extrema derecha, dejando un informe que poco viene a reflejar los verdaderos intereses y preocupaciones de la ciudadanía.

    Lo siento por el ponente, pero lo importante de este informe –de este debate– ni siquiera son las enmiendas o el informe, es la estrategia de la Comisión de Peticiones, sobre todo en el año 2023, que ha consistido en politizarla, utilizarla y manosearla para la propia agenda del Partido Popular. Y, realmente, peticiones que sí que son importantes y son de la ciudadanía nunca fueron atendidas o, como estamos viendo, son vetadas por intereses políticos, como es el caso de una petición gallega o de una sobre la DANA en Valencia, en donde su ciudadanía –las víctimas– ha podido verse antes con Úrsula von der Leyen o con Roberta Metsola que comparecer en la Comisión de Peticiones.

    Yo le quiero hacer una pregunta al resto de delegaciones del Partido Popular o de Patriots. ¿Van a seguir consintiendo que una delegación concreta utilice una comisión, que debería atender a la ciudadanía, pero que se ha convertido una especie de sucursal del Congreso de los Diputados? ¿Están utilizando recursos del Parlamento Europeo para hacer oposición a un Gobierno de un Estado miembro?

    Nosotros no vamos a aceptar que una comisión, que debería ser un verdadero instrumento de participación ciudadana, sea una mera fábrica de confrontación política, una pantalla de propaganda, y que se haya convertido en eso, además, exactamente en el año 2023, bajo la presidencia del Partido Popular Español y de Dolors Montserrat. Nosotros no vamos a ser cómplices y, por lo tanto, no vamos a permitir que se destruya lo que tanto costó construir: una Europa al servicio de la ciudadanía y no de sus partidos.

     
       

     

      Pál Szekeres, a PfE képviselőcsoport nevében. – Elnök Úr! Először is szeretném megköszönni azt a munkát, amit a Petíciós Bizottság végzett a 2023-as esztendőben az uniós polgárok hangjának meghallgatásáért. A jelentés számos fontos témát tár fel az alapvető joguktól kezdve a környezetvédelemig. De engedjék meg, hogy egy területre külön felhívjam a figyelmet, a fogyatékossággal élő személyek jogainak védelmére, és ezen belül különösen a jelnyelv használatának előmozdítására.

    Üdvözlöm, hogy a szakbizottság elismerte, hogy a kommunikáció nem luxus, hanem alapjog. Ezért nagyon fontos, hogy szorgalmazzuk a Parlament eljárási szabályzatának módosítását annak érdekében, hogy a siket polgárok tudjanak a saját anyanyelvükön, a nemzeti jelnyelven kommunikálni. Ez nem csupán technikai kérdés, hanem kötelezettség is, amelyet az ENSZ fogyatékossággal élő személyek jogairól szóló egyezménye is aláír és deklarálja. Én üdvözlöm a pozitív lépéseket, és felszólítom a kollégákat, hogy ne engedjék, hogy az eredmények kirakatintézkedésekké silányuljanak, és nagyon fontosnak tartom, hogy továbbra is támogassuk az európai polgárokat, hogy petíciókat tudjanak benyújtani, hogy tudjuk, hogy mi a véleményük a munkánkról.

     
       

     

      Jana Toom, on behalf of the Renew Group. – Mr President, Commissioner, dear colleagues, the work of the Committee of Petitions is unfortunately often underestimated, which I consider a big mistake, because we are the first – if not the only – direct channel for Europeans to address their concerns and seek solutions.

    This report very well reflects these expectations, as well as our ability to meet them. This ability, to be honest, is pretty limited. While citizens are very well aware of their rights, they are not so well aware, for instance, of Article 51 of the European Charter of Fundamental Rights, which clearly states that the charter is obligatory to follow only if Member States implement European law, which leaves a huge gap between the rights and values we promote and the real life of our citizens, which in turn leads to disappointment and Euroscepticism.

    There are two ways: we leave this as it is and wait for the next crisis to force us to open the Treaties and remove these and other obstacles, or we find courage to put political pressure on our governments and not only promote, but truly defend the rights of Europeans are entitled to exercise – at least on paper.

     
       

     

      Ana Miranda Paz, em nome do Grupo Verts/ALE. – Senhor Presidente, Senhor Comissário, com este relatório, os grupos à direita e a extrema-direita deste Parlamento conseguiram silenciar e minar o importante trabalho realizado pela Comissão das Petições, em 2023, sobre temas ambientais e climáticos e sobre direitos das pessoas. A Comissão das Petições é, para mim, como deputada europeia, das mais importantes deste Parlamento Europeu.

    Mas não fizeram só isso, também usaram esta comissão para tratar de assuntos da exclusiva responsabilidade dos Estados-Membros — nomeadamente do Estado espanhol —, com acusações infundadas, gerando um ambiente de pouco consenso e levando a que a maioria das alterações do nosso grupo fossem rejeitadas sempre por questões ideológicas — como sempre fazem e continuam a fazer.

    Um dos aspetos mais censuráveis é a atitude do Partido Popular espanhol desde que as maiorias parlamentares mudaram. Antes, era capaz de pactuar com os grupos progressistas deste Parlamento e, agora, prefere alinhar-se com a extrema-direita para bloquear qualquer iniciativa interessante e construtiva proposta pelos outros grupos parlamentares, ignorando, assim, a cidadania europeia. Tal como as petições que, no ano passado, foram apresentadas contra a empresa de macrocelulose Altri — um projeto que trouxe à rua mais de 100 mil pessoas —, não lhes importa.

    Por isso, Senhor Relator, tenham este aspeto em conta, porque temos de mudar as coisas na Comissão das Petições e temos de fazer um trabalho que seja de todos os grupos, conjuntamente, e não trabalho sectário e manipulado, como fez o Partido Popular espanhol, manipulando também esta Comissão das Petições.

     
       

     

      Marcin Sypniewski, w imieniu grupy ESN. – Szanowny Panie Przewodniczący! Zalewacie nas codziennie tysiącami stron raportów i analiz, a tak naprawdę macie duży problem z transparentnością. W sprawie tajnych SMS-owych negocjacji szefowej Komisji Europejskiej z Pfizerem sprawa musiała trafić do sądu. Były tu ukrywane ustalenia na miliardy euro. I co? Jest wyrok Trybunału Sprawiedliwości, i co z tego? Żadnych konsekwencji.

    Podobnie w sprawie popularnych polskich pasów bezpieczeństwa dla dzieci, Smart Kids Belt, które zostały zaorane przez regulacje unijne. Tu też sąd stwierdził, że Komisja prowadziła kontakty z konkurentami i to wykończyło polską firmę. I żadnych konsekwencji. Posłowie nie mają też dostępu do ważnych dokumentów i ustaleń. Jaka to jest transparentność? Tylko w teorii. I te instytucje tak naprawdę działają tylko dla elit, a nie dla ludzi. I to widać w tych petycjach, które rozpatrujemy.

    Od siedmiu lat nie możecie znieść zmiany czasu, ale gdy trzeba wydać kolejne miliardy euro, gdy trzeba załatwić kolejną zapomogę dla Ukrainy, to działamy ekspresowo i bez namysłu. To małe sprawy, ważne dla ludzi powinny być załatwiane ekspresowo, a ważne sprawy dotyczące wielomiliardowych wydatków powinny być rozpatrywane rozważnie i z namysłem.

     
       

     

      Maria Walsh (PPE). – Mr President, I speak today on behalf of the communities in Donegal and Mayo – places where families are living in homes that are literally falling apart around them. These houses were built with defective concrete blocks containing too much mica and pyrite, causing serious structural damage, emotional and financial strain for many, many people.

    In 2023, I joined colleagues from the Petitions Committee on its fact-finding mission to Donegal, a powerful moment that helped bring much-needed European attention to this crisis. The Parliament visit was built on years of local advocacy and resulted in clear, practical recommendations: first being faster access to a scheme that is fit for purpose, less red tape, stronger support for families, including mental health services, and accountability, with assurances that this would never happen again.

    We must properly enforce rules on construction materials and hold those to account and prevent this from ever happening again. We must ensure colleagues in the Irish Government and this Parliament deliver on those recommendations to strengthen the protections for everyone’s future.

     
       

       

    Catch-the-eye procedure

     
       

     

      Elena Nevado del Campo (PPE). – Señor presidente, son los ciudadanos los que se dirigen al Parlamento, por lo tanto, les pido que no les insulten.

    El Partido Socialista español pretende instrumentalizar hasta el Parlamento Europeo. Confunde su forma de hacer con el derecho de los españoles a trasladar sus preocupaciones a este Parlamento y su preocupación por los permanentes atentados al Estado de Derecho que estamos padeciendo. Porque los españoles, en 2023, fueron los ciudadanos que más peticiones presentaron a esta comisión. Esto es la consecuencia del asalto de nuestro Gobierno al CIS, el ataque a los jueces y a los tribunales, la colonización de las empresas y el uso de la Fiscalía, del Tribunal Constitucional y del Banco de España. Es la consecuencia de casos como el caso Koldo, el del hermano del presidente, la amnistía por los condenados por el procés, el derecho a protestar por la imputación de la mujer del presidente y un largo etcétera. Eso es lo que debe preocuparnos. La Comisión de Peticiones está para responder a estos problemas. No les insulten.

     
       

     

      Petras Gražulis (ESN). – Pirmininkaujantis, gerbiamas Komisare. Kai kartą šiandien Lietuvoj renkama peticija Europos Parlamentui, nes buvusi, buvusi, dabar esantys valdžioje, socialdemokratai, dalyvaudami rinkiminėje kampanijoje, pasipriešino tuometinei valdžiai ir sakė, kad mokesčių nekels. Tame tarpe nekilnojamo turto, gyventojų pajamų mokesčių ir kitų. Atėję į valdžią, jie šiandien po pateikimo priėmė mokesčių pakėlimą. Žmonės piktinasi apgauti. Vieną kalbą prieš rinkimus, o po rinkimus atlieka visai kitus veiksmus. Žmonės mato, kaip švaistomas visuomeninis turtas, kaip plečiasi biurokratija. Tai nustatinėja net ir Valstybės kontrolė, tačiau nesiima veiksmų, apiplėšinėja žmones. Aš tikiuosi, kad ir Europos Komisija, ir Europos peticijų komitetas atsižvelgs ir rimtai nagrinės šimtus tūkstančių surinktų Lietuvos piliečių parašų.

     
       

     

      Μαρία Ζαχαρία (NI). – Κύριε Πρόεδρε, η Επιτροπή Αναφορών αποτελεί το βασικό θεσμικό βήμα μέσω του οποίου οι Ευρωπαίοι πολίτες εκφράζουν τις αγωνίες, τις ανησυχίες και τα προβλήματά τους. Ο ρόλος μας είναι ξεκάθαρος: να υπερασπιζόμαστε και να προωθούμε τα δικαιώματά τους χωρίς εκπτώσεις. Είναι απογοητευτικό ότι μια δεξιά-ακροδεξιά συμμαχία εντός της επιτροπής δρα για να κλείνει αναφορές που ενοχλούν τις δεξιές κυβερνήσεις. Επίσης, είναι απογοητευτικό το γεγονός ότι η πλειοψηφία των κρατών μελών επιλέγει συστηματικά να μην απαντά στα ερωτήματα που τους τίθενται από αυτήν την επιτροπή. Η λογοδοσία προς τους πολίτες δεν μπορεί να είναι επιλεκτική. Πρέπει να είναι καθολική και χωρίς υπεκφυγές. Γι’ αυτόν ακριβώς τον λόγο, είχα προτείνει, τουλάχιστον, την εφαρμογή της διαδικασίας «name and shame» για εκείνα τα κράτη μέλη που αρνούνται να συνεργαστούν, να απαντήσουν και να λογοδοτήσουν. Δυστυχώς, τα περισσότερα μέλη των πολιτικών Ομάδων επέλεξαν να προστατεύσουν τις κυβερνήσεις τους. Εμείς, ωστόσο, θα επιμένουμε, θα συνεχίσουμε να διεκδικούμε ονομαστική λογοδοσία για την υπεράσπιση των δικαιωμάτων των απλών ανθρώπων.

     
       

     

      Λευτέρης Νικολάου-Αλαβάνος (NI). – Κύριε Πρόεδρε, θέλουμε να καταγγείλουμε την απόφαση του Ευρωκοινοβουλίου και της Επιτροπής Αναφορών να κλείσουν χωρίς συζήτηση αναφορά των αντιστασιακών ελληνικών οργανώσεων για τις γερμανικές επανορθώσεις, με τον προκλητικό ισχυρισμό ότι δεν εμπίπτει στις αρμοδιότητες της Ευρωπαϊκής Ένωσης. Όμως οι αποζημιώσεις για τα εγκλήματα των Ναζί, το αναγκαστικό κατοχικό δάνειο, την κλοπή αρχαιολογικών θησαυρών καθορίζονται από διεθνείς συμβάσεις που δεσμεύουν δύο κράτη μέλη. Η Ευρωπαϊκή Ένωση θεωρεί αρμοδιότητά της να παρεμβαίνει σε κάθε διεθνές ζήτημα, σε ιμπεριαλιστικούς πολέμους σε κάθε γωνιά του πλανήτη· να στηρίζει τη γενοκτονία του παλαιστινιακού λαού από το Ισραήλ· από τη Ρωσία, πριν καν τελειώσει ο πόλεμος στην Ουκρανία, απαιτεί επανορθώσεις. Στο θέμα των γερμανικών αποζημιώσεων, όμως, κάνουν τους αναρμόδιους. Η στάση της Ευρωπαϊκής Ένωσης, της κυβέρνησης της Νέας Δημοκρατίας και των προηγούμενων, που δεν διεκδικούν για να μη διαταραχθούν οι σχέσεις με τη Γερμανία, είναι πρόκληση απέναντι στον ελληνικό λαό, την ηρωική αντίστασή του και τις βαριές θυσίες του στην πάλη κατά του φασισμού. Συνεχίζουμε τον αγώνα ώστε οι κυβερνήσεις της Γερμανίας, της Ελλάδας και η Ευρωπαϊκή Ένωση να τοποθετηθούν επίσημα απέναντι στις δίκαιες απαιτήσεις του ελληνικού λαού για τις γερμανικές πολεμικές αποζημιώσεις.

     
       

       

    (End of catch-the-eye procedure)

     
       

       

    (The sitting was suspended at 10:45)

     
       

       

    PRESIDENZA: PINA PICIERNO
    Vicepresidente

     

    5. Voting time

       

    (Per i risultati delle votazioni e altri dettagli che le riguardano: vedasi processo verbale)

     

    5.1. Amending Regulation (EU) No 228/2013 as regards additional assistance and further flexibility to outermost regions affected by severe natural disasters and in the context of cyclone Chido devastating Mayotte (vote)

     

      Presidente. – Iniziamo con la richiesta di decisione d’urgenza presentata dalla Commissione AGRI per quanto riguarda l’assistenza integrativa e l’ulteriore flessibilità per le regioni ultraperiferiche colpite da gravi calamità naturali e nel contesto delle devastazioni provocate a Mayotte dal ciclone Chido (cfr. punto 5.1 del processo verbale).

     

    5.2. Amending Regulation (EU) 2023/956 as regards simplifying and strengthening the carbon border adjustment mechanism (A10-0085/2025 – Antonio Decaro) (vote)

       

    – Dopo la votazione:

     
       

       

    (Il Parlamento accoglie la richiesta di rinvio in commissione)

     

    5.3. Modification of customs duties applicable to imports of certain goods originating in or exported from the Russian Federation and the Republic of Belarus (A10-0087/2025 – Inese Vaidere) (vote)

       

    – Prima della votazione:

     
       

     

      Inese Vaidere, rapporteur. – Madam President, dear colleagues, many agricultural producers have become increasingly dependent on Russian fertiliser imports. The dependency on Russian gas is being replaced with a new dependency on Russian fertiliser.

    In addition, it has had a negative impact on the European fertiliser industry. Instead of a ban on importing Russian fertilisers as we, the European Parliament already called for in September, the Commission proposed to gradually, over a period of three years, increase import duties for fertilisers and agricultural goods from Russia and Belarus.

    This will give the farming sector time to adjust and the fertiliser industry time to boost their production. Additionally, European producers will benefit from increased tariffs on other agricultural goods imported from Russia and Belarus. To prevent that these tariff measures have a negative effect on the agricultural sector, we have asked the Commission to provide a statement about their action plan.

    Dear colleagues, I urge you to adopt this proposal without any amendments. This way, we will be able to ensure that this regulation enters into force, as foreseen, by 1 July this year. Every delayed day will mean lost lives in Ukraine.

    Of course, this proposal is a compromise and it’s never the case that compromises make everyone happy. Can you name a law that everyone is 100 % happy with?

    The Council has already confirmed their readiness to adopt this regulation without any amendments. I sincerely thank the Members who were able to set aside their particular interests for a while to agree on the overarching goal at the forefront. We need to stop financing Russia’s war in Ukraine. War is right next to our external borders. Stopping it is needed for our safety.

     
       

     

      Glenn Micallef, Member of the Commission. – Madam President, honourable Members, the European Commission would like to make the following declaration.

    The Union’s food security depends on the continuous existence of the autonomous Union’s nitrogen‑based fertiliser production industry that can supply the European Union market. The present level of imports from the Russian Federation, competing unfairly in the EU market due to gas price differences, is undermining the EU industry.

    At the same time, it is essential to ensure that Union farmers have predictable, sufficient and affordable access to nitrogen‑based fertilisers as this is indispensable to the stabilisation of the EU agricultural markets. Article 2 of the Regulation provides that the Commission shall monitor prices applicable in the Union of the goods listed in Annex II during four years from the application of this Regulation.

    The Commission recalls that it already publishes regularly data reflecting the price evolution of fertilisers. Trends shown by this data set are discussed during the EU Fertilisers Market Observatory meetings.

    On this basis, the Commission will continue the monitoring of the prices of nitrogen‑based fertilisers subject to this Regulation and will make the information about the results of this monitoring available to the Member States on a regular monthly basis through a consolidated document published on the website of the Commission.

    The Commission notes that the Regulation provides for the suspension of tariffs for concerned fertiliser products imported from origins other than the Russian Federation and the Republic of Belarus, as one of the potential appropriate actions in case of a substantial surge in fertiliser prices. The Commission commits to take such action if this case arises.

    Already in 2022, the Commission proposed, and the Council accepted, a temporary suspension of common customs tariffs on some nitrogen‑based fertilisers from countries other than Russia and Belarus due to a significant price increase in the Union market.

    Furthermore, the Commission recalls that since the start of Russia’s war of aggression against Ukraine, it adopted measures to support European farmers in all Member States whenever it was considered necessary. The Commission recognises the need to take fully into account the competitiveness of the EU fertilisers industry in the future actions implementing the Clean Industrial Deal.

     

    5.4. Granting equivalence to Moldova and Ukraine for field inspections and seed production (A10-0043/2025 – Veronika Vrecionová) (vote)

     

      Presidente. – Procediamo ora con la relazione dell’onorevole Vrecionová sulla concessione alla Moldova e all’Ucraina dell’equivalenza delle ispezioni in campo e la produzione di sementi (cfr. punto 5.4 del processo verbale).

     

    5.5. Amendments to the Capital Requirements Regulation as regards securities financing transactions under the net stable funding ratio (vote)

     

      Presidente. – Passiamo ora alla proposta sulle modifiche al regolamento (UE) n. 575/2013 relativo ai requisiti prudenziali per quanto riguarda i requisiti per le operazioni di finanziamento tramite titoli nell’ambito del coefficiente netto di finanziamento stabile (cfr. punto 5.5 del processo verbale).

     

    5.6. Euratom Research and Training Programme for the period 2026-2027 complementing Horizon Europe (A10-0083/2025 – Borys Budka) (vote)

     

      Presidente. – Passiamo ora alla relazione dell’onorevole Budka sul programma di ricerca e formazione di Euratom per il periodo 2026-2027 che integra Orizzonte Europa (cfr. punto 5.6 del processo verbale).

     

    5.7. Partial renewal of Members of the Court of Auditors – HR nominee (A10-0088/2025 – Ondřej Knotek) (vote)

     

      Presidente. – Passiamo ora alla relazione dell’onorevole Knotek sul rinnovo parziale dei membri della Corte dei conti – Candidata HR (cfr. punto 5.7 del processo verbale).

     

    5.8. Deliberations of the Committee on Petitions in 2023 (A10-0063/2025 – Gheorghe Falcă) (vote)

       

    – dopo la votazione sull’emendamento 42:

     
       

     

      Fabienne Keller (Renew). – Madame la Présidente, chers collègues, je souhaite vous proposer un amendement oral au rapport annuel sur lequel nous votons actuellement. L’amendement est ajouté à la fin du paragraphe 35 et est formulé comme suit. Je vais le lire en anglais.

    ‘Urges, in that sense, the European Commission, in due respect of the spirit of the ECI – the European Citizens’ Initiative procedure – to provide adequate, concrete and effective follow‑up to ECIs related to fundamental rights of citizens, such as the one calling for a binding legal ban on conversion practices targeting LGBTIQ+ citizens in the EU and the ECI ‘My voice, my choice’.’

    Chers collègues, cet amendement est nécessaire, à l’heure où les droits des communautés LGBT et les droits des femmes sont menacés partout en Europe. Avec mon groupe Renew Europe et avec beaucoup d’entre vous, je l’espère, nous sommes engagés en faveur de la défense de ces droits inscrits dans la Charte des droits fondamentaux de l’Union européenne et nous apporterons notre soutien aux communautés LGBT lors de la Pride de Budapest le 28 juin prochain.

     
       

       

    (Il Parlamento non accetta di porre in votazione l’emendamento orale)

     
       

       

    (Con questo si conclude il turno di votazioni)

     
       

       

    (La seduta è sospesa per pochi istanti)

     

    6. Resumption of the sitting

       

    (La seduta è ripresa alle 11.42)

     

    7. Explanations of vote

     

      Presidente. – L’ordine del giorno reca le dichiarazioni di voto.

     

    7.1. Amending Regulation (EU) 2023/956 as regards simplifying and strengthening the carbon border adjustment mechanism (A10-0085/2025 – Antonio Decaro)

     

      Jadwiga Wiśniewska (ECR). – Pani Przewodnicząca! Zagłosowałam za przyjęciem rozporządzenia upraszczającego i wzmacniającego mechanizm CBAM. Uważam, że to krok w dobrym kierunku. Uproszczenia zaproponowane są odpowiedzią na realne problemy związane z implementacją CBAM. CBAM ma chronić unijny przemysł obciążony restrykcyjną polityką klimatyczną poprzez nałożenie opłat na import towarów takich jak: stal, cement, aluminium, wodór czy nawozy z państw trzecich.

    Niestety pierwotne przepisy okazały się zbyt skomplikowane. Objęły nawet mikroprzedsiębiorstwa importujące niewielkie ilości towarów. Dlatego propozycję, by wyłączyć z systemu tak zwanych importerów okazjonalnych, czyli tych, którzy sprowadzają do Unii mniej niż 50 ton rocznie, uważam za rozsądne i proporcjonalne rozwiązanie, zmniejszające obciążenia biurokratyczne dla MŚP i niezakłócające unijnej konkurencji.

    Niemniej mechanizm CBAM wciąż wymaga dopracowania. Kluczowe wyzwania to zapewnienie wiarygodności danych dotyczących emisyjności produktów z państw trzecich oraz zapobieganie obchodzeniu przepisów. Co więcej, CBAM nie może być jedyną odpowiedzią na problemy przemysłu. Potrzebne są komplementarne działania, w tym powrót do bezpłatnych uprawnień emisyjnych i dalsze wsparcie dla firm dotkniętych wysokimi kosztami energii.

     
       

     

      Presidente. – Non c’è la possibilità di intervenire su quella relazione.

     

    8. Approval of the minutes of the part-session and forwarding of texts adopted

     

      Presidente. – Il processo verbale della seduta odierna e di quella di ieri sarà sottoposta all’approvazione del Parlamento all’inizio della prossima seduta. Se non vi sono obiezioni, procederò alla trasmissione immediata delle risoluzioni approvate nella seduta odierna ai loro destinatari.

     

    9. Dates of the next part-session

     

      Presidente. – La prossima tornata si svolgerà dal 16 al 19 giugno 2025 a Strasburgo.

     

    10. Closure of the sitting

       

    (La seduta è tolta alle 11.46)

     

    11. Adjournment of the session

     

      Presidente. – Dichiaro interrotta la sessione del Parlamento europeo.

     

    MIL OSI Europe News

  • MIL-OSI Russia: Russian President: Russia remains among the top five global arms exporters

    Translation. Region: Russian Federal

    Source: People’s Republic of China in Russian – People’s Republic of China in Russian –

    Source: People’s Republic of China – State Council News

    MOSCOW, May 23 (Xinhua) — Russia maintains its position among the top five arms exporters, Russian President Vladimir Putin said at a meeting on military-technical cooperation on Friday.

    “Russia continues to remain among the top five leaders in the global arms market and maintains its leading export positions in many areas,” the Russian President noted.

    According to V. Putin, this indicator “once again confirms the quality, reliability and efficiency of military products produced by gunsmiths.”

    He also noted that last year Russian enterprises generally fulfilled their export obligations, and Russia should consider the development of military-technical cooperation as an important tool for the technological renewal of the Russian army and navy.

    “The portfolio of orders for Russian military products is now serious – tens of billions of dollars. And we need to actively increase the volume of export deliveries,” the president emphasized. -0-

    MIL OSI Russia News

  • MIL-OSI Russia: Croatia and China agree to jointly develop green technologies

    Translation. Region: Russian Federal

    Source: People’s Republic of China in Russian – People’s Republic of China in Russian –

    Source: People’s Republic of China – State Council News

    ZAGREB, May 23 (Xinhua) — Croatia and China have reached an agreement to cooperate in developing knowledge and technology for biodiversity conservation and green development, the Croatian government said in a statement on Friday.

    It was reported that Chinese Minister of Science and Technology Yin Hejun, who is on a visit to Croatia, met with the country’s Prime Minister Andrej Plenkovic and the Minister of Science and Education Radovan Fuks, and signed a memorandum of cooperation with the Croatian Ministry of Science and Education in the field of biodiversity conservation and green development with the aim of jointly promoting sustainable socio-economic growth.

    According to the statement, this is a continuation of the process of Chinese companies’ participation in infrastructure and investment projects in Croatia, and also underlines the Croatian government’s desire to increase exports to China.

    The document also emphasizes that, as a member of the European Union, Croatia will continue to advocate for maintaining good relations between the EU and China by maintaining an open dialogue. –0–

    MIL OSI Russia News

  • MIL-OSI Russia: Harvard University Sues Trump Administration Over International Student Ban

    Translation. Region: Russian Federal

    Source: People’s Republic of China in Russian – People’s Republic of China in Russian –

    Source: People’s Republic of China – State Council News

    WASHINGTON, May 23 (Xinhua) — Harvard University on Friday filed a second lawsuit against the Trump administration, a day after the U.S. Department of Homeland Security announced a ban on international students at the university.

    “The revocation of our foreign admissions authorization is the latest in a series of government actions designed to retaliate against Harvard for our refusal to surrender our academic independence and submit to the federal government’s unlawful efforts to exert control over our academic programs, faculty, and student body,” Harvard President Alan Garber wrote in a letter to the university community.

    “We condemn this illegal and unjustified action. It jeopardizes the future of thousands of Harvard students and scholars and sends a disturbing message to countless others at colleges across the country who came to America to educate themselves and pursue their dreams,” Garber said.

    Harvard’s president said the university has already filed a lawsuit and will file a motion for a temporary injunction soon. “While we seek legal relief through the courts, we will do everything we can to support our students and researchers,” he said.

    U.S. Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem announced the Trump administration’s decision on Thursday. “Let this serve as a warning to all universities and educational institutions across the country,” Noem said in a statement. “Admitting international students is a privilege, not a right, and that privilege has been revoked due to Harvard’s repeated failure to comply with federal law.”

    The minister noted that in addition to the ban on the enrollment of future international students, “current international students at Harvard must transfer to another university or lose their legal status.”

    On April 11, Trump administration officials sent a letter to Harvard demanding that the university undertake “meaningful governance reform and restructuring.” Among the administration’s key demands are rooting out what it calls anti-Semitism on campus and eliminating diversity initiatives that favor certain minority groups.

    On April 14, Harvard University rejected the Trump administration’s demands for sweeping changes to its governance, recruitment, and admissions systems. Just hours later, the White House announced it was freezing $2.2 billion in multi-year grants and $60 million in multi-year contracts previously awarded to the university.

    On April 16, Noem demanded that Harvard University provide information about illegal and violent activities by holders of foreign student visas by April 30, threatening that otherwise the school would lose its permission to accept foreign students.

    On April 21, Harvard University said it had filed a federal lawsuit challenging the Trump administration’s funding freeze, calling the measure “unlawful and beyond the government’s authority.”

    According to Harvard, international students made up more than 27 percent of the university’s total enrollment in the fall 2023 semester. –0–

    MIL OSI Russia News