Category: Switzerland

  • MIL-OSI Video: Adam Grant: The key trait future leaders need to succeed – and rethinking the classic workday

    Source: World Economic Forum (video statements)

    Big shifts must happen to ready teams for a work future that requires agile thinking and new forms of collaboration. Organizational psychologist, best-selling author and Wharton professor Adam Grant shares research-backed strategies that help develop leaders and work relationships across an organization as well as help teams practice critical soft skills like analysis and creativity that are often overlooked and undervalued. He explains why future workers will need to become “job crafters,” and the one trait leaders won’t be able to work without. He’ll also share what a college job as a magician taught him about engaging skeptics (and prompting critical thinking) and why he swears by keeping a “To-Don’t” list.

    This interview was recorded in January 2025 at the Annual Meeting in Davos, Switzerland

     

    About this episode: -Adam grant: YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/@adammgrant Podcast: https://open.spotify.com/show/0uFXKiNiC05GOrjE9AXnkn -Future of Jobs Report: https://www.weforum.org/publications/the-future-of-jobs-report-2025/ Related Podcasts: -How leaders can prepare teams for the future of work: ADP’s Chief Economist: https://tinyurl.com/mrpm57k6 (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ShvNPomJ4mE&t=508s) -Upskilling, tapping human talents, and what’s really needed for the future of work: Cognizant CEO Ravi Kumar: https://www.weforum.org/podcasts/meet-the-leader/episodes/ravi-kumar-cognizant-future-technology/

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qhumjh07lAA

    MIL OSI Video

  • MIL-OSI Video: Adam Grant: Future leaders won’t succeed without this key trait

    Source: World Economic Forum (video statements)

    Big shifts must happen to ready teams for a work future that requires agile thinking and collaborating with emerging tech. Organizational psychologist, best-selling author and Wharton professor Adam Grant shares research-backed strategies that help develop leaders and work relationships across an organization as well as help teams practice critical soft skills like analysis and creativity that are often overlooked and undervalued. He explains why future workers will need to become “job crafters,” and the one trait leaders won’t be able to work without. He’ll also share what a college job as a magician taught him about engaging skeptics (and prompting critical thinking) and why he swears by keeping a “To-Don’t” list.

    This interview was recorded in January 2025 at the Annual Meeting in Davos, Switzerland

    About this episode:
    Adam grant: https://www.youtube.com/@adammgrant
    Future of Jobs Report: https://www.weforum.org/publications/the-future-of-jobs-report-2025/

    Related Podcasts:
    Meet The Leader – How leaders can prepare teams for the future of work: ADP’s Chief Economist: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ShvNPomJ4mE&t=508s
    Meet The Leader – Upskilling, tapping human talents, and what’s really needed for the future of work: Cognizant CEO: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AEfNr3mizBY

    The World Economic Forum is the International Organization for Public-Private Cooperation. The Forum engages the foremost political, business, cultural and other leaders of society to shape global, regional and industry agendas. We believe that progress happens by bringing together people from all walks of life who have the drive and the influence to make positive change.

    World Economic Forum Website ► http://www.weforum.org/
    Facebook ► https://www.facebook.com/worldeconomicforum/
    YouTube ► https://www.youtube.com/wef
    Instagram ► https://www.instagram.com/worldeconomicforum/ 
    Twitter ► https://twitter.com/wef
    LinkedIn ► https://www.linkedin.com/company/world-economic-forum
    TikTok ► https://www.tiktok.com/@worldeconomicforum
    Flipboard ► https://flipboard.com/@WEF

    #WorldEconomicForum

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=buVVIpttzUA

    MIL OSI Video

  • MIL-OSI Submissions: Economy – KOF Economic Barometer declines but remains above its medium-term average

    Source: KOF Economic Institute

    In February, the KOF Economic Barometer decreases. After an increase in the previous months, it remains above its medium-term average. While faced with headwinds, the Swiss Economy shows a robust outlook.

    The KOF Economic Barometer decreases by 1.3 points to 101.7 in February (after revised 103 in January). Except for the construction industry, all production-side indicator bundles included in the KOF Economic Barometer are under pressure, with the indicator bundles for manufacturing and other services weakening in particular. However, the demand-side indicator bundles for foreign demand and private consumption are able to slightly cushion the negative developments.

    In the producing industry (manufacturing and construction), the sub-indicators for stockpiling of intermediate products and for the general business situation show negative developments. The sub-indicators for production activity, for the assessment of production barriers, and for profits are slowing down slightly. Positive developments are signaled by the sub-indicators for order backlogs, for the competitive situation, as well as for exports.

    Within the manufacturing industry, particularly the paper and printing industry, the chemical and pharmaceutical industry, the wood, glass, stone and earth segment, as well as machinery and equipment manufacturing all experience a setback. A more favourable outlook, however, is shown by both the electrical industry and the metal industry.

    MIL OSI – Submitted News

  • MIL-OSI Europe: Taskforce Drones of the DDPS invites industry to an information event

    Source: Switzerland – Department of Defence, Civil Protection and Sport

    The Taskforce Drones invites companies to an information event on the topic of small drones on 28 February 2025. The event will focus on information of the Taskforce Drones, insights into potential forms of cooperation with public authorities and export law. The Taskforce Drones aims to be able to develop small and medium-sized drones independently in Switzerland and deploy them in the Armed Forces.

    MIL OSI Europe News

  • MIL-OSI China: Over 300 firms sign up for China’s supply chain expo

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

    BEIJING, Feb. 28 — More than 300 domestic and foreign companies have signed up for the third China International Supply Chain Expo, China’s trade promotion body announced on Friday.

    The expo kicked off its global roadshows in January and has so far hosted promotional events and roadshows in 12 countries and regions, including Vietnam, Switzerland, South Africa and the United Arab Emirates, Yang Fan, spokesperson with the China Council for the Promotion of International Trade (CCPIT), told a press conference.

    Foreign enterprises and institutions have demonstrated great enthusiasm for participating in and visiting the expo, Yang said, anticipating an increase in attendance this year, particularly from overseas groups and businesses, for on-site visits and exchanges.

    The expo recorded more than 200,000 visits last year, CCPIT data showed.

    This year’s expo, slated to be held in Beijing from July 16 to 20, will cover a total exhibition area of 120,000 square meters.

    As the world’s first national-level exhibition focusing on supply chains, the China International Supply Chain Expo is an internationally shared public product. First held in 2023, the expo has contributed to building more secure, stable, open and inclusive global industrial and supply chains, according to the CCPIT.

    MIL OSI China News

  • MIL-OSI: 6/2025・Trifork Group AG – 2024 annual report and interim report for the quarter ending 31 December 2024

    Source: GlobeNewswire (MIL-OSI)

     
     
    Trifork Group – 2024 annual report and interim report for the quarter ending 31 December 2024

    Company announcement no. 6 / 2025
    Schindellegi, Switzerland – 28 February 2025

    Trifork Group reports full-year 2024 net profit of EURm 17.9 and EPS growth of 13.3%. Trifork Segment reports Q4 2024 revenue growth of 1.8% and EBITDA margin of 16.1%.


    Full-year 2024

    • Trifork Group
      • In 2024, Trifork Group revenue amounted to EURm 205.9, a decline of 0.9% from 2023. Adjusted for the effect of third-party software and hardware sales, revenue grew by 0.4% of which inorganic growth of 3.0% was offset by an organic decline of 2.6%. The organic decline was driven by market headwinds throughout the year in Build and Run.
      • Trifork Group EBITDA amounted to EURm 24.7, corresponding to 12.0% EBITDA margin.
      • Trifork Group EBIT amounted to EURm 8.2, corresponding to 4.0% EBIT margin.
      • Trifork Group net income amounted to EURm 17.9. Realized and unrealized gains in Trifork Labs of EURm 16.2 contributed significantly to net income.
      • Basic earnings per share was EUR 0.85 (2023: EUR 0.75). Diluted earnings per share was EUR 0.85 (2023: EUR 0.74).
    • Trifork Segment
      • In 2024, adjusted EBITDA of the Trifork segment amounted to EURm 26.9, a decline of 23.2% from 2023. The adjusted EBITDA margin was 13.1%, down from 16.9% in 2023 mainly due to lower revenue growth and increased investments in business development in the first half of the year.
      • Sub-segments
        • Inspire revenue increased by 18.1% to EURm 7.4 and realized an adjusted EBITDA of EURm -2.4 (2023: -2.7).
        • Build revenue declined by 0.2% to EURm 149.3 and realized an adjusted EBITDA margin of 13.4% (2023: 18.8%).
        • Run revenue declined by 4.3% to EURm 49.1 and realized an adjusted EBITDA margin of 24.5% (2023: 24.3%). If adjusted for sales of third-party licenses and hardware, Run grew 1.4%.
    • Trifork Labs
      • In 2024, Trifork Labs recorded EBT of EURm 13.3 driven by realized and unrealized gains from the agreement to partially exit an investment in the company XCI and unrealized gains from updated valuations due to liquidity events driven by external investors or better-than-expected operational and financial performance in some companies. Three smaller investments were fully impaired and other risk-based partial impairments were made.
      • At year-end 2024, the total book value of active Labs investments amounted to EURm 83.2 (2023: 69.7).

    Fourth quarter 2024

    • Trifork Group
      • In Q4 2024, Trifork Group revenue amounted to EURm 56.0, an increase of 1.8% from Q4 2023. Adjusted for the effect of third-party software and hardware sales, revenue declined by 0.2%.
      • Trifork Group EBITDA amounted to EURm 8.3, corresponding to 14.9% EBITDA margin.
      • Trifork Group EBIT amounted to EURm 3.7, corresponding to 6.7% EBIT margin.
      • Trifork Group net income amounted to EURm 12.7. Realized and unrealized gains in Trifork Labs contributed significantly to net income.
    • Trifork Segment
      • In Q4 2024, adjusted EBITDA in the Trifork Segment amounted to EURm 9.0, a decline of 23.4% from Q4 2023. The adjusted EBITDA margin was 16.1%, down from 21.4% in Q4 2023.
      • Sub-segments
        • Inspire revenue increased by 30.1% to EURm 3.7 and realized an adjusted EBITDA of EURm -0.8 (Q4 2023: EURm -0.3).
        • Build revenue increased by 0.2% to EURm 38.8 and realized an adjusted EBITDA margin of 13.2% (Q4 2023: 18.3%).
        • Run revenue increased by 4.3% to EURm 13.7 and realized an adjusted EBITDA margin of 31.0% (Q4 2023: 31.2%).
    • Trifork Labs
      • In Q4 2024, Trifork Labs recorded EBT of EURm 9.3 driven by realized and unrealized gains from an agreement to partially exit an investment in the company XCI and unrealized gains from updated valuations due to liquidity events driven by external investors or better-than-expected operational and financial performance in some companies. Three smaller investments were fully impaired and other risk-based partial impairments were made.

    Comment from CEO Jørn Larsen

    “2024 was an eventful year for Trifork, marked by an unstable economic environment and the growing negative impact of climate change worldwide. We all need to become more sustainable, and I am proud to observe the impact we have on our customers’ ESG agenda through digital innovation. In 2024, we also had exciting technological breakthroughs, and growing interest and strong operational performance in our portfolio companies in Trifork Labs. Despite the tough customer environment in the private sector and reduced EBITDA, our diluted earnings per share grew 15%, proving the strength of our two-legged business model – profitable operations in the Trifork Segment paired with strategic R&D investments in Trifork Labs. We had to adapt as some large customers scaled back, but won new business and grew our public sector revenue, and we continued to sharpen our go-to-market approach and product offering. Our products and capabilities within AI and spatial computing are in high demand, and these may become significant revenue drivers in the coming years. At the same time, our EURm 10 cost savings program will set us up for stronger margins in 2025.”

    Financial guidance for 2025 

    • Revenue is expected to be in the range of EURm 215-225 equal to 4.4-9.3% total growth
    • Organic revenue growth is expected in the range of 2.9-7.8%
    • Adjusted EBITDA in Trifork Segment is expected in the range of EURm 32.0-37.0
    • EBIT in Trifork Group is expected to be in the range of EURm 14.5-19.5.

    The guidance does not include potential effects from new acquisitions or divestments.

    Mid-term financial targets for 2026

    Based on the lower-than-expected performance in 2024 and the continued instability in the economic environment in 2025, the mid-term revenue targets for 2026 are adjusted:
     

    • Total revenue CAGR of 10-15% from a baseline in 2024 (prev. 15-25% with a baseline in 2023)
    • Organic CAGR of 5-10% from a baseline in 2024 (prev. 10-15% with baseline in 2023)

    The margin and gearing targets for 2026 are maintained:

    • 16-20% adj. EBITDA margin in Trifork Segment in 2026
    • 10-14% EBIT margin in Trifork Group in 2026
    • Net interest-bearing debt leverage of up to 1.5x Group adj. EBITDA (may temporarily exceed during the period)

    Change to Executive Management

    The Group CRO role will transition into a decentralized structure, with four regional CRO positions covering our core markets in Denmark, US, Switzerland, and UK to better reflect our decentralized organization. Some of these positions will be filled internally. As a consequence, Trifork will reduce Executive Management to CEO Jørn Larsen and CFO Kristian Wulf-Andersen. Morten Gram will leave the Group Executive Management.

    Main events in 2024

    • Inspire
      Trifork’s Inspire sub-segment, where we arrange technology conferences and online tech content, planned to stabilize performance in 2024 compared to the loss of EURm -2.7 in 2023. Overall, it turned out to difficult and we did not see any major market improvements in willingness to invest in sponsorships to conferences and education of their employees. The result was a growth of 18.1% with an EBITDA improvement of just EURm 0.3 compared to 2023. This was not satisfactory and we have now decided to exit part of our conference activities in 2025 and co-work or potentially co-own minority stakes in some of these with other partners. In total, we had 5,900 attendees to our conferences. Our GOTO tech channels on YouTube and Instagram ended the year with more than 80 million accumulated views – equal to more than 18 million views in 2024. The YouTube channel now has more than 1 million subscribers and we received a gold-reward plate from Google. According to Tech Talk Weekly, GOTO was behind the single most watched tech talk on YouTube in 2024. GOTO had five videos in the top 10, and 22 times in the top 100.
    • Build
      Trifork’s Build sub-segment, where we develop innovative software solutions for customers, saw unchanged revenue compared to 2023. Build accounted for 72.5% of total revenue. Corporates continued to take a cautious approach to IT spending in light of the global economic and geopolitical uncertainty. The continued low activity from private sector customers has been particularly visible in UK, whereas private sector engagements in US displayed comparatively better performance due to successful business development efforts. Overall, new customers accounted for 28% of revenue – similar to 2023. The public sector customer base primarily consists of Danish engagements. Danish public revenue grew 9.4% in 2024. After a soft start to the year with disruptions to existing customer engagements, the Danish Public business gained momentum with several key wins and ramp-up of delivery on existing framework agreements won in previous quarters and years. In January 2024, Trifork increased its stake in Erlang Solutions, a previous acquisition. In May, Trifork acquired Spantree in the US. In June, Trifork acquired Sapere Group in Denmark. All companies primarily deliver Build revenue.
    • Run
      Trifork’s Run sub-segment, where we operate and maintain internally or externally developed products for our customers, grew by 1.4% on hosting, service agreements, and Trifork licenses. Run-based revenue now accounts for 23.8% of total revenue. Growth was lower than expected due to delayed start or ramp-up of new agreements. During 2024, we continued to develop on existing Trifork IP and products but also launched new product offerings like Corax AI and Contain hosting platform products.
    • Trifork Labs
      Trifork Labs, the investment arm of Trifork Group that invests in strategic partnerships and uses venture-financing to grow some of our internally developed products, saw a continued strong momentum in 2024 in its 24 investments. Revenue in the portfolio companies (not consolidated in Trifork Group due to minority ownership stakes) surpassed EURm 100, up from EURm 50 two years ago. Trifork Labs co-founded TSBX and Mirage Insights, and made a new external investment in Rokoko Care. Trifork Labs provided additional funding to Arkyn Studios, Bluespace Ventures, and Dryp. A partial exit was announced in December in XCI where an institutional investor joined the growth journey with a 30% acquisition of existing shares. The sale was done above book value and contributed significantly to Group net income.


    Initiation of share buyback program

    Today, 28 February 2025, the Board of Directors decided to initiate a share buyback program of up to DKKm 14.92 (EURm 2.0) for the period from 4 March 2025 up to and including no later than 30 June 2025. A separate announcement will be distributed with further details.

    Results presentation

    Trifork will host a results presentation and Q&A session with CEO Jørn Larsen and CFO Kristian Wulf-Andersen today, 28 February 2025 at 11:00 CET in a live webcast that can be accessed via the following link: https://investor.trifork.com/events/. A recording will be made available on our investor website.

    Investor and media contact

    Frederik Svanholm, Group Investment Director & Head of Investor Relations
    frsv@trifork.com, +41 79 357 7317

    About Trifork  

    Trifork is a pioneering global technology partner, empowering enterprise and public sector customers with innovative solutions. With 1,229 professionals across 73 business units in 16 countries, Trifork delivers expertise in inspiring, building, and running advanced software solutions across diverse sectors, including public administration, healthcare, manufacturing, logistics, energy, financial services, retail, and real estate. Trifork Labs, the Group’s R&D hub, drives innovation by investing in and developing synergistic and high-potential technology companies. Trifork Group AG is a publicly listed company on Nasdaq Copenhagen. Learn more at trifork.com.

     

    Attachments

    The MIL Network

  • MIL-OSI: 7/2025・Trifork Group AG – Initiation of share buyback program

    Source: GlobeNewswire (MIL-OSI)

    Company announcement no. 7 / 2025
    Schindellegi, Switzerland – 28 February 2025


    Initiation of share buyback program

    Today, Trifork Group AG (“Trifork”) announces that the Board of Directors has decided to initiate a share buyback program of up to DKK 14.92 million (approximately EUR 2.0 million). 

    The share buyback program is initiated pursuant to the decision of the Board of Directors taken on 28 February 2025 to acquire own registered shares with a nominal value of CHF 0.10 each.

    The purpose of the program is to meet Trifork’s obligations pursuant to the employee stock program and potentially to reduce the share capital by cancellation of shares, if and to the extent so decided in the future by the Board of Directors, by use of the new capital band set forth in the articles of association of Trifork, which were approved by the annual general meeting on 19 April 2024.

    The share buyback program is planned to run from 4 March 2025 up to and including no later than 30 June 2025. The buyback program will not be active from 9 April to 15 April 2025.

    The share buyback program will be executed in accordance with EU Market Abuse Regulation, EU Regulation no. 596/2014 of 16 April 2014 and the provisions of Commission Delegated Regulation (EU) 2016/1052 of 8 March 2016 (the “Safe Harbour Regulation”).

    Trifork has appointed Danske Bank A/S as lead manager of the share buyback program. Under a separate agreement, Danske Bank A/S will within the announced limits buy back shares on behalf of Trifork and make related trading decisions independently of and without influence by Trifork.

    The share buyback program will be implemented under the following terms:

    • The maximum total consideration for shares bought back will be DKK 14.92 million (approximately EUR 2.0 million).
    • The maximum number of shares to be bought back is 400,000, equivalent to 2.0% of the outstanding registered number of shares of Trifork.
    • The maximum number of shares that may be purchased per daily market session may not exceed 25.0% of the average daily volume of Trifork’s shares traded on Nasdaq Copenhagen during the preceding 20 trading days.
    • Shares cannot be bought back at a price exceeding the higher of (i) the share price of the last independent transaction on Nasdaq Copenhagen, and (ii) the highest independent bid on the shares on Nasdaq Copenhagen.
    • On a weekly basis, Trifork will announce transactions made under the share buyback program in accordance with the reporting obligations imposed by the Safe Harbour Regulation.
    • The shares will be acquired through public trading on Nasdaq Copenhagen.
    • Trifork is entitled to suspend or terminate the share buyback program at any time. Such a decision will be disclosed in a company announcement.

    Prior to the launch of the share buyback program, Trifork holds 289,640 treasury shares corresponding to 1.5% of the total share capital.


    Investor and media contact

    Frederik Svanholm, Group Investment Director & Head of Investor Relations
    frsv@trifork.com, +41 79 357 73 17


    About Trifork

    Trifork is a pioneering global technology partner, empowering enterprise and public sector customers with innovative solutions. With 1,229 professionals across 73 business units in 16 countries, Trifork delivers expertise in inspiring, building, and running advanced software solutions across diverse sectors, including public administration, healthcare, manufacturing, logistics, energy, financial services, retail, and real estate. Trifork Labs, the Group’s R&D hub, drives innovation by investing in and developing synergistic and high-potential technology companies. Trifork Group AG is a publicly listed company on Nasdaq Copenhagen. Learn more at trifork.com.

    Attachment

    The MIL Network

  • MIL-OSI USA: ICYMI: Grassley Secures Argentine President Milei’s Partnership in Credit Suisse Investigation into Nazi-Linked Accounts

    US Senate News:

    Source: United States Senator for Iowa Chuck Grassley

    WASHINGTON – Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa) is welcoming Argentine President Javier Milei’s commitment to support Grassley’s ongoing investigation into Credit Suisse and its historic servicing of Nazi-linked accounts. This includes providing archival records documenting the use of Nazi “ratlines.” Ratlines were monetary and logistic pathways Nazis used to escape justice and flee to Latin America, including Argentina, following World War II.

    “In order to continue this work, I respectfully request possession of Argentina’s archival records relating to Nazi ratlines. This includes records dating to the time before, during, and following World War II that will help shed light on the planning and carrying out of the Nazi ratlines. The great people of Argentina’s support in helping the Senate Judiciary Committee obtain possession would assist the committee in advancing its corresponding oversight of this matter,” Grassley wrote to Milei.

    Grassley will chair a Senate Judiciary Committee hearing next week focused on stemming the tide of antisemitism.
    Read additional background from the Times of Israel.                                  

    Argentine president opening files on Nazi ‘ratlines’ that trafficked Eichmann, Mengele

    By Matt Lebovic

    February 24, 2025

    Argentinian President Javier Milei promised officials of the Simon Wiesenthal Center his full cooperation in granting access to documents related to the financing of so-called “ratlines” that helped Nazis escape Europe after the Holocaust. The promise was made in Buenos Aires at the presidential palace, Casa Rosada, during a meeting with Milei and activists on Tuesday.

    For decades, organizations including the Simon Wiesenthal Center, named after the famed Nazi hunter, have sought records related to unofficial escape routes taken by thousands of Nazis during the years after World War II. Up to 10,000 Nazis and other fascist war criminals escaped justice by fleeing to Argentina and other countries.

    “While some previous leaders promised full cooperation to get to the hard truths that involved Argentina’s past, Milei is the first to act with lightning speed to enable the SWC to uncover important pieces of the historic puzzle, especially as it related to involvement with Nazis before, during and after the Holocaust,” Rabbi Abraham Cooper, associate dean of the Simon Wiesenthal Center, told The Times of Israel.

    During the SWC meeting on Tuesday, Jonathan Missner, managing partner at Stein, Mitchell, Beato & Missner, brought a letter from US Senator Charles Grassley, chairman of the US Senate Judiciary Committee. The letter — which was handed to Milei — requested the Argentinian leader’s assistance in uncovering how the ratlines were organized and funded. A copy of the letter was sent to US President Donald Trump.

    Nazis’ escape routes

    Several countries in the Americas received Nazis, including Canada, the US, and Mexico. Nazis also fled to Australia, Spain, and Switzerland. In some cases, US intelligence officials used ratlines to pluck top Nazi scientists away from Soviet orbits.

    One of two primary escape routes went through Germany and Spain, then across the Atlantic to Argentina…

    Up to 5,000 Nazis are said to have settled in Argentina, including Holocaust “architect” Adolf Eichmann and Josef Mengele, one of the most recognizable — and wanted — Nazis. Traveling along a ratline in 1948, the notorious Auschwitz physician used the new identity of Helmut Gregor when fleeing Europe.

    “These files will be instrumental in obtaining justice, which is instrumental to honoring the memory of those who suffered and died in the Holocaust,” said Cooper. “Especially in a post-October 7 world, those who financed, facilitated, or otherwise assisted these ratlines must be held accountable,” he said.

    “Words are one thing — actions are another. President Milei’s historic decision signals his unequivocal allyship with the Jewish community while reinforcing his commitment to accountability and transparency at home,” Missner told The Times of Israel.

    Support for harboring Nazi war criminals went right to the top in Argentina, according to historians. President Juan Peron was angered by the Nuremberg Trials and authorized key facets of the escape routes, making them a state affair. In addition to German Nazis, the Peron regime and other South American governments aided war criminals from Hungary, Croatia and elsewhere.

    “President Milei is a staunch ally of the global Jewish community and was eager to open these archives. He knows that confronting Argentina’s history of Nazi collaboration requires nothing less than full transparency, and the same principle undergirds his pursuit of justice for the AMIA bombing,” said Missner.

    -30-

    MIL OSI USA News

  • MIL-OSI Security: Northwest Arkansas Man Sentenced to More Than Four Years in Prison for Operating an Illegal Money Transmitting Business Using Pandemic Funds

    Source: Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) State Crime News

    FAYETTEVILLE – A Northwest Arkansas man was sentenced on February 20, to 51 months in Federal Prison, followed by three years of supervised release. Additionally, he was ordered to pay restitution of $725,558.00 on one count of operating an Illegal Money Transmitting Business. The Honorable Judge Timothy L. Brooks presided over the sentencing hearing, which took place in the United States District Court in Fayetteville.

    According to court documents, Richard Harold Stone, age 77, waived indictment by a grand jury and pleaded guilty to a criminal information charging him with conducting an unlicensed money transmitting business in the State of Arkansas. Stone was the President or Chief Officer of numerous businesses registered with the Arkansas Secretary of State, including: Partex Oman Corp., Renewable Energy Campus Arkansas, Inc., Stonetek Global Corp., and Tires 2 Energy, LLC. Stone also was associated with Environmental Energy & Finance Corp., a Delaware corporation. The advertised purpose of these businesses was developing technology and facilities to repurpose waste materials, such as tires, into useable fuel sources. None of these businesses were registered with the State of Arkansas as a money transmitting business, as required by Arkansas law (Arkansas Code, Section 23-55-806(b)&(c)).

    Between November 2020 and March 2021, Stone received through various bank accounts associated with the above entities and other accounts under his control, deposits of funds from applications made on behalf of unwitting victims for Paycheck Protection Program (PPP) loans, Economic Impact Disaster Loans (EIDL), and Pandemic Unemployment Assistance (PUA), totaling more than $600,000. After receiving these funds, Stone immediately transferred most of the funds by wire transfer to parties in locations including Berne, Switzerland; London, England; New York, NY; Chennai, India; and Mumbai, India.

    At the conclusion of Thursday’s sentencing hearing, Stone was immediately remanded to the custody of the U.S. Marshals Service.

    U.S. Attorney David Clay Fowlkes of the Western District of Arkansas made the announcement.

    The Internal Revenue Service-Criminal Investigation, Federal Bureau of Investigation, and Department of Labor Office of the Inspector General investigated the case.

    Assistant U.S. Attorney Hunter Bridges is prosecuting the case.

    Related court documents may be found on the Public Access to Electronic Records website at www.pacer.gov.

    MIL Security OSI

  • MIL-OSI: Diginex Limited Announces Relocation of Headquarters to London as Cornerstone for Global Expansion

    Source: GlobeNewswire (MIL-OSI)

    LONDON, Feb. 27, 2025 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) — Diginex Limited (“Diginex Limited” or the “Company”) (Nasdaq: DGNX), an impact technology company specializing in environmental, social, and governance (ESG) issues, today announced that the Company will relocate its corporate headquarters to London, the United Kingdom, as part of its centralizing leadership to execute its strategic growth plans. On February 26, 2025, the Company signed a lease for office space with International Workplace Group for 18 months at 25 Wilton Road, Victoria, London, Greater London, SW1V 1LW, United Kingdom commencing on April 1, 2025, underscoring its commitment to establishing a strong base in one of the world’s leading financial hubs.

    By establishing its headquarters in London, Diginex Limited aims to enhance access to global financial markets, expand business operations, and strengthen opportunities for strategic partnerships and acquisitions in the European market and beyond. The upcoming move follows the Company’s recent cross-listing on the Frankfurt Stock Exchange (Open Market) and the Tradegate Exchange under the symbol “I0Q” as of February 20, 2025, as well as its engagement with German-based investor relations firm, Kirchhoff Consult GmbH.

    Diginex Limited’s Chief Executive Officer, Mark Blick, will relocate to London to lead the Company’s expansion in the region. The Company’s executive leadership team comprises of six senior leaders, including four British executives, one German, and one Swiss. The Company plans to hire additional senior executives in London to further support its growing operations and drive strategic initiatives. This decision strengthens Diginex Limited’s leadership presence in the European market, which has become an increasingly important region for its growth strategy. With this shift, Diginex Limited expects to be better positioned to intensify its focus on mergers and acquisitions across Europe and the United States, allowing key executives to be closer to potential M&A target companies and emerging opportunities.

    “We believe relocating our corporate headquarters to London is a welcome milestone in our strategic plan to grow by acquisition and places key executives closer to the company’s external M&A partners thus encouraging greater efficiency and more fluid decision making,” said Miles Pelham, Chairman of Diginex Limited. “This move strengthens our ability to engage with global investors, expand our leadership team, and accelerate future growth. With sustainability and regulatory frameworks playing a growing role in corporate governance, the relocation makes it easier to engage directly with organizations operating under the ISSB (International Sustainability Standards Board) and the CSRD (Corporate Sustainability Reporting Directive) frameworks.”

    As Diginex Limited continues its expansion, the Company remains dedicated to driving innovation in ESG solutions, supporting businesses in navigating regulatory landscapes, and delivering value to global clients across Europe, North America and Asia. 

    About Diginex Limited

    Diginex Limited is a Cayman Islands exempted company, with subsidiaries located in Hong Kong, the United Kingdom and the United States of America. Diginex Limited conducts operations through its wholly owned subsidiary Diginex Solutions (HK) Limited, a Hong Kong corporation (“DSL”) and DSL is the sole owner of (i) Diginex Services Limited, a corporation formed in the United Kingdom and (ii) Diginex USA LLC, a limited liability company formed in the State of Delaware. DSL commenced operations in 2020, and is a software company that empowers businesses and governments to streamline ESG, climate, and supply chain data collection and reporting. DSL is an impact technology business that helps organizations address the some of the most pressing ESG, climate and sustainability issues, utilizing blockchain, machine learning and data analysis technology to lead change and increase transparency in corporate social responsibility and climate action.

    Diginex’s products and services solutions enable companies to collect, evaluate and share sustainability data through easy-to-use software. For more information, please visit the Company’s website: https://www.diginex.com/.

    Forward-Looking Statements

    Certain statements in this announcement are forward-looking statements. These forward-looking statements involve known and unknown risks and uncertainties and are based on the Company’s current expectations and projections about future events that the Company believes may affect its financial condition, results of operations, business strategy and financial needs. Investors can identify these forward-looking statements by words or phrases such as “approximates,” “believes,” “hopes,” “expects,” “anticipates,” “estimates,” “projects,” “intends,” “plans,” “will,” “would,” “should,” “could,” “may” or other similar expressions. The Company undertakes no obligation to update or revise publicly any forward-looking statements to reflect subsequent occurring events or circumstances, or changes in its expectations, except as may be required by law. Although the Company believes that the expectations expressed in these forward-looking statements are reasonable, it cannot assure you that such expectations will turn out to be correct, and the Company cautions investors that actual results may differ materially from the anticipated results and encourages investors to review other factors that may affect its future results in the Company’s filings with the SEC.

    For investor and media inquiries, please contact:

    Diginex
    Investor Relations
    Email:ir@diginex.com

    European IR Contact
    Jens Hecht
    Phone: +49.40.609186.82
    Email:jens.hecht@kirchhoff.de

    US IR Contact
    Jackson Lin
    Lambert by LLYC
    Phone: +1 (646) 717-4593
    Email: jian.lin@llyc.global

    The MIL Network

  • MIL-OSI Europe: The Office of the Attorney General of Switzerland closes its investigation into Morgan Stanley (Switzerland) GmbH with a summary penalty order

    Source: Switzerland – Federal Administration in English

    By means of a summary penalty order dated 27 February 2025, the Office of the Attorney General (OAG) finds that Morgan Stanley (Switzerland) GmbH, respectively its predecessor Bank Morgan Stanley (Switzerland) AG, did not take all necessary and reasonable organisational measures when conducting its business activity to prevent one of its client advisors from committing qualified money laundering in the year 2010 involving assets that originally stemmed from acts of bribery in Greece. With the present summary penalty order, the OAG orders Morgan Stanley (Switzerland) GmbH to pay a fine of one million Swiss Francs and brings the matter to a close.

    MIL OSI Europe News

  • MIL-OSI Economics: New administration can create a stronger AI tech export rule

    Source: Microsoft

    Headline: New administration can create a stronger AI tech export rule

    A high-stakes race is underway that will determine which country will supply the technology that powers the world’s emerging AI economy. Vice President Vance got it right at the recent AI Summit in Paris, emphasizing the need to focus on AI opportunities, pursue lighter regulations, and prioritize bringing American AI to the world. However, a last-minute Biden administration regulation, if left unchanged, risks undermining America’s ability to succeed.  

    The Biden administration’s interim final AI Diffusion Rule caps the export of essential American AI components to many fast-growing and strategically vital markets. As drafted, the rule undermines two Trump administration priorities: strengthening U.S. AI leadership and reducing the nation’s near trillion-dollar trade deficit. Left unchanged, the Biden rule will give China a strategic advantage in spreading over time its own AI technology, echoing its rapid ascent in 5G telecommunications a decade ago.    

    As a company, we support the need to protect national security by preventing adversaries from acquiring advanced AI technology. And there are important elements in the rule that should be retained. For example, the rule’s qualitative provisions would ensure that AI technology components are deployed in certified, secure, and trusted datacenters. This avoids shipments of advanced chips to entities that do not meet these standards and thereby helps reduce the risk of chip diversion to China. Similarly, the rule rightly imposes strict requirements on these trusted datacenter operators to protect against chip diversion and to ensure that advanced AI services cannot be used by adversaries.  

    There is an important opportunity to further strengthen these provisions, including by ensuring the Commerce Department has the resources it will need to put the Rule into effect. This can help both expedite approval processes for companies and strengthen enforcement, including against unlawful chip diversion. 

    But a significant problem remains. Namely, the Biden rule goes beyond what’s needed. It puts many important U.S. allies and partners in a Tier Two category and imposes quantitative limits on the ability of American tech companies to build and expand AI datacenters in their countries. This includes many American friends, such as Switzerland, Poland, Greece, Singapore, India, Indonesia, Israel, the UAE, and Saudi Arabia. These are countries where we and many other American companies have significant datacenter operations.  

    This Tier Two status is undermining one of the essential requirements needed for a business to succeed—namely, confidence by our customers that they will be able to buy from us the AI computing capacity that they will need in the future. Customers in Tier Two countries now worry that an insufficient supply of critical American AI technology will restrict their opportunities for economic growth.  

    The unintended consequence of this approach is to encourage Tier Two countries to look elsewhere for AI infrastructure and services. And it’s obvious where they will be forced to turn. If left unchanged, the Diffusion Rule will become a gift to China’s rapidly expanding AI sector.  

    All this comes at precisely the time when the American tech sector wants to invest in AI computing capacity at an unprecedented level. Our own company’s plans are illustrative. This year alone, Microsoft will spend $80 billion to build AI infrastructure around the world, with more than half of this total on U.S. soil. As this reflects, the solid majority of our computing power will remain in the United States.   

    But our ability to continue growing and investing at this level, including in the United States, depends in important part on exporting our technology services. This requires building AI infrastructure in other countries, so AI services can be accessed and used with low latency by local enterprises and consumers. Ironically, the Diffusion Rule discourages what should be regarded as an American economic opportunity—the export of world-leading chips and technology services. 

    The potentially negative impact on American economic growth doesn’t stop there. As the tech sector invests billions of dollars to build datacenters around the world, we are developing global supply chains that combine international and American suppliers of more traditional manufactured goods. I saw this first-hand when I was in Warsaw last week to announce with Prime Minister Donald Tusk a $700 million expansion of Microsoft’s datacenter infrastructure in Poland. Among the beneficiaries are American workers manufacturing advanced electrical generators in Lafayette, Indiana, so they can be shipped to Poland. 

    The irony could not be clearer. At the very moment when the Trump administration is pressing Europe to buy more American goods, the Biden Diffusion Rule leaves the leaders of partners like Poland asking why they have been relegated to Tier Two status and an uncertain ability to buy more American AI chips in the future. 

    This puts the opportunity for the Trump administration in bold relief. It can take an overly complex rule that requires 41 pages in the Federal Register and right-size it. Make it simpler. Stop relegating American friends and allies into a second tier that undermines their confidence in ongoing access to American products. Eliminate the quantitative caps that would interfere with a well-functioning economic market. And keep what matters most, such as the qualitative security standards and AI use restrictions that protect national security. 

    We need to recognize the obvious. America’s AI race with China begins at home. It’s founded on the ability of innovative American firms to bring manufactured goods and technology services to like-minded countries around the world. We’re prepared to invest. What we need now is an AI diffusion rule that gives us the ability to do so. 

    Tags: AI diffusion rule, AI economy, supply chains

    MIL OSI Economics

  • MIL-OSI Security: Conditions imposed on weekly protest in Swiss Cottage

    Source: United Kingdom London Metropolitan Police

    The Met has confirmed conditions have been imposed on a long-running protest in Swiss Cottage.

    The static protest in Finchley Road, at the junction of Eton Avenue, has been taking place on a weekly basis on Friday’s since October 2023.

    From Friday, 28 February the protest, organised by the International Jewish Anti-Zionist Network (IJAN), must take place within a designated area in Kings Cross.

    The decision to impose these conditions has been made with a view to minimising serious disruption to the community in the Swiss Cottage area.

    Superintendent Jack Rowlands, who is responsible for the policing operation across Camden and Islington, said:

    “Our role is to ensure all those exercising their right to protest can do so without incident and without causing serious disruption to the lives of the wider community.

    “We have imposed conditions under the Public Order Act on when and where this protest can take place. I would ask anyone attending to make themselves aware of these conditions as to breach them, or to incite others to do so, is a criminal offence.”

    The conditions state:

    – Any person participating in the IJAN protest must remain in the area shaded on the attached map outside Kings Cross Station, Euston Road, London, on the pavement between the bus stop and pedestrian crossing.

    – The assembly must finish by 19:30hrs.

    Officers will be in attendance and we would encourage people to speak to them if they have concerns. They are there to ensure everyone is kept safe.

    If you want to report anything suspicious you can call 101 or 999 in an emergency.

    MIL Security OSI

  • MIL-OSI: 21Shares AG (the “Company”) – Announcement: Filing of Amendment Request regarding Exchange Traded Products entered the Official List of the FCA and admitted to LSE

    Source: GlobeNewswire (MIL-OSI)

    This Announcement relates to the following Exchange Traded Products entered the Official List of the FCA and admitted to the London Stock Exchange:

    ETP: 21Shares Bitcoin ETP
    ISIN: CH0454664001
    TIDM: ABTC / BTCU

    ETP: 21Shares Ethereum Staking ETP
    ISIN: CH0454664027
    TIDM: AETH / ETHU

    ETP: 21Shares Bitcoin Core ETP
    ISIN: CH1199067674
    TIDM: CBTC / CBTU

    ETP: 21Shares Ethereum Core Staking ETP
    ISIN: CH1209763130
    TIDM: ETHC/ CETU

    (hereinafter referred to as the “Products” and each a “Product”)

    Name, registered office and address of the Company: 21Shares AG is a stock corporation under the laws of Switzerland. It has its registered office and address at Pelikanstrasse 37, 8001 Zurich.

    With respect to each Product, during the period between 24 May 2024 and the dates specified in the table below for each Product (see column “Dates” in the table below), the following total number of outstanding Products presented in the table below have been recorded in the Official List of the FCA and admitted to trading on the London Stock Exchange. Those total numbers of Products that were incorrectly filed and listed into the Official list of the FCA by the Company are set out in column “Incorrectly Disclosed/Filed Total Numbers” in the table below.

    Further to the Company’s previous announcement dated 25 February 2025, in order to correct the incorrectly disclosed/filed total number of outstanding Products listed into the Official list of the FCA, the Company has submitted a formal amendment request to the FCA to rectify them and specify the correct number of such total number of outstanding Products, as recorded in the Official List of the FCA and admitted to trading on the London Stock Exchange (see column “Actual/Corrected Total Numbers” in the table below).

    The Company hereby informs the public of the revised total number of outstanding number of its Products (and the corresponding number of tranches of each such Product) listed into the Official list of the FCA and admitted to trading on the London Stock Exchange as of the dates specified below:

    ISIN Products Dates Incorrectly Disclosed/Filed Total Numbers Actual/Corrected Total Numbers Actual number of tranches of Products that are listed into the Official list of the FCA and admitted to trading on the London Stock Exchange
    CH0454664001 21Shares Bitcoin ETP 28.05.2024 – 15.01.2025 1’165’472’500 26’152’500 39
    CH0454664027 21Shares Ethereum Staking ETP 28.05.2024 – 14.01.2025 491’947’500 12’325’000 37
    CH1199067674 21Shares Bitcoin Core ETP 28.05.2024 – 15.01.2025 361’110’000 13’155’000 40
    CH1209763130 21Shares Ethereum Core Staking ETP 28.05.2024 – 09.12.2024 38’820’000 2’510’000 20

    Contact Details:
    21Shares AG, attn. Mr. Eric Baumgartner, Pelikanstrasse 37, 8001 Zurich, Switzerland, email: legal@21.co

    Further Information:
    For further information, please refer to the Programme and UK Base Prospectus dated May 22, 2024, and the respective Final Terms. This Announcement neither constitutes a prospectus nor advertisement within the meaning of the Swiss Financial Services Act. Copies of the prospectus and any supplements thereto, if any, as well as copies of all transaction documents are available free of charge at 21Shares AG, Zurich (email: etp@21shares.com).

    * * *
    This document is not an offer to sell or a solicitation of an offer to buy or subscribe for securities of 21Shares AG.
    This document and the information contained herein is not for publication or distribution into the United States of America and should not be distributed or otherwise transmitted into the United States or to U.S. persons (as defined in the U.S. Securities Act of 1933, as amended (the “Securities Act) or publications with a general circulation in the United States. This document does not constitute an offer or invitation to subscribe for or to purchase any securities in the United States of America. The securities referred to herein have not been and will not be registered under the Securities Act or the laws of any state and may not be offered or sold in the United States of America absent registration or an exemption from registration under Securities Act. There will be no public offering of the securities in the United States of America.

    The products are exchange traded products, which do not qualify as units of a collective investment scheme according to the relevant provisions of the Swiss Federal Act on Collective Investment Schemes (CISA), as amended, and are not licensed thereunder. Therefore, the products are neither governed by the CISA nor supervised or approved by the Swiss Financial Market Supervisory Authority FINMA (FINMA). Accordingly, Investors do not have the benefit of the specific investor protection provided under the CIS

    The MIL Network

  • MIL-OSI: Correction: Virtune announces a change of ETP calculation agent for all ETPs

    Source: GlobeNewswire (MIL-OSI)

    Stockholm, February 27, 2025 – Virtune announces that as of March 3, 2025, the ETP Calculation Agent for Virtune’s ETPs will change to ETFBook. The ETP Calculation Agent is responsible for calculating and distributing PCFs (Portfolio Composition Files) to counterparties as a third party in relation to Virtune.

    Notification of Service Provider Change within Virtune’s ETP Program

    Virtune announces a change of ETP Calculation Agent to ETFBook for all Virtune’s ETPs, which will be reflected in the updated final terms, available as of March 3, 2025. This change aims to optimize and streamline the process of PCF calculations and their further distribution.

    Please note that this change does not affect investors or the trading of Virtune’s ETPs, and no action is required from investors.

    Change:

    • New ETP Calculation Agent: SquaredData GmbH, owner of the ETFBook brand.
    • Address: Weissenrainstrasse 28, 8707 Uetikon am See, Zurich, Switzerland.

    This change applies to all Virtune’s ETPs, which include the following:

    • Virtune Bitcoin ETP (ISIN: SE0020845709)
    • Virtune Staked Ethereum ETP (ISIN: SE0020541639)
    • Virtune Staked Solana (ISIN: SE0021309754)
    • Virtune Staked Polkadot ETP (ISIN: SE0021148129)
    • Virtune XRP ETP (ISIN: SE0021486156)
    • Virtune Avalanche ETP (ISIN: SE0022050092)
    • Virtune Chainlink ETP (ISIN: SE0021149259)
    • Virtune Arbitrum ETP (ISIN: SE0021310133)
    • Virtune Staked Polygon ETP (ISIN: SE0021630217)
    • Virtune Staked Cardano ETP (ISIN: SE0021630449)
    • Virtune Crypto Altcoin Index ETP (ISIN: SE0023260716)
    • Virtune Crypto Top 10 Index ETP SEK (ISIN: SE0020052207)
    • Virtune Crypto Top 10 Index ETP EUR (ISIN: SE0020052215)

    Press contact

    Christopher Kock, VD Virtune AB (Publ)
    Christopher@virtune.com
    +46 70 073 45 64

    Virtune with its headquarters in Stockholm is a regulated Swedish digital asset manager and issuer of crypto exchange traded products on regulated European exchanges. With regulatory compliance, strategic collaborations with industry leaders and our proficient team, we empower investors on a global level to access innovative and sophisticated investment products that are aligned with the evolving landscape of the global crypto market.

    Cryptocurrency investments are associated with high risk. Virtune does not provide investment advice. Investments are made at your own risk. Securities may increase or decrease in value, and there is no guarantee that you will recover your invested capital. Please read the prospectus, KID, terms at www.virtune.com.

    Attachment

    The MIL Network

  • MIL-OSI Global: Brutalism – the architectural style that dared to summon a new world from the ashes of World War II

    Source: The Conversation – USA – By Michael Allen, Visiting Assistant Professor of History, West Virginia University

    Boston City Hall, which was completed in 1968, is considered a classic example of Brutalist architecture. Yunghi Kim/The Boston Globe via Getty Images

    Some viewers of “The Brutalist” are probably getting their first taste of Brutalism, the architectural style that gives the film its name.

    The film, which has been nominated for 10 Academy Awards, centers on the efforts of fictional protagonist László Tóth to realize a mammoth, bunkerlike, concrete structure that will house a community center in Pennsylvania.

    A survivor of the Holocaust, Tóth insists on the building’s overwhelming scale, starkly unadorned concrete surfaces and labyrinthine interior in order to create an architectural version of the designer’s own shattered, traumatized inner world. The near-maniacal drive to finish the work becomes an intensely personal project of overcoming his trauma.

    Yet “The Brutalist” doesn’t relay much about Brutalist architecture beyond its reflexive relationship to Tóth. Drawings and photographs of real-life Brutalist buildings appear in several scenes as glimpses into Tóth’s originality and style. But the structures come across as the progeny of one architect’s ego, while the philosophy behind Brutalism remains unexplained.

    The actual story of Brutalism is so much more.

    What you see is what you get

    In my research, I’ve explored how architecture can embody values such as the common good and the human struggle for well-being. Specifically, my work explores how architecture after World War II presented a vision of a new world, one that could overcome decades of violence, exploitation and oppression.

    Brutalism, which flourished from the 1950s until around 1980, is one style that has taught me a lot.

    Brutalist buildings emphasize form using assemblies of monumental geometric shapes. While some critics find Brutalism’s heavy look and utilitarian use of materials like concrete, brick and glass harsh – even ugly – there is a beautiful intent behind them.

    Historian and critic Reyner Banham articulated Brutalism’s core ideas in a 1955 review of Peter and Alison Smith’s Hunstanton School, which was completed in 1954 in Norfolk, United Kingdom.

    Banham latched onto the French term “beton brut” – “bare concrete” – to christen the emergent style. The architects at the forefront of what Banham termed “New Brutalism” were actually thwarting the overly theorized, self-referential modernism of the times. Their buildings, he explained, exhibited three simple traits: an easily visible interior plan, direct expression of structure, and building materials that were valued for their own traits.

    In “The Brutalist,” Tóth’s insistence on plain concrete, as well as Cararra marble for the community center’s altar, captures the core of the philosophy. The materials used for Brutalist structures are not chosen as mere cladding, but as components that are essential to the building’s design. Their presence is an endorsement of their utility and beauty.

    Some Brutalist buildings, such as the Hunstanton School, are made of brick instead of concrete. Others use stone. The goal is honest expression, not in-your-face experimentation.

    Monuments to the masses

    Beyond the devotion to the materials, plan and form of buildings, Brutalism often signified a devotion to social change.

    Brutalism sought to upend preexisting social hierarchies and divisions. Its staggering forms made monuments out of ordinary places frequented by ordinary people: homes, schools, libraries.

    In the U.S., public colleges and universities erected Brutalist structures to celebrate the expansion of higher education to the masses, thanks to the GI Bill. In a project led by Walter Netsch, the University of Illinois-Chicago wove together its buildings with concrete walkways leading to a central, outdoor amphitheater. Harry Weese’s Forest Park Community College in St. Louis consisted of long, monumental brick blocks that made the junior college appear as a temple.

    Chicago-born architect Walter Netsch made an outdoor amphitheater the beating heart of the University of Illinois-Chicago’s campus.
    ArchEyes

    Well-known, if not always well-loved, public buildings such as Boston City Hall, which was built in 1968, expressed faith in modern democracy, giving the majestic government buildings of the past a new look to signify a modern egalitarianism.

    Other projects emphasized the triumphs of the Civil Rights Movement. The Neigh Dormitory at Mary Holmes College in West Point, Mississippi, was completed in 1970 by the firm of Black architect J. Max Bond Jr. Architectural historian Brian Goldstein described it as “modernism as liberation.”

    Despite Brutalism’s social optimism, it is not without detractors. In 2014, Northwestern University demolished Bertrand Goldberg’s Prentice Women’s Hospital in Chicago despite pleas from preservationists. According to the university, the concrete construction made the building impossible to adapt for new laboratory space.

    In Goshen, New York, county officials long viewed Paul Rudolph’s Orange County Government Center as an ugly and unpleasant seat of government, and almost succeeded in having it demolished. The building has since been remodeled to cloak the Brutalist design.

    New buildings for a new world

    In the U.K., cities faced damages from Nazi bombing during World War II as well as long-deferred upgrades to public housing. Brutalism was a key part of postwar housing recovery and expansion efforts.

    Perhaps the most iconic Brutalist structure in the U.K. is Erno Goldfinger’s 31-story Trellick Tower, a frequent setting for film and music videos.

    That same year, Alison and Peter Smithson unveiled their massive apartment complex, Robin Hood Gardens, in London. With its hulking concrete forms and “streets in the sky” – wide, outdoor decks on each story that were meant to mimic street life and facilitate contact with neighbors – the project demonstrated that working-class people could not only have modern apartments, but also live in new ways. London’s massive, middle-class Barbican Estate, completed in 1982, created a small city within the city, replete with plazas, a waterway and iconic concrete and brick buildings.

    London’s Robin Hood Gardens was famously built with ‘streets in the sky.’
    Matthew Lloyd/PA Images via Getty Images

    Other European Brutalist works directly confront the horrors of World War II.

    The Swiss-French architect and artist known as Le Corbusier built the Convent at Sainte Marie de La Tourette in France in the 1950s with concrete shapes resembling cannons and machine-gun barrels in its walls.

    In Paris, Georges-Henri Pingusson’s Memorial to the Martyrs of Deportation, built in 1962, commemorates the lives of 200,000 victims of the Holocaust through an assemblage of stark, monolithic concrete forms.

    While the Soviet Union’s 1950s and 1960s prefabricated concrete panel housing estates built under Premier Nikita Khruschev embody the Brutalist devotion to cost efficiency and social problem-solving, projects in the former Yugoslavia show how Brutalism could symbolize the rebirth of a people. Housing projects and commercial blocks in New Belgrade forged a new architecture for a new nation – and, in a sense, a new nationality.

    And on the site of the Jasenovac concentration camp in Croatia, run by a Nazi puppet regime, architect Bogdan Bogdanović crafted perhaps the most optimistic acknowledgment of the will to overcome the 20th century’s darkest hours.

    Where slave labor once made bricks, and thousands lost their lives, the designer crafted a massive concrete monument, completed in 1969. The stark form suggests a flower emerging from tortured soil but set upon thriving anyway.

    To me, monuments like Bogdanović’s show how Brutalism is the perfect style to convey the earnest hope that a new world is possible.

    Bogdan Bogdanović’s memorial honors the people killed at the Jasenovac concentration camp in Croatia.
    Stringer/AFP via Getty Images

    Michael Allen is an Advisor to the National Trust for Historic Preservation.

    ref. Brutalism – the architectural style that dared to summon a new world from the ashes of World War II – https://theconversation.com/brutalism-the-architectural-style-that-dared-to-summon-a-new-world-from-the-ashes-of-world-war-ii-248957

    MIL OSI – Global Reports

  • MIL-OSI United Kingdom: Human Rights in Russia and the deaths of Alexei Navalny and Boris Nemtsov: Joint Statement to the OSCE, February 2025

    Source: United Kingdom – Executive Government & Departments

    Speech

    Human Rights in Russia and the deaths of Alexei Navalny and Boris Nemtsov: Joint Statement to the OSCE, February 2025

    UK and others commemorate Alexei Navalny and Boris Nemtsov and call on Russia to release political prisoners immediately and unconditionally.

    Thank you  Mr Chair.  I am making this statement on behalf of Albania, Canada, Iceland, Liechtenstein, Norway, Switzerland, Ukraine and my own country the United Kingdom.   

    Following the anniversary of Alexei Navalny’s death, which followed years of arbitrary detention in poor conditions, we extend our condolences to his family and reiterate that the ultimate responsibility for his death lies with the Russian authorities. Today we also commemorate Boris Nemtsov, ten years after his brutal murder.   

    We regret that Russia’s dire human rights record continues to deteriorate. The Russian government crushes peaceful dissent, maintains a climate of fear and undermines the rule of law. This stands in direct contradiction to shared OSCE principles and commitments on inter alia the right to a fair trial, freedom from arbitrary detention, the right to freedom of assembly and association and the prohibition on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment.  

    As we reflect on Navalny and Nemtsov’s enduring legacy, our countries continue to stand with civil society and human rights defenders working tirelessly to build a better future for Russia in the face of immense personal risk. 

    In July 2022, 38 participating States invoked the Moscow Mechanism on threats to the fulfilment of the provisions of the Human Dimension posed by human rights violations and abuses in the Russian Federation.  That Moscow Mechanism report determined that:  “a decade of reform legislation in Russia has completely changed the scope of action of Russian civil society, cutting it off from foreign and international partners, suppressing independent initiatives, stifling critical attitudes towards the authorities, silencing the media and suppressing political opposition”.  

    Such internal clampdowns on human rights and fundamental freedoms helped the Russian Federation prepare the ground for its war of aggression against Ukraine. Since February 2022 the Russian authorities have further tightened internal repression in an apparent attempt to silence all opposition voices.  There are now over 800 political prisoners in Russia, including many imprisoned for speaking out against Russia’s illegal invasion of Ukraine and the brutality shown towards the Ukrainian people.  

    In this context we regret Russia’s lack of response to the Vienna Mechanism of March 2024 on treatment of prisoners.   We also recall the 11 October 2024 report by the UN Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights in the Russian Federation which inter alia examined the widespread and systematic use of torture and ill treatment in the Russian Federation.  

    We reiterate our call to the Russian authorities to immediately and unconditionally release all political opposition activists, human rights defenders, journalists and other media actors.   

    We will continue to hold Russia to account against its international obligations and commitments on human rights and fundamental freedoms, including OSCE principles and commitments to which it signed up willingly. 

    For as we all agreed in Moscow in 1990, respect for human rights, fundamental freedoms, democracy and the rule of law constitutes one of the foundations of the international order.  And as we also agreed in Moscow, commitments undertaken in the field of the human dimension are matters of direct and legitimate concern to all participating States and do not belong exclusively to the internal affairs of the State concerned.  

    Thank you, Mr Chair.

    Updates to this page

    Published 27 February 2025

    MIL OSI United Kingdom

  • MIL-OSI Europe: Half of students in higher education took online courses in 2024

    Source: Switzerland – Department of Foreign Affairs in English

    In 2024, 53% of students in higher education took online courses. Last year, students spent less time studying (‒2.1 hours per week on average) and more time in paid employment (+0.7 hours) than in 2020. In 2024, more students worked upwards of 40% of full-time equivalent hours. These are the initial results of the 2024 Survey on the Social and Economic Conditions of Student Life carried out by the Federal Statistical Office (FSO).

    MIL OSI Europe News

  • MIL-OSI Europe: Gross domestic product in the fourth quarter of 2024: Swiss economy shows solid growth

    Source: Switzerland – Department of Foreign Affairs in English

    In the fourth quarter of 2024, Switzerland’s GDP adjusted for sporting events grew by 0.5%, following 0.2% in the previous quarter. [1][2], Growth was driven roughly equally by industry and the services sector. On the expenditure side, both consumption and investment provided a positive impulse.

    MIL OSI Europe News

  • MIL-OSI Europe: Successful European battery project: From raw material to an (almost) finished car battery

    Source: Switzerland – Department of Foreign Affairs in English

    In a four-year EU project led by Empa, eleven collaborators from research and industry succeeded in significantly improving batteries for electric cars. One of the main objectives of the project was to scale up the new materials and technologies so that they can be brought to market as fast as possible.

    MIL OSI Europe News

  • MIL-OSI: Virtune announces a change of ETP calculation agent for all ETPs

    Source: GlobeNewswire (MIL-OSI)

    Stockholm, February 27, 2025 – Virtune announces that as of March 3, 2025, the ETP Calculation Agent for Virtune’s ETPs will change from Ultumus to ETFBook. The ETP Calculation Agent is responsible for calculating and distributing PCFs (Portfolio Composition Files) to counterparties as a third party in relation to Virtune.

    Notification of Service Provider Change within Virtune’s ETP Program

    Virtune announces a change of ETP Calculation Agent from Ultumus to ETFBook for all Virtune’s ETPs, which will be reflected in the updated final terms, available as of March 3, 2025. This change aims to optimize and streamline the process of PCF calculations and their further distribution.

    Please note that this change does not affect investors or the trading of Virtune’s ETPs, and no action is required from investors.

    Change:

    • Previous ETP Calculation Agent: Ultumus LTD.
    • New ETP Calculation Agent: SquaredData GmbH, owner of the ETFBook brand.
    • Address: Weissenrainstrasse 28, 8707 Uetikon am See, Zurich, Switzerland.

    This change applies to all Virtune’s ETPs, which include the following:

    • Virtune Bitcoin ETP (ISIN: SE0020845709)
    • Virtune Staked Ethereum ETP (ISIN: SE0020541639)
    • Virtune Staked Solana (ISIN: SE0021309754)
    • Virtune Staked Polkadot ETP (ISIN: SE0021148129)
    • Virtune XRP ETP (ISIN: SE0021486156)
    • Virtune Avalanche ETP (ISIN: SE0022050092)
    • Virtune Chainlink ETP (ISIN: SE0021149259)
    • Virtune Arbitrum ETP (ISIN: SE0021310133)
    • Virtune Staked Polygon ETP (ISIN: SE0021630217)
    • Virtune Staked Cardano ETP (ISIN: SE0021630449)
    • Virtune Crypto Altcoin Index ETP (ISIN: SE0023260716)
    • Virtune Crypto Top 10 Index ETP SEK (ISIN: SE0020052207)
    • Virtune Crypto Top 10 Index ETP EUR (ISIN: SE0020052215)

    Press contact

    Christopher Kock, VD Virtune AB (Publ)
    Christopher@virtune.com
    +46 70 073 45 64

    Virtune with its headquarters in Stockholm is a regulated Swedish digital asset manager and issuer of crypto exchange traded products on regulated European exchanges. With regulatory compliance, strategic collaborations with industry leaders and our proficient team, we empower investors on a global level to access innovative and sophisticated investment products that are aligned with the evolving landscape of the global crypto market.

    Cryptocurrency investments are associated with high risk. Virtune does not provide investment advice. Investments are made at your own risk. Securities may increase or decrease in value, and there is no guarantee that you will recover your invested capital. Please read the prospectus, KID, terms at www.virtune.com.

    Attachment

    The MIL Network

  • MIL-OSI United Nations: 26 February 2025 Departmental update WHO unveils updated global database of air quality standards

    Source: World Health Organisation

    The World Health Organization (WHO), in collaboration with the Swiss Tropical and Public Health Institute (Swiss TPH), has unveiled the updated 2025 Air Quality Standards database. This resource compiles national air quality standards for major pollutants and other airborne toxics from countries worldwide. This latest update provides an overview of global efforts towards achieving the WHO global air quality guidelines, with 17% more countries now implementing standards for pollutants that pose a risk to human health.

    “The updated WHO Air Quality Standards database is a crucial tool highlighting global progress in setting air quality regulations to protect public health,” says Dr Maria Neira, Director, Environment, Climate Change and Health at the World Health Organization. “It provides essential data for evidence based policymaking, helping to reduce air pollutions impacts on communities worldwide.”

    Building on previous efforts, the updated database now includes data from approximately 140 countries from all WHO regions, showcasing their air pollution regulatory efforts aimed at protecting public health.

    The database is presented as an interactive tool, providing values for both the short and long-term standards for particulate matter (PM10 and PM2.5), nitrogen dioxide (NO2), sulfur dioxide (SO2), ozone (O3) and carbon monoxide (CO). These values are based on averaging times that align with WHO’s global air quality guidelines.

    WHO air quality guidelines as a tool to protect health

    The WHO guidelines were published in 2021 to reflect new evidence of the health effects of air pollution. The guidelines recommend lower air quality levels to protect populations, underscoring the need for countries to implement stricter standards and policies to mitigate air pollution and its associated health risks.

    The health sector has a critical role to play to promote public health protection through effective air quality governance. Involving the health community in the development of national air quality standards as well as in processes ensuring that air quality standards are embedded in legislation is key to maximize public health protection.

    Adopting air quality standards as best buys to prevent noncommunicable diseases

    Environmental risks account for a quarter of the disease burden worldwide – with air pollution alone being responsible for almost 7 million deaths. Many of these deaths are preventable through policies in the energy, transport, agriculture, household, industry and other sectors. Air pollution has been recognized as a major risk for noncommunicable diseases (NCDs), impacting not only the respiratory and cardiovascular systems, but many more other organs and systems.

    The costs of air pollution on the health systems are substantial, and it jeopardizes the health of the most vulnerable such as children, who are affected throughout their entire life course, as well as people with pre-existing diseases.

    By compiling national air quality standards into a single, comprehensive database, WHO aims to empower stakeholders such policy makers, public health officials, researchers and other civil society and health organizations with the information necessary to monitor progress, drive policy changes and support the implementation of effective interventions to improve air quality and safeguard public health.

    Time to commit for clean air and health

    Adopting stricter air quality standards embedded in legislation is the first step – a required best buy – countries can do to commit to combat NCDs and other health outcomes. The upcoming 2nd WHO Conference on Air Pollution and Health will provide an opportunity for countries to commit to tackling air pollution, supported by the health community call for clean air action.

    MIL OSI United Nations News

  • MIL-OSI Economics: Development Asia: Enhancing Vaccine Regulation for Pandemic Preparedness

    Source: Asia Development Bank

    Strengthening regulatory frameworks is critical in ensuring that vaccines are quickly approved and distributed. Using a systematic approach, gaps in key areas of the regulatory system can be identified, prioritized, and effectively addressed through regulatory capacity building and education of regulatory professionals.

    The World Health Organization Global Benchmarking Tool was developed to evaluate regulatory systems objectively and systematically, identify strengths and areas for improvement, guide interventions, and monitor progress in strengthening the regulatory system. Consistent and regular training of national regulators can also complement regulatory systems strengthening efforts by focusing on the identified gaps.

    The diverse and fragmented regulatory environment in Asia and the Pacific calls for regulatory convergence[1] and cooperation to facilitate timely and equitable access in the region. Stable, well-functioning national regulatory authorities in the region listed as WHO Maturity Level 3 and 4 and WHO Listed Authorities, such as those in the People’s Republic of China, India, Indonesia, Republic of Korea, Singapore, Thailand, and Viet Nam, could foster regional regulatory cooperation and serve as reference agencies for lower-resourced regulatory agencies.

    Such cooperation could be facilitated by formalized processes and relationships such as memoranda of understanding. For example, Singapore’s Health Sciences Authority has adopted a confidence-based regulatory approach that leverages the decisions of established and trusted regulatory agencies through formal recognition mechanisms and has expedited reviews without compromising the robustness of regulatory decisions. This has reduced approval timelines to 90 working days from 270 working days for the Health Sciences Authority’s full evaluation route under its verification evaluation system.

    Confidence-based approaches can be adopted in various stages of the vaccine life cycle. The ASEAN Mutual Recognition Arrangement on Good Manufacturing Practice Inspection enables member states to leverage on the regulatory inspections performed by other member states. It is legally binding for member states to recognize one another’s good manufacturing practice certificates, benchmarked against the international Pharmaceutical Inspection Cooperation Scheme.

    Regulatory cooperation can range from legally-binding mechanisms in the form of mutual recognition agreements and reliance mechanisms to other forms of cooperation such as joint collaborative assessments, report sharing and work sharing. Work sharing can promote mutual learning and the sharing of best practices among participating national regulatory authorities and can encourage regulatory convergence. For industry, the work-sharing model can be commercially attractive, providing simultaneous access to multiple countries and shorten timelines with the consolidation of questions.

    While cooperation on vaccine regulation is still nascent, there are other examples of regulatory cooperative mechanisms. Work sharing is practiced by Access Consortium, comprising the national regulatory authorities of Australia, Canada, Singapore, Switzerland and the United Kingdom. A similar coalition is the Opening Procedures at EMA to Non-EU authorities (OPEN) initiative, led by the EMA, which partners Australia, Brazil, Canada, Japan, Switzerland and WHO in joint assessments. In Asia and the Pacific, the Indo-Pacific Regulatory Strengthening Program, comprising Cambodia, Indonesia, Laos, Myanmar, Papua New Guinea, Thailand, and Viet Nam, and supported by Australia, successfully expedited approval of the antimalarial tafenoquine in Thailand in 2019 in its joint review.

    While the work-sharing model has its advantages, the following points also need to be considered:

    • Participating national regulatory authorities may have different priority drug lists and approval timelines.
    • Participating national regulatory authorities may have different technical requirements.
    • Lack of clarity in regulatory decisions could impact company filing strategies.

    Convergence of regulatory requirements can further contribute to successful work-sharing collaborations. One way to incentivize the alignment of key regulatory requirements is the creation of a consensus on indicators that measure overall efficiency of the work-sharing pathway, which participating countries can jointly work towards. Regional regulatory convergence efforts include the APEC Action Plan on Vaccination Across the Life-Course, which sets key policy targets to achieve by 2030. Priorities for alignment include post-approval change management, labeling, and packaging.

    MIL OSI Economics

  • MIL-OSI Submissions: Tech and Business – Oracle Services Power IT Modernization in Asia Pacific

    Source: Information Services Group, Inc.

    Enterprises embrace providers with GenAI tools to improve enterprise cloud migrations, optimize Oracle investments, ISG Provider Lens report says.

    A growing number of enterprises in Asia Pacific are seeking Oracle ecosystem services to help them carry out digital transformations to remain competitive in rapidly changing markets, according to a new research report published today by Information Services Group (ISG) (Nasdaq: III), a global AI-centered technology research and advisory firm.

    The 2024 ISG Provider Lens Oracle Cloud and Technology Ecosystem report for Asia Pacific finds many large Oracle customers are modernizing legacy systems, navigating cloud migrations and evaluating hyperscale cloud options. Service providers are helping clients optimize their Oracle investments, often with the use of AI tools, while Oracle is increasingly investing in talent development and collaboration in the region, including partnerships with governments in Singapore, Australia and India for large-scale training programs.

    “Companies in Asia Pacific need digital transformation to stay relevant,” said Michael Gale, partner and regional leader, ISG Asia Pacific. “Oracle and its partners are rising to the challenge by strengthening their expertise and developing talent in the region.”

    Large organizations in manufacturing, retail, financial services, consumer packaged goods and the public sector are increasing their use of Oracle services, the report says. In addition to modernization planning and execution, many seek help addressing regional nuances such as data sovereignty and compliance requirements, especially in India, Singapore, Malaysia, Australia and New Zealand.

    Outdated legacy systems are holding back many organizations in the region, leading to rising demand for both consulting and advisory services to plan modernization initiatives, ISG says. To reach strategic goals and maximize Oracle investments, enterprises seek providers that demonstrate domain expertise and the ability to innovate. Carrying out transitions with minimal disruption and consistent data integrity is a key requirement.

    Companies seeking to maintain Oracle performance and uptime amid cost, compliance and complexity challenges are driving up demand for managed services in Asia Pacific, the report says. Comprehensive services allow clients to optimize resource management, enhance productivity and focus on strategy.

    More enterprises in the region are adopting Oracle Cloud Infrastructure (OCI), often leveraging local data centers and integrating advanced tools, ISG says. A key requirement is the availability of generative AI for process automation and management of multicloud environments. Companies give priority to service providers that offer comprehensive support for Oracle and non-Oracle environments and enhance integration across cloud platforms.

    “Enterprises in Asia Pacific are choosing leading OCI providers with a strong local presence,” said Jan Erik Aase, partner and global leader, ISG Provider Lens Research. “Along with competitive pricing and proven track records in Oracle migrations, this fosters trust.”

    The report also examines other trends affecting Oracle users in Asia Pacific, including enterprises consolidating providers of comprehensive application management services and the impact of OCI’s recently introduced interoperability across AWS, Azure and Google Cloud.

    For more insights into the challenges faced by enterprises using Oracle in Asia Pacific, see the ISG Provider Lens Focal Points briefing here.

    The 2024 ISG Provider Lens Oracle Cloud and Technology Ecosystem report for Asia Pacific evaluates the capabilities of 28 providers across four quadrants: Consulting and Advisory Services, Implementation and Integration Services, Managed Services and OCI Solutions and Capabilities.

    The report names Accenture, Cognizant, Deloitte, HCLTech, Infosys, LTIMindtree, TCS, Tech Mahindra and Wipro as Leaders in all four quadrants. It names PwC as a Leader in three quadrants and KPMG as a Leader in two quadrants. Capgemini is named as a Leader in one quadrant.

    In addition, Capgemini, DXC Technology and Kyndryl are named as Rising Stars — companies with a “promising portfolio” and “high future potential” by ISG’s definition — in one quadrant each.

    In the area of customer experience, Capgemini is named the global ISG CX Star Performer for 2024 among Oracle Cloud and Technology Ecosystem providers. Capgemini earned the highest customer satisfaction scores in ISG’s Voice of the Customer survey, part of the ISG Star of Excellence program, the premier quality recognition for the technology and business services industry.

    The 2024 ISG Provider Lens Oracle Cloud and Technology Ecosystem report for Asia Pacific is available to subscribers or for one-time purchase on this webpage.

    About ISG Provider Lens Research

    The ISG Provider Lens Quadrant research series is the only service provider evaluation of its kind to combine empirical, data-driven research and market analysis with the real-world experience and observations of ISG’s global advisory team. Enterprises will find a wealth of detailed data and market analysis to help guide their selection of appropriate sourcing partners, while ISG advisors use the reports to validate their own market knowledge and make recommendations to ISG’s enterprise clients. The research currently covers providers offering their services globally, across Europe, as well as in the U.S., Canada, Mexico, Brazil, the U.K., France, Benelux, Germany, Switzerland, the Nordics, Australia and Singapore/Malaysia, with additional markets to be added in the future. For more information about ISG Provider Lens research, please visit this webpage.

    About ISG

    ISG (Nasdaq: III) is a global AI-centered technology research and advisory firm. A trusted partner to more than 900 clients, including 75 of the world’s top 100 enterprises, ISG is a long-time leader in technology and business services that is now at the forefront of leveraging AI to help organizations achieve operational excellence and faster growth. The firm, founded in 2006, is known for its proprietary market data, in-depth knowledge of provider ecosystems, and the expertise of its 1,600 professionals worldwide working together to help clients maximize the value of their technology investments.

    MIL OSI – Submitted News

  • MIL-OSI Europe: REPORT on the assessment of the implementation of Horizon Europe in view of its interim evaluation and recommendations for the 10th Research Framework Programme – A10-0021/2025

    Source: European Parliament

    MOTION FOR A EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT RESOLUTION

    on the assessment of the implementation of Horizon Europe in view of its interim evaluation and recommendations for the 10th Research Framework Programme

    (2024/2109(INI))

    The European Parliament,

     having regard to Articles 179 to 188 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU),

     having regard to Regulation (EU, Euratom) 2024/2509 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 23 September 2024 on the financial rules applicable to the general budget of the Union[1],

     having regard to Regulation (EU) 2021/695 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 28 April 2021 establishing Horizon Europe – the Framework Programme for Research and Innovation, laying down its rules for participation and dissemination, and repealing Regulations (EU) No 1290/2013 and (EU) No 1291/2013[2],

     having regard to Council Decision (EU) 2021/764 of 10 May 2021 establishing the Specific Programme implementing Horizon Europe – the Framework Programme for Research and Innovation, and repealing Decision 2013/743/EU[3],

     having regard to Regulation (EU) 2021/819 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 20 May 2021 on the European Institute of Innovation and Technology[4],

     having regard to Decision (EU) 2021/820 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 20 May 2021 on the Strategic Innovation Agenda of the European Institute of Innovation and Technology (EIT) 2021-2027: Boosting the Innovation Talent and Capacity of Europe and repealing Decision No 1312/2013/EU[5],

     having regard to Council Regulation (EU) 2021/2085 of 19 November 2021 establishing the Joint Undertakings under Horizon Europe and repealing Regulations (EC) No 219/2007, (EU) No 557/2014, (EU) No 558/2014, (EU) No 559/2014, (EU) No 560/2014, (EU) No 561/2014 and (EU) No 642/2014[6],

     having regard to Regulation (EU) 2021/697 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 29 April 2021 establishing the European Defence Fund and repealing Regulation (EU) 2018/1092[7],

     having regard to the Commission communication of 30 September 2020 entitled ‘A new ERA for Research and Innovation’ (COM(2020)0628),

    _ having regard to the Commission communication of 22 October 2024 entitled ‘Implementation of the European Research Area (ERA) – Strengthening Europe’s Research and Innovation: The ERA’s Journey and Future Directions’ (COM(2024)0490),

     having regard to the Commission communication of 18 May 2021 on the Global Approach to Research and Innovation Europe’s strategy for international cooperation in a changing world (COM(2021)0252),

     having regard to its resolution of 6 April 2022 on a global approach to research and innovation: Europe’s strategy for international cooperation in a changing world[8],

     having regard to its resolution of 22 November 2022 on the implementation of the European Innovation Council[9],

     having regard to the Commission communication of 19 July 2023 entitled ‘EU Missions two years on: assessment of progress and way forward’ (COM(2023)0457),

     having regard to its resolution of 14 December 2023 on young researchers[10],

     having regard to its resolution of 17 January 2024 with recommendations to the Commission on promotion of the freedom of scientific research in the EU[11],

     having regard to the European Research and Innovation Area Committee Opinion of 26 June 2024 on Guidance for the next Framework Programme for Research & Innovation,

     having regard to the partnership evaluation reports published in 2024 on eight of the nine Knowledge and Innovation Communities, namely EIT Urban Mobility, EIT Climate-KIC, EIT Food, EIT InnoEnergy, EIT Health, EIT Manufacturing, EIT Raw Materials, and EIT Digital,

     having regard to the Report of the CERIS Expert Group of November 2024 entitled ‘Building resilience in the civil security domain based on research and technology’,

     having regard to European Court of Auditors Special Report 09/2022 of September 2022 entitled ‘Climate spending in the 2014-2020 EU budget– Not as high as reported’,

     having regard to the Commission communication of 19 January 2016 entitled ‘On the Response to the Report of the High Level Expert Group on the Ex Post Evaluation of the Seventh Framework Programme’(COM(2016)0005),

     having regard to Enrico Letta’s report of 17 April 2024 entitled ‘Much more than a market’,

     having regard to Mario Draghi’s report of 9 September 2024 entitled ‘The future of European competitiveness’,

     having regard to the report by the Commission Expert Group on the Interim Evaluation of Horizon Europe of 16 October 2024 entitled ‘Align, Act, Accelerate: Research, Technology and Innovation to boost European Competitiveness,

     having regard to Rule 55 of its Rules of Procedure,

     having regard to the report of the Committee on Industry, Research and Energy (A10-0021/2025),

    A. whereas Horizon Europe (HEU) is the EU’s largest centrally managed funding programme and the largest publicly funded research and development (R&D) programme in the world; whereas Parliament initially proposed a budget of EUR 120 billion rather than the EUR 93.4 billion left after the revision of the multiannual financial framework;

    B. whereas investments in R&D are essential for EU competitiveness, societal progress and innovation; whereas the report on the Future of European Competitiveness (the Draghi report) and the report by the Commission Expert Group on the Interim Evaluation of Horizon Europe (the Heitor report) recommended a budget for the 10th Framework Programme for Research and Innovation (FP10) of EUR 200 billion and EUR 220 billion respectively;

    C. whereas the FP must be founded on European values, scientific independence, freedom and excellence, as well as on high European ethical standards and a drive to improve European competitiveness as well as to address societal challenges;

    D. whereas the Draghi report showed that Europe is a world leader in science and innovation with the second highest share of high quality scientific publications and the third highest share of patent applications globally; whereas the Draghi report also concluded that the value chain that goes from research to innovative products that improve citizens’ lives in the EU is less effective compared to the US and China in translating good research into successful businesses providing quality jobs, new products and services to European citizens, as illustrated by the persistent gap between the US and EU in innovation performance, and the closing gap between the EU and China; whereas the Draghi report highlights that Europe lags particularly when it comes to the scaling up of start-ups;

    E. whereas Commissioner Zaharieva, in her hearing with Parliament, committed to fighting for an independent and simplified FP and expressed her support for an increased budget and more expert-driven governance;

    F. whereas the Heitor report outlines that in the first three years of Horizon Europe, 7 474 SMEs (34 % of all participants) were participating in the programme and that more than half of Horizon Europe SMEs are new to EU research, development and innovation programmes; whereas the success rates of SME applications has strongly improved (up to 19.9 % from 12 % in Horizon 2020);

    G. whereas the Letta report proposes the establishment of a ‘fifth freedom’ to encompass research, innovation and education as a new dimension of the single market, as the four original freedoms are fundamentally based on 20th-century theoretical principals;

    H. whereas the Letta report’s ‘freedom to stay’ reiterates the importance of avoiding internal brain drain, and the Heitor report’s ‘Choose Europe’ initiative sets out to foster research careers and turn the current European brain drain into a ‘brain gain’ by 2035;

    General observations on Horizon Europe and Research and Innovation (R&I)

    1 Recalls that we are at a crucial moment for R&I, and that Commission President Ursula von der Leyen stated that Europe needs to put ‘research and innovation at the heart of our economy’ during the presentation to Parliament of her programme for her second term as president of the European Commission in July 2024;

    2. Notes that the Draghi, Letta and Heitor reports consider R&I to be of central importance to achieving European competitiveness and stress the urgent need to act not to fall behind; stresses that a strong commitment is needed to achieve a future framework programme that constitutes a crucial contribution to the competitiveness of Europe and its overall welfare;

    3. Recalls that the Draghi and the Heitor reports are a wake-up call for Europe to face global competition and the significant rise of Chinese science in recent years; welcomes the higher success rate of HEU compared to Horizon 2020 (H2020); appreciates HEU’s responsiveness in crises, such as COVID-19 and geopolitical challenges, but regrets not only the lack of additional funding but also the continuous funding cuts, which compromise original priorities;

    4. Regrets that there have been negative experiences with the implementation of HEU because the shift from H2020 to HEU has mostly been experienced as an increase in complexity and bureaucracy; underlines that the success rates in some parts of the programme are still so low as to discourage potentially excellent applications, especially from researchers from research institutions with smaller budgets and SMEs; considers that strategic planning  should lead to more substantial benefits for the quality of the programming and a strengthened commitment of all R&I stakeholders, which so far do not seem to have materialised sufficiently; believes that FP10 should be built on instruments under Horizon Europe that have proven to be effective and efficient;

    5. Highlights the importance of an agile FP; notes that the Heitor report outlines the importance of responding to the fast-changing field of science and innovation and recommends a radical reform in engaging practitioners in the governance  of the  programme, notably through the two proposed new Councils as well as less prescriptive calls; recalls that the Draghi report notes that the current governance of the FP is slow and bureaucratic, that its organisation should be redesigned to be more outcome-based and evaluated by top experts and that the future FP should be governed by people with a proven track record at the frontier of research or innovation; notes that innovative ideas cannot always be predicted and programmed and underlines the need for sufficient funding that is not pre-programmed in order to tap the full potential of developing innovation;

    6. Highlights the importance of having an FP based on excellence in order to ensure the participation of the best researchers in Europe through the whole programme; argues that one of the critical weakness of the EU R&I policy landscape is also linked to the lack of a meaningful, integrated and complementary approach between place-based and excellence-driven R&I activities, in particular between the FP and the R&I window of the cohesion policy, which are of the same order of magnitude in terms of the EU budget; notes that the scale-up and commercialisation of research results remains a big challenge in Europe;

    7. Recalls the recommendation by the Heitor report to foster an attractive and inclusive European research, development and innovation ecosystem; recalls the recommendation by the Letta report to foster the development of a fifth freedom in the single market; recalls the observation of the Draghi report that the fragmentation of the EU innovation ecosystem is one of the root causes of Europe’s weak innovation performance; recalls that the Treaties situate the FP in the development of the European Research Area; is convinced that to maximise the impact of the framework programme, it needs to be embedded in a broader European research policy that ensures that Europe is an attractive location for research activities which attracts global talent, which effectively translates science into economic growth and societal progress, and which effectively addresses the innovation gap within the EU; considers that the upcoming European Research Area Act (ERA Act) should aim at achieving this Europe; recognises that there are still significant obstacles to ‘brain circulation’ among Member States, including the recognition of qualifications;

    8. Insists on the absolute need for that Member States to adopt concrete commitments to reach a target of 3 % of GDP spending on R&D by 2030; notes that the EU is investing significantly less than other global powers, and that it has failed to reach the 3 % target for more than two decades, investing 2.24 % of its GDP in R&D in 2022, for example, compared to 3.5 % in the US; underlines that each year the EU under invests in R&D worsens the situation and deepens the gap with third countries; specifies that major discrepancies exist between the R&D intensity of the 27 EU Member States, with five reaching the 3 % spending target, while some others are below 1 %; recalls that, at less than 7 % of the total[12], the EU budget’s contribution to R&D spending is a very minor share of the overall public spending on R&D in the EU; notes that national spending for research should not be cut in response to  the availability of EU research funding as alternative funding; highlights that a joint effort between European and national funding for research and innovation is needed; underlines as well the important role of private investment in research and innovation in order to complement public funding; regrets that European private investment in research, development and innovation is lagging behind that in China and the US, reaching 1.3 % of GDP in the EU, compared to 2.4 % in the US and 1.9 % in China; insists, therefore, on the vital role of EU intervention as a catalyst for R&D spending, and on the need for further coordination and alignment  between national and EU R&D spending;

    9. Insists on the vital role of long-term public funding to support excellent basic research, driven by scientific curiosity with the only aim of advancing scientific knowledge and without an obvious nor immediate benefit, sometimes characterised by serendipity;

    10. Highlights recital 72 of the Horizon Europe Regulation, which states that in order to guarantee scientific excellence, and in line with Article 13 of the Charter, the programme should promote the respect of academic freedom in all countries benefiting from its funds; underlines that while several incidents regarding academic freedom took place in several countries benefiting from Horizon Europe funds, the Commission has not used this recital effectively to address specific problems; welcomes the commitment by the Commissioner responsible for start-ups, research and innovation, in her hearing with Parliament, to propose a legislative proposal on the freedom of scientific research; calls on the Commission to present such a legislative proposal in line with Parliament’s resolution of 17 January 2024;

    11. Supports the high levels of climate spending in the first years of Horizon Europe; urges the Commission to stay on course to achieve the overall climate spending target of 35 % over the full lifetime of the programme;

    12. Highlights that Horizon Europe is on track to meet its climate spending targets without, according to the Horizon Europe Programme Guide, considering the Do No Significant Harm principle in the evaluation of proposals, unless it was relevant for the content of the call; underlines that there is no legal obligation or legal basis for the horizontal application of either the Do No Significant Harm principle or the Do No Harm principle; welcomes the commitment by the Commissioner responsible for start-ups, research and innovation, in her hearing with Parliament, to assess the current approach and the new approach to the application of the Do No Significant Harm principle, including the legal basis for its application, and to share the assessment with Parliament; urges the Commission to report to Parliament, before the start of FP10, on the impact of the use of Do No (Significant) Harm under Horizon Europe, including an estimate of the associated costs of its implementation for the Commission and beneficiaries, and its impact on the simplification of project applications;

    13. Considers that during the implementation of Horizon Europe, several major global events put thousands of researchers at risk, including in the EU’s neighbourhood, leading to significant spikes in applications by researchers at risk for an emergency placement in Europe; concludes, however, that under the current programme, the EU does not have sufficient funding available to support researchers at risk and that efforts by some Member States and NGOs are fragmented;

    14. Affirms the importance of international cooperation for the advancement of science; is concerned in this regard that international cooperation has declined under Horizon Europe compared to Horizon 2020; encourages the Commission to seek and conclude other association agreements with third countries, restates[13] and emphasises that Parliament’s ability to give meaningful consent to international agreements specifically concerning the participation of countries referred to in Article 16(1)d of the Horizon Europe Regulation in EU programmes is impeded where such agreements do not provide for a structure that guarantees parliamentary scrutiny under a consent procedure for association to a specific EU programme;

    15. Welcomes in particular the association of the UK and Switzerland to Horizon Europe as it recognises the fact that UK and Swiss science and innovation are an integral part of the European science and innovation ecosystem; restates its concern about the amended Protocol in 2023 and its provisions regarding the automatic rebate for the UK; emphasises that any international agreement on the association of Switzerland to EU programmes should fully respect the prerogative of Parliament to provide meaningful consent in line with its resolution on association agreements for the participation of third countries in Union programmes;

    16. Takes note of the Commission white paper on options for enhancing support for research and development involving technologies with dual-use potential; considers that nearly all respondents to the public consultation on the white paper rejected option 3; emphasises that many respondents considered that the implications of options 1 and 2 were not clear enough to allow them to determine which option would be preferable; highlights that it is widely recognised that the current constellation requires improvement to ensure the efficient use of public funds and to boost Europe’s technological sovereignty; notes that Commissioner Zaharieva committed, in her hearing with Parliament, to continuing this evaluation, potentially through a new study to ensure the views expressed are representative of all stakeholders;

    17. Notes that significant advances have been made in the framework of Horizon Europe with gender equality plans (GEPs) as an eligibility criterion and the gender dimension in the content of R&I as an award criterion by default across the programme; recognises that recent analyses confirm that the GEP eligibility criterion has had a catalytic effect;

    Observations on competitiveness

    18. Is deeply convinced that EU spending on science, research and innovation is the best investment in our common European future and for increasing competitiveness and societal progress, and successfully closing the innovation gap; agrees with Mr Draghi that all public R&D spending in the EU should be better coordinated at EU level, meaning properly aligning investments with the EU’s strategic priorities, focusing on funding initiatives that achieve relevant impact and create added value, and that a reformed and strengthened FP is crucial to achieving this; underlines that, in order to ensure real added value, R&D spending should also be better coordinated at national level between Member States; reiterates that the reformed fiscal rules exclude national funds used to co-finance EU programmes, and calls for this possibility to be put to full use in order to boost EU research funding;

    19. Underlines the importance of standardisation activities to ensure that European companies can effectively capitalise on the competitive advantage from research and innovation;

    20. Underlines the significant role of research and innovation across different industrial sectors that contributes to creating jobs and increasing European competitiveness compared to third countries;

    21. Emphasises the importance of the European Innovation Council (EIC) for Europe’s competitiveness; highlights in this regard that investments under the EIC are bridging the ‘valley of death’ and lead to innovations of a disruptive nature that have breakthrough and scale-up potential; highlights also the unique proposition of the EIC Accelerator to provide tailor-made support for high-potential, non-bankable start-ups;

    22. Welcomes the fact that 44 % of the Horizon Europe budget to date has contributed to the digital and industrial transitions, most notably by stimulating cooperation for technology development, which are fundamental for European competitiveness;

    23. Strongly believes that, beyond their key role for long-term and sustainable competitiveness, applied research, development and innovation policies are instrumental to avoid, anticipate and cope with the main global and societal challenges;

    Observations on technical implementation

    24. Considers that administrative simplification stagnated under Horizon Europe given that 32 % of participants consider applying to Horizon Europe to be more burdensome than Horizon 2020, while nearly half of participants report no difference[14], is concerned about the ‘exploded cumulative transaction and administrative costs’[15]; notes that on average beneficiaries reported spending 6-10 % of their project budget on administrative costs, with 48 % reporting administrative costs of more than 10 %, including a 10 % share of beneficiaries reporting administrative costs of more than 20 %; deplores the fact that the time-to-grant under Horizon Europe is longer than it was under Horizon 2020, and that it exceeds the target of eight months set by the Commission[16]; insists on further administrative simplification, streamlining of the relevant procedures, cost cutting and a greater focus on applicants, and underlines that simplification must be for the benefit of the applicants, while ensuring that applications contain all the information needed for the evaluation of their excellence;

    25. Recalls that the first full version of the Annotated Model Grant Agreement for Horizon Europe was published only in May 2024, more than three years after the start of the programme; notes that without a full version of this document, beneficiaries are not fully informed of the legal and financial conditions associated with signing a Grant Agreement; recalls that the first version of the Annotated Model Grant Agreement for Horizon 2020 was published before the official start of the programme; notes that the apparent cause of the delayed publication is the corporate approach to Model Grant Agreements which the Commission took for EU programmes under the current multiannual financial framework;

    26. Notes that there are various opinions and experiences among different beneficiaries regarding the functionality of lump sums; recognises that some beneficiaries do not consider the introduction of lump-sum funding to be a simplification for them; underlines that the 2024 assessment of lump sum funding presents unclear data, which leaves important worries and questions unanswered, such as the uncertainty of the impact of an ex-post audit, while confirming other objections, such as the artificial increase of the number of work packages[17]; considers that this assessment confirms that lump-sum funding can be a simplification for some beneficiaries, but not for all[18];

    27. Considers that the simplification offered by lump-sum funding consists of removing all obligations on actual cost reporting by beneficiaries to the Commission and removing financial ex-post audits for projects; welcomes the fact that this results in a lower error rate; underlines, however, that the error rate is a tool to ensure proper spending of public funds and not a goal in itself; warns, in that context, against putting at risk the quality of the spending of a highly successful programme by ramping up the use of lump sums too quickly;

    28. Observes that the average size of consortia in Horizon Europe is significantly larger than in Horizon 2020[19]; considers that consortia foster collaboration and that bigger consortia contribute to broader, and potentially more diverse, collaboration; underlines, however, that managing bigger consortia also requires more time and effort both in the proposal preparation phase and in the project implementation phase, which takes away resources from performing research; considers, furthermore, that more complex consortia are less attractive to join for newcomers, given the complexity and the resources as well as the experience needed to manage them;

    29. Underlines the importance of an open and accessible programme with low thresholds for applying in order to ensure participation of newcomers as well as SMEs; underlines that more than half of SME participants in Horizon Europe are newcomers[20]; considers that administrative burdens, the time investments needed and the complexity of applications risk discouraging SMEs from participating in the programme[21]; notes that the simple, small and fast grants of the SME Instrument under H2020 were a magnet for newcomer SMEs[22];

    30. Considers that the Commission has not succeeded in creating agile but strong management of HEU, which has led to complex implementation; expects that the interim evaluation report should address shortages and possible solutions;

    Observations on Pillar 1

    31. Recognises the importance of Pillar 1 in promoting scientific excellence and attracting highly-skilled research, through the European Research Council (ERC), and programmes such as the Marie Skłodowska Curie Actions (MSCA);

    32. Welcomes the continued success of the ERC; underlines that its success is dependent on the independence of the Scientific Council; stresses that the last few years have shown that the presence of a capable and committed president of the Scientific Council with respected scientific credentials is essential for the functioning and independence of the ERC; notes that the bottom-up calls and independent governance of the ERC Scientific Council have proven highly effective;

    33. Highlights the ability of both the ERC and the MSCA to attract scientific talent to Europe; notes the valuable contribution of the MSCA to European scientific leadership; notes with worry the low success rates in the MSCA;

    34. Underlines that research projects funded under Pillar 1 should adhere to the principle of ‘high risk/high gain’; suggests clarifying evaluation criteria to strictly ensure the realisation of ‘high risk/high gain’ when evaluating research proposals; observes that ‘high risk’ also means employing new research methods;

    35. Emphasises that research infrastructures, in particular digital research infrastructures, provide a vital platform for researchers and innovators across disciplines and sectors to share data, methods and expertise, fostering the development and application of new technologies to strengthen Europe’s technological sovereignty; welcomes, particularly in this regard, the progress made on the European Open Science Cloud and the European Museums Cloud;

    Observations on Pillar 2

    36. Emphasises that collaborative research is at the heart of the European framework programmes; recognises the importance of Pillar 2, which serves as a vital strategic tool, fostering pan-European collaboration by pooling resources and knowledge, and aligning public and private R&I agendas; notes that collaboration would not occur without EU funding at a similar rate, highlighting the unique added value of EU collaboration programmes, in particular for enabling Europe to address complex societal challenges and integrate businesses into critical, continent-wide value chains; considers that Pillar 2 has fostered research collaboration and has in particular been able to support joint research and innovation agendas for technology maturation through the joint undertakings, which contributes to the competitiveness of the EU;

    37. Considers Pillar 2 a strategic tool for enabling pan-European collaboration and pooling of knowledge and resources, attracting private investments, and for bringing together public and private stakeholders across Europe to tackle complex societal challenges; believes it is important to continue support for these collaborations; acknowledges, however, the complexity of Pillar 2; believes that the implementation of this pillar remains too complex and should be improved, simplified and streamlined with a view to targeting results rather than solely addressing expenditure; notes that the number of instruments involved such as a multitude of partnerships, the complex, top-down administrative implementation of missions, and the many budgetary shifts have resulted in unnecessary complexity which discourages applicants, and especially newcomers, from participating; emphasises the importance of the accessibility of these instruments, particularly for SMEs from across all European regions, in order to enable participation for all excellent researchers and innovators as well as to foster the absorption capacities of companies; welcomes the announcement of the rebalancing in Pillar 2 towards a better equilibrium between the different types of R&I activities, from fundamental research to market-oriented innovation, as announced in the second strategic plan for Horizon Europe; notes in that context the conclusion in the European Research and Innovation Area Committee opinion on FP10 that the Cluster structure of Horizon Europe creates an unnecessary obstacle for participants looking for funding, in particular newcomers, as well as the conclusion of the Draghi report that ‘[t]he programme should consolidate the overall fragmented and heterogeneous activities’;

    Observations on Pillar 3

    38. Notes that scaling up and commercialising research outcomes remains Europe’s greatest challenge; recalls the decisive role of entrepreneurship, for instance in the commercial and economic exploitation of excellent applied research into breakthrough innovation;

    39. Highlights that the European Innovation Council is filling a widely recognised investment gap for scale-up finance for break-through innovations[23]; takes note of the very low success rate under the EIC and considers this a confirmation of the relevance of EIC funding as well as a worrying signal of underfunding of the programme; welcomes that fact that the EIC was completed as an instrument by the introduction of transition activities because these complete the innovator’s journey from early idea to scale-up by facilitating technology maturation and validation; underlines the quality and relevance of the advice provided by the EIC Board and recalls in this regard the importance of expert advice to guide the implementation of the framework programme;

    40. Considers that the EIC is a needed and excellent instrument in principle; agrees that streamlining and boosting the EIC, attracting private investments and supporting the commercialisation of research is at the core of Pillar 3, as confirmed by the Heitor report; regrets, however, that the Commission made some implementation decisions that led the EIC away from its intended purpose to help companies scale up; recognises that the EIC should have the flexibility to strategically maximise its potential to support breakthrough technology; firmly believes that the EIC can achieve its full potential if the legal and institutional setting of the programme is clarified and strengthened;

    41. Regrets that not all of Parliament’s recommendations set out in its resolution of 22 November 2022 on the implementation of the European Innovation Council have been implemented, most notably the recommendation that a thorough assessment be made of ways to improve the EIC’s implementation, considering as an option the establishment of an independent EU body under Article 187 TFEU as the main entity responsible for implementing the EIC; regrets, moreover, that its recommendation to ensure the implementation of both the equity and grant components with direct coordination between the two components has been ignored;

    42. Draws attention to the work of the programme managers in the EIC; strongly believes in the approach of strategic intelligence developed by experts with widely recognised expertise in the field to effective programming of strategic challenge-based calls; appreciates, in particular, the work done by programme managers to help projects find and realise added value by bringing together projects with a common interest;

    43. Notes the generally positive assessments (in particular in terms of EU added value) made by independent experts of the Knowledge and Innovation Communities; notes that EIT KICs contribute to strengthening links between higher education and business as well as to closing the ‘skills gap’, and that synergies should be explored with the academies introduced in recent EU legislation (e.g. Net Zero Industry Act, Critical Raw Materials Act, Cybersecurity Package); highlights, moreover, that the EIT regional innovation scheme (RIS) activities contribute to reducing the European innovation capacity divide; recalls that more synergies to bridge the innovation divide should be created between the EIT and other actions such as the EU preparatory action entitled ‘Innovation for place-based transformation’ and believes that the EIT KICs could improve synergies within the framework programme (in pillar 3 activities and between pillars), and establish concrete synergies between excellence-driven and place-based innovation, for instance via the implementation of successors of R&I activities led by the Directorate-General for Regional and Urban Policy, such as the Interregional Innovation Investments (I3) instrument;

    44. Regrets to conclude, however, that the relevance of the EIT as a programme is questioned by several stakeholders, including some of its biggest beneficiaries; underlines that in principle the concept of knowledge and innovation communities is appreciated by stakeholders as a useful instrument for effective innovation ecosystem development and integration; considers that the two main concerns raised are the financial self-sustainability requirement for KICs[24] and the central management by the EIT organisation which is too bureaucratic and burdensome, and which creates governance difficulties for the KICs[25]; concludes that for many stakeholders the financial and other costs, including the high burden of participating in a KIC, outweigh the benefits of the relatively little funding support relevant for them;

    45. Regrets that, although some efforts have already been made, synergies between the EIC, the EIT and the ERC are not sufficiently developed;

    Observations on Part 4

    46. Welcomes that participation of entities from widening countries has increased in HEU; acknowledges that the innovation divide persists, notwithstanding a slight decrease in the disparities in innovation performance across Europe, in spite of two decades of widening efforts; underlines, however, that the existence of this innovation gap in Europe has negative consequences for the EU as a whole given that it means available talent is left unused and economic disparities within the EU can be expected to grow; notes that this low participation can be partially explained by structural factors, including inadequate national public investment in R&D, which undermines the effectiveness of the national R&I systems, as reflected by low scores on the European Innovation Scoreboard; notes, furthermore, that there is a link between high levels of FP participation and high levels of national public investment in R&D; is strongly convinced that without national reforms, the innovation gap cannot be closed, regardless of the efforts made at European level, and refers to the European Court of Auditors Special Report 09/2022 on this matter; recognises that new and more effective mechanisms to increase widening are needed, but that financing for these actions should primarily come from the national level and be complemented by cohesion policy funds; calls on the Commission to ensure that the upcoming ERA Act lays down strong obligations for Member States to improve the functioning of their R&I system in order to eliminate subpar performance due to structural challenges;

    47. Underlines the importance of the Seal of Excellence under Horizon Europe; considers that the Seal in part mitigates the persistent issue of underfunding in Horizon Europe, which significantly hampers the ability to adequately support all high-quality proposals; acknowledges furthermore that the Seal can contribute to improving the relative participation of researchers from widening countries; emphasises, however, that the Seal cannot be considered as a substitute for direct financial support, particularly because the Seal is not a guarantee for funding;

    48. Notes that a thriving European innovation ecosystem requires strong and well-connected place-based innovation ecosystems and that a better connected European innovation ecosystem will be essential for enhancing the competitiveness of Europe, its resilience and strategic autonomy; recognises that collaboration among territorial ecosystems enables European regions to leverage their combined strengths to develop innovative solutions more efficiently; underlines that this collaboration also accelerates the commercialisation and scaling of technologies, bolstering the EU’s competitiveness also globally; recognises the vital role of public research organisations, including universities, as drivers of place-based innovation;

    Observations on missions and partnerships

    49. Highlights the science communication role of the missions and the need to strengthen this even further because this will bring research results closer to society and help address the challenge of distrust in R&I, while simultaneously helping gain societal approval for public investments in R&I; recalls that the Commission communication entitled ‘EU Missions two years on: assessment of progress and way forward’ did not constitute a positive assessment of the missions and concluded that missions had failed on core objectives such as crowding in external funding;

    50. Recalls the fundamental role of partnerships in bringing together the Commission and private and/or public partners, and is of the opinion that they must receive continuous support with a defined target and scope; emphasises that public-private partnership governance structures should be streamlined and simplified to avoid unnecessary burdens and enhance focus on key priorities; considers the joint undertakings as very useful instruments to foster better coordination and alignment of research agendas across the EU, as well as to foster co-investment in R&D between the public and private sectors; notes with regret that the Joint Undertakings have not yet resulted in increased R&D spending by European industry overall;

    Recommendations for the remaining part of Horizon Europe

    51. Notes that no significant changes in the implementation of the missions have taken place since the publication of the communication; concludes that the current approach to missions is not sufficiently oriented towards fostering creative novel and R&I ideas to address challenges; believes mission-oriented programming should have objectives that can be reached through R&I, should be implemented through open calls for bottom-up ideas to achieve the mission, and should be managed through a portfolio approach building on the experience of the EIC programme managers; considers that mission-oriented programming should first and foremost be a novel approach to research programming which puts more emphasis on bottom-up research ideas, which fosters interdisciplinarity and in particular creates space for synergies between Social Sciences, Humanities and the Arts (SSHA)-driven and technology-driven activities, to address problems; therefore calls on the Commission to pilot this approach in the remaining years of Horizon Europe by spending the majority of the funds allocated to the missions through openly formulated calls that invite proposals for R&I activities that can contribute to achieving a specific objective; encourages the Commission to consider whether it is appropriate to continue funding each mission under Horizon Europe and to find additional funding and support for the continuation of the missions in other parts of the EU budget and at national as well as regional level, where appropriate;

    52. Supports the proposal in the Heitor report to set up an experimental unit under Horizon Europe to experiment with new implementation methods and instruments in order to foster real simplification for participants and to develop a more agile implementation of the programme; urges the Commission to launch, from 2025, a task force to improve the efficacy of the European Semester, in line with the EU’s share towards the 3 % target, as clearly described in the Draghi and Heitor reports and reiterated by European leaders in the Budapest Declaration on the New European Competitiveness Deal;

    53. Insists that the Commission should continue the use of lump-sum funding under HEU, and apply it to beneficiaries for which the assessments show it to be clearly experienced as a simplification, such as SMEs and projects for which there is solid evidence that it is a genuine simplification; underlines in that regard that the intended ramping up of the use of lump sums for the 2026-2027 work programme remains questionable given the existing worries and unknowns regarding the impact of lump sums with regard to the simplification they offer to some beneficiaries and their impact on the quality of the projects funded; calls on the Commission to take all necessary steps to ensure sound and efficient use of EU funds before increasing the share of the Horizon Europe budget spend through lump sums in the last years of Horizon Europe and to explore the further improvement of the system to ensure lump-sum funding leads to genuine simplification for beneficiaries; supports the recommendation of the European Court of Auditors to define the scope of ex-post controls for lump-sum grants;

    54. Supports the Heitor report’s urgent call to introduce a ‘Choose Europe’ co-funding line and to turn the current ‘European brain drain’ into a ‘brain gain’ by 2035, noting that this should be considered a major and unique opportunity for Europe in the current uncertain geopolitical context, in particular following the recent US election, and should therefore be implemented urgently from 2025;

    55. Calls on the Commission to restore EIC autonomy and agility without delay in order to get rid of existing complex processes that lead to lower implementation; believes the EIC transition activities should be open to proposals based on results from any FP project, regardless of which programme part funded that project;

    56. Urges the Commission, as guardian of the Treaties, to rely on recital 72 of the Horizon Europe Regulation to enforce more respect for academic freedom in the EU as well as in associated countries, in particular to use it as a basis to openly and directly address blatant violations of academic freedom by national governments;

    57. Recommends that the use of the Do No (Significant) Harm principle should be accompanied by detailed guidance from the Commission on how compliance with the principle will be evaluated in the context of the specific call in which the principle is used;

    Recommendations for the 10th Research Framework Programme (FP10)

    58. Calls for FP10 to be a stand-alone EU programme, in the context of the upcoming discussion of the highly anticipated Competitiveness Fund, as announced by Commission President Ursula von der Leyen in her speech of 17 July 2024 in Strasbourg, dedicated to EU research and innovation excellence and strategic technology development, with a substantially higher budget appropriate  for achieving the 3 % GDP spending target and sufficient to fund  at least 75 % of the excellent[26] proposals submitted; recommends that FP10 focus on three core objectives:

    (a) creating a European competition of ideas, and a funnel to accelerate the development from fundamental science to innovation scale-up, providing support for blue-sky and basic research as well as strengthening the deployment and exploitation of innovative solutions,

    (b) supporting strategic research initiatives which require large-scale and European collaboration, as the programme’s ability to prioritise these initiatives will be of utmost importance for Europe’s ability to address the societal challenges it faces as well as for European industry and SMEs, including for technology maturation and fostering of European ecosystems, to address the competitiveness gap with our global competitors, focussing on the development of priority innovative advanced technologies and their translation into concrete applications of innovative products, processes and services,

    (c) advancing the ERA, including by addressing the innovation gap in Europe;

    59. Recommends that the Commission ensure user-oriented, science-led, effective and efficient implementation of the programme, including by:

    (a) implementing an improved governance, inspired by the findings of the Heitor expert group and the Draghi report, addressing the need to improve the programme’s agility, which should:

    i. be oriented towards facilitating the best science, technology development and innovation,

    ii. contribute to EU priorities on the terms of science and innovation,

    iii. be based on the principle of self-governance, through which recognised, independent specialists from the relevant field that act in the public interest can  advise on how research and innovation can best contribute to the achievement of the policy priorities set by policymakers; recommends, as part of implementing this principle, setting up new Councils in line with the Heitor report to deliver expert advice on the strategic priorities of the programme as well as on the formulation of call texts to ensure their quality,

    (b) including positions for programme managers for the EIC, comparable to programme managers at the American ARPA-style agencies, who are experts appointed from outside the Commission with a proven track record in the relevant field, appointed for a predefined period, as special advisers to the Commissioner responsible for research and innovation to ensure their seniority in the Commission, to manage strategic visionary portfolios of projects, fostering collaboration between projects where relevant across the whole programme for their mutual benefit and set out challenges based on strategic intelligence and with a view to fostering global leadership for Europe in specific areas of their field,

    (c) implementing a radical simplification in the administrative work related to the application for and management of FP10 projects, following the proposal of the Heitor report to trust first and check later for the application system as well as keeping the information requested in applications to an absolute minimum – no information which is not absolutely necessary for a good qualitative evaluation of the scientific or innovative quality of a proposal should be included in the proposal stage,

    (d) promoting synergies and coordinated programming and implementation with other programmes and sectoral policies in particular with the future new industrial policy and the next important projects of common European interest dealing with research, development and innovation at national and EU level;

    60. Recommends that the GEPs as eligibility criteria for funding should be maintained in FP10 in their current form as a permanent and integral element of EU research funding requirements;

    61. Recommends that the general objective on advancing the ERA should  lead to the development of an excellent, unified and well-functioning European Research Area that attracts  talent, integrates  newcomers in existing networks and provides access to world leading research and technology infrastructures while remaining open for excellent research proposals irrespective of the supporting research institution and supports joint early research programmes with national funders; underlines that the forthcoming ERA Act needs to ensure increased national investments, national reforms and the elimination of barriers to the free movement of knowledge, technology and researchers, to create the conditions for FP10 to support the achievement of a well-functioning ERA;

    62. Considers that the Research Infrastructures, COST and Teaming programmes should contribute to the achievement of this general objective; is convinced that FP10 should provide for an instrument for strategic investments in technology infrastructures; believes that the MSCA is a crucial instrument for achieving this objective as it facilitates the mobility across the EU and between sectors of the best and the brightest who are selected based on the excellence of their proposal; believes that, to further the integration of the ERA, participation of entities from areas with low research performance should be encouraged in the programme;

    63. Firmly believes that FP10 should include a newly established European fellowship programme for researchers at risk, incorporating the lessons learnt from the ongoing preparatory action, to achieve this general objective;

    64. Continues to support the knowledge triangle approach of the EIT to foster innovation in Europe; believes that a reformed and refocussed EIT should contribute to the achievement of this general objective, given its particular role of integrating the European innovation ecosystem;

    65. Believes that in FP10 an expanded and interlinked ERC and EIC should be the engine for a European competition of ideas and that an increase of their budgets should be prioritised in the FP10 budget; recommends that these programmes be designed so that they create a European, bottom-up funnel for innovation to develop quickly from fundamental science to innovation scale-up;

    66. Considers that the EIC can only succeed if it can (i) offer blended finance as a single project and (ii) act with the same predictability and agility as private actors on the venture capital market through a tailor-made legal entity for its implementation; underlines that the strengthened autonomy and self-governance of both the ERC and the EIC are crucial to achieving this; considers in this regard that new options must be investigated to ensure their independence and long-term stability, such as creating dedicated legal entities;

    67. Considers that the expansion of the EIC and ERC should include increased funding for blue-sky, collaborative and early research projects; recommends this expansion to fund smaller projects and consortia in order to lower the barrier to participation, to increase the success rate and to encourage experimentation with new ideas and collaborations; considers that both the EIC Pathfinder and the ERC Synergy Grants have a role to play in this expanded space for bottom-up collaborative research; underlines that the EIC Pathfinder should continue to fund Challenges, but they should be reformed from Challenge-based calls to ARPA-style Challenges which leave space for bottom-up proposals while securing strategic technology development;

    68. Urges the Commission to design FP10 such that it can effectively support strategic research, technology development and deployment initiatives, focussing on a limited number of priorities to support research-based competitiveness and the resilience of key sectors in the European economy as well as to address societal challenges with 2040 as the time horizon and which require cross-border collaboration due to the scale and complexity of the issue at hand; believes that these initiatives could take the form of (i) societal mission-oriented programmes which address socio-economic and/or ecological challenges, (ii) technology mission-oriented programmes to accelerate the development of strategic technologies in Europe, and (iii) joint undertakings to secure joint investments by the private sector, Member States and the EU;

    69. Is furthermore convinced that a share of the budget of FP10 should remain available for higher Technology Readiness Level collaborative calls to support strategic collaboration not covered in the strategic initiatives, in particular this budget could be used for strategic calls developed by the programme managers to further develop an emerging ecosystem;

    70. Emphasises that mission-oriented programmes under FP10 should be fundamentally differently organised than the current missions in Horizon Europe; calls on the Commission to implement mission-oriented programmes under FP10 that set objectives that can be reached through R&I, implemented through open calls for bottom-up ideas, fostering interdisciplinarity, including between SSHA-driven and technology-driven activities, to achieve the mission, and managed through a portfolio approach building on the experience of the pilot under Horizon Europe; underlines that the successful management of these mission-oriented programmes requires outstanding expertise on the topic of the missions rather than generic expertise;

    71. Underlines that procedures for obtaining support under FP10 must align with companies’ realities; is of the opinion that, to this end, an industry-oriented application procedure, building on the experience of the Fast Track to Innovation from Horizon 2020, should be re-introduced under FP10, in particular where the programme aims to support strategic initiatives;

    72. Is convinced that a strategic approach to international cooperation is more important than ever; believes that global collaboration in science is essential for the knowledge development of humanity, but cannot be pursued in a naive manner; recommends that the Commission develops a clear strategic policy framework for its decisions on international collaboration which includes (i) a clear policy on the association of third countries which recognises that association is a tool for political partnerships, (ii) a structured process for determining how open or closed FP10 projects need to be to foster the best possible research while also considering the strategic interests of the EU, and (iii) a plan to boost global collaboration through the programme;

    73. Underlines the importance of FP10’s compliance with the Council recommendation on research security; calls on the Commission to include in the strategic approach whether the right balance between security and openness can be best achieved at the level of programmes, calls or selected projects; believes as well that, beyond the agility of the framework programme itself, delivering resilience must be mainstreamed to become an integral part of all the applied research, development and innovation activities of the next framework programme, in a differentiated manner depending on the topic and the type of activity; believes in particular that innovation activities close to the market must take into account the risk of increased dependency on third countries stemming from them, and the necessary enhanced strategic autonomy of the EU;

    74. Recommends in principle maintaining the civilian nature of the next framework programme and leaving calls specifically for defence applications to the successor of the European Defence Fund; urges the Commission further to develop options to strengthen the synergies between civilian and defence R&D spending; calls on the Commission in particular to explore how the exploitation of dual-use potential can be maximised, especially through interventions after project selection rather than in call or programme definition; underlines that academic freedom includes the right of researchers to decide to what research and development they wish to contribute;

    75. Recommends that the programme should recognise the role of interdisciplinary research in addressing societal challenges, also including a better integration of SSHA; reiterates the need for sufficient funding for research projects that address societal challenges and that fall within the area of SSHA;

    76. Recommends the introduction of research actions in order to foster and encourage more lower Technology Readiness Level research and basic research;

    77. Notes that the allocation of at least 35 % of Horizon Europe expenditure to climate objectives served the general EU objective of mainstreaming climate actions into its sectoral policies and funds; considers this an ambitious target to ensure that FP10 adequately funds science, research and innovation that support the EU climate objectives;

    78. Underlines that any potential application of the Do No (Significant) Harm principle under FP10 should, in line with Article 33(2)d of the Financial Regulation, be set out in the FP10 legislation;

    79. Recommends that the central role of standardisation in driving innovation, enhancing competitiveness, and ensuring impactful, market-ready solutions be recognised in FP10 by ensuring that costs associated with standardisation activities, where relevant in projects, are clearly recognised as eligible for reimbursement under the programme as well as by offering support to researchers in their standardisation activities;

    80. Insists that rules regarding the association of third countries to FP10 should require that these associations can only be concluded through international agreements, which requires the consent of the Parliament for each specific association to a specific EU programme, including for the scope of that association;

    81. Notes that FP10 should take into account the use of Artificial Intelligence (AI) as a way to foster European research and development while identifying specific risks that may arise form an abusive use of AI in the scientific environment and the corresponding mitigation measures;

    °

    ° °

    82. Instructs its President to forward this resolution to the Council, the Commission and the governments of the Member States.

     

    MIL OSI Europe News

  • MIL-OSI United Kingdom: World Trade Organisation 2nd Trade Policy Review of Ukraine – Joint Statement

    Source: United Kingdom – Executive Government & Departments 3

    News story

    World Trade Organisation 2nd Trade Policy Review of Ukraine – Joint Statement

    At the second Trade Policy Review of Ukraine, the UK and Members from across the WTO reiterated their unwavering solidarity and support for Ukraine in a joint statement at the World Trade Organization.

    We, the delegations of the undersigned WTO Members, on the occasion of the Second Trade Policy Review of Ukraine in the WTO, held on 26 and 28 February 2025, reiterate our full support for and solidarity with the people of Ukraine. We express our deep sadness at the devastating human losses and profound suffering caused by Russia’s ongoing war of aggression against Ukraine, which continues for the fourth year in gross violation of international law and the Charter of the United Nations.

    We reaffirm our commitment to Ukraine’s sovereignty, independence, and territorial integrity and call for the Russian Federation to immediately, completely and unconditionally withdraw all of its military forces from the territory of Ukraine within its internationally recognized borders.

    Russia’s war of aggression against Ukraine continues to have devastating global and regional impacts, including on Ukraine’s economy and ability to trade. The destruction of significant parts of Ukraine’s transport routes, port infrastructure, and grain storage facilities as well as the mining of millions of hectares of agricultural land is impeding Ukraine’s ability to produce, export, and import. We are gravely concerned about the consequences of this destruction for Ukraine and for global trade, in particular with regard to the supply to international markets of a number of key commodities produced by Ukraine, including agricultural and food products, fertilisers, and critical minerals. We are also deeply concerned by reports of attacks on civilian vessels transporting agricultural goods from Ukrainian Black Sea ports and millions of tonnes of grain being plundered by Russia from illegally occupied regions of Ukraine using falsified phytosanitary certificates and hiding vessels’ data. These actions violate the principles and values of the WTO.

    Ukraine is one of the world’s top exporters of key agricultural commodities such as wheat, maize, barley, soybeans and sunflower oil. We recognise Ukraine’s determination, despite Russia’s war of aggression, to ensure global food security and supply to some of the most vulnerable parts of the world, particularly developing countries and LDCs. In this regard, the “Grain from Ukraine” initiative, which has already helped to feed 20 million people in 13 countries, continues to be an important tool to help to respond to world hunger. We praise Ukraine’s achievement of maintaining under difficult conditions food exports by its Black Sea corridor to global markets and commend the ongoing functioning of the EU Solidarity Lanes and their contribution to global food security and Ukraine’s economy. This benefits all countries, notably the most in need. In this context, it is necessary to ensure free, full, and safe navigation in the Black and Azov Seas and that sea routes and ports are not threatened or blocked by threat of or use of force.

    We underscore the need to reach, as soon as possible, a comprehensive, just, and lasting peace in Ukraine, in full respect of Ukraine’s sovereignty and territorial integrity, based on the principles of the Charter of the United Nations. We welcome Ukraine’s efforts aimed at achieving peace, including through the principles laid out in the Peace Formula and Joint Communiqué on a Peace Framework adopted at the Summit on Peace in Ukraine on Bürgenstock. We reiterate that the Russian Federation must bear the legal consequences of all of its internationally wrongful acts, including making reparation for injury and loss, including for any humanitarian, economic, and environmental damage caused by such acts.

    We will continue work to support Ukraine and to facilitate its exports and supply chains for the benefit of global food security. We encourage all WTO Members to do likewise in a manner commensurate with their capacity, including by facilitating the use of infrastructure, as well as facilitating and simplifying customs procedures. Within the capacity of each WTO Member, we will continue to provide assistance to Ukraine to alleviate the suffering of the Ukrainian people. We will also continue to look for practical ways to help and assist Ukraine in its reconstruction efforts, economic recovery, activities, and projects to overcome the negative consequences of Russia’s war of aggression.

    Albania, Australia, Canada, Chile, European Union, Georgia, Iceland, Japan, Republic of Korea, Liechtenstein, Montenegro, New Zealand, Republic of Moldova, Norway, Separate Customs Territory of Taiwan, Penghu, Kinmen and Matsu, Switzerland, United Kingdom and Ukraine

    Updates to this page

    Published 26 February 2025

    MIL OSI United Kingdom

  • MIL-OSI: STMicroelectronics releases innovative satellite navigation receiver to democratize precise positioning for automotive and industrial applications

    Source: GlobeNewswire (MIL-OSI)

    STMicroelectronics releases innovative satellite navigation receiver to democratize precise positioning for automotive and industrial applications

    • ST first to put quad-band, multi-constellation design, needed for precise GNSS positioning accurate to a few centimeters, on a single die
    • Innovative design ensures cost-effective precise positioning for road users and for new industrial applications, to increase the areas where autonomous vehicles can operate

    Geneva, Switzerland, February 26, 2025 – STMicroelectronics (NYSE: STM), a global semiconductor leader serving customers across the spectrum of electronics applications, has introduced the Teseo VI family of global navigation satellite system (GNSS) receivers aimed at high-volume precise positioning use cases. For the automotive industry, Teseo VI chips and modules will be core building blocks of advanced driving systems (ADAS), smart in-vehicle systems, and safety-critical applications such as autonomous driving. They have also been designed to improve positioning capabilities in multiple industrial applications including asset trackers, mobile robots for home deliveries, managing machinery and crop monitoring in smart agriculture, timing systems such as base stations, and many more.

    Our new Teseo VI receivers represent a real breakthrough among positioning engines for several reasons: they are the first to integrate multi-constellation and quad-band signal processing in a single die; they are the first to embed a dual-Arm®-core architecture enabling both very high performance and ASIL-level safety for assisted and autonomous driving applications. Last but not least, they embed ST’s proprietary embedded Non-Volatile-Memory (PCM), thus delivering a very integrated, cost-effective, and reliable platform for new precise-positioning solutions,” said Luca Celant, Digital Audio and Signal Solutions General Manager, STMicroelectronics. “ST’s new satellite-navigation receivers will support exciting, advanced capabilities in automotive ADAS applications and enable many new use cases being implemented by industrial companies.

    Teseo VI is the first in the market to integrate all the necessary system elements for centimeter accuracy into one die, supporting simultaneous multi-constellation and quad-band operations. This innovation simplifies the development of end-user navigation and positioning products, enhances reliability even in challenging conditions like urban canyons, and reduces bill-of-materials costs. Additionally, the single chip accelerates time to market and allows for compact and lightweight form factors.

    The new Teseo VI family of precise positioning receiver chips leverages decades of experience and integrates multiple ST proprietary technologies, including precise positioning and advanced embedded memory.

    Technical Notes for Editors

    ST’s new GNSS device family includes the Teseo VI STA8600A and Teseo VI+, STA8610A, each with dual independent Arm® Cortex®-M7 processing cores for local control of all the IC’s (integrated circuit) functions. The Cortex-M7 brings powerful 32-bit processing and helps enable concurrent multi-constellation and multi-band operation on a single die.

    Teseo VI+ can also host various enhanced positioning engines, developed independently by third ST Authorized Partner companies, to provide complete real-time kinematics for centimeter position accuracy.

    Completing the family, the Teseo APP2 STA9200MA operates dual cores in lockstep, providing hardware redundancy for applications such as road vehicle guidance meeting ISO 26262 ASIL-B functional safety. Pin-compatibility between Teseo APP2 and other Teseo VI ICs simplifies PCB design for companies producing ASIL-certified and non-ASIL applications.

    All variants feature ST’s innovative RF architecture and GNSS baseband design provides quad-band GNSS support (L1, L2, L5 and E6) with the unique ability to acquire and track only L5. This is highly effective in reducing outliers and increasing robustness in difficult conditions such as urban canyons and in the presence of jammers.

    In addition, the proprietary phase-change memory (PCM) technology removes external memory needs, thereby minimizing the system bill of materials (BOM) and simplifying the manufacturing supply chain. Proprietary PCM is robust to withstand challenging environments such as automotive, non-volatile like Flash, and has a small cell architecture suited to space-efficient on-chip integration.

    The ICs all contain a full set of hardware cyber security features including secure boot, over-the-air firmware update, and output-data protection. In addition, ST’s hardware security module (HSM) provides robust protection against online hacking. The devices comply with the latest UNECE R155 and ISO 21434 specifications that mandate cybersecurity by design.

    The Teseo VI product family is supported by an established ecosystem of suppliers and partners for algorithms, reference designs, and compatible complementary hardware.

    The Teseo VI product family includes also two new GNSS automotive modules: the Teseo-VIC6A in a 16mm x 12mm form factor (embedding Teseo VI), and the Teseo-ELE6A in a 17mm x 22mm form factor (embedding Teseo VI+). These new modules simplify the integration of Teseo VI/VI+ ICs on the customer platform and ensure optimum performance. 

    The Teseo VI samples are available on request.

    For more information, please go to www.st.com/teseo6

    You can also read our blogpost at https://blog.st.com/teseovi/

    About STMicroelectronics
    At ST, we are over 50,000 creators and makers of semiconductor technologies mastering the semiconductor supply chain with state-of-the-art manufacturing facilities. An integrated device manufacturer, we work with more than 200,000 customers and thousands of partners to design and build products, solutions, and ecosystems that address their challenges and opportunities, and the need to support a more sustainable world. Our technologies enable smarter mobility, more efficient power and energy management, and the wide-scale deployment of cloud-connected autonomous things. We are committed to achieving our goal to become carbon neutral on scope 1 and 2 and partially scope 3 by 2027. Further information can be found at www.st.com.

    INVESTOR RELATIONS
    Jérôme Ramel
    EVP Corporate Development & Integrated External Communication
    Tel: +41.22.929.59.20
    jerome.ramel@st.com

    MEDIA RELATIONS
    Alexis Breton
    Corporate External Communications
    Tel: +33.6.59.16.79.08
    alexis.breton@st.com

    Attachments

    The MIL Network

  • MIL-OSI: Freename partners with Chiliz: .CHZ Domains Are Here

    Source: GlobeNewswire (MIL-OSI)

    Zurich, Switzerland, Feb. 26, 2025 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) — Freename is pleased to announce a strategic partnership with Chiliz, a leading blockchain platform for sports and fan engagement. Through this collaboration, Freename has launched .CHZ domains, offering exclusive benefits to CHZ stakers and Scoville NFT holders.

    This partnership represents a significant step in expanding the Web3 ecosystem, providing blockchain and sports enthusiasts with the opportunity to establish their digital identities. Additionally, it creates new avenues for a broader audience—including cryptocurrency users, digital creators, resellers, and investors—to engage with a highly secure Ethereum-powered environment, interact with on-chain decentralized applications (dApps), and seamlessly exchange ERC-20 tokens.

    The First Sport-Focused Top-Level Domain  

    Arguably, .CHZ is an eagerly awaited domain where sports fans can create unique digital identities and build a highly secure sports community. “Sports enthusiasts, fans, and Web3 users need digital identities that reflect their passion and establish their presence in the digital world,” said Gherardo Varani, Head of Business Development at Freename.

    This Freename–Chiliz partnership aims to set the tone for sports enthusiasts who want to stay updated on their favorite sports. With the integration of Chiliz—the leading blockchain for sports and fan engagement—this vision is becoming a reality. In addition to incorporating the Chiliz blockchain into its portfolio, Freename has launched the first-ever sport-focused TLD, .CHZ, which is expected to attract thousands of fans to the Chiliz network.

    Beyond sports, .CHZ will also appeal to individuals exploring the decentralized space, offering them new opportunities to engage. “.CHZ is the first sport-focused top-level domain, built for those who live and breathe sports—whether as fans, collectors, or digital creators,” Gherardo added.

    Exclusive Benefits of Minting .CHZ Domains

    The basic purpose of the .CHZ domains is to provide custom Web3 identities for the Chiliz community, crypto users, and domain investors. Ensuring maximum value for your purchases, Freename provides exceptional discounts and benefits on the acquisition of .CHZ TLDs and domains

    These benefits are specifically meant for Chiliz network users, including CHZ stakers and Scoville NFT holders.

    For CHZ Stakers

    If you’re already minting on the Chiliz blockchain, the .CHZ domains will diversify your portfolio. Oftentimes, these domains can be resold at much higher prices in the future.  

    CHZ stakers can save more on buying .CHZ domains from Freename. To qualify for this offer, you must have a staking balance of 1,000 CHZ or more. 

    Qualified users can get a discount between $30 – $100 and a free-of-cost renewal for up to five years (based on your staking balance).  

    • If you’re staking between 1,000 and 10,000 CHZ, you will receive a 2-year domain renewal along with a $30 coupon.  
    • Those staking in the 10,001 – 50,000 CHZ bracket will receive a $75 coupon and a 3-year domain renewal
    • And if you’re staking above 50,000 CHZ, you will receive a $100 coupon with a 5-year domain renewal upon checkout.

    Simply verify your status at checkout and claim your reward.

    Scoville NFT Holders

    Scoville NFT Holders can integrate .CHZ domains into their digital wallet or link their NFT collection, leveraging them in more ways than one. They can also transfer domains minted on other blockchains to the Chiliz blockchain. 

    For Scoville NFT holders, Freename offers $10 off on buying the .CHZ domains. Adding more to savings, these domains come with 2-year domain renewal.

    The Chiliz Chain

    Chiliz Chain is a stand-alone, layer-1, EVM compatible blockchain that leverages a Proof of Staked Authority (PoSA) mechanism. This mechanism grants authority through staking tokens.

    Over the years, the blockchain has been used to mint Fan Tokens for popular teams like Paris Saint-Germain FC, Juventus. You can also find Fan Tokens related to Motorsports, Tennis, European Football, and more!

    At present, the blockchain boasts more than 70 officially licensed Fan Tokens, serving more than 2 million Fan Token wallets across the globe. 

    What You Can Do with Your .CHZ Domain

    The .CHZ domain is your gateway to the decentralized webspace. You can get access to millions of users via Chiliz Fan Tokens and scale your business. You can also feature your dApps on chain and expand your growth quickly. 

    Some of the major benefits of the .CHZ domain are listed below:

    Name Your Wallet with Your Favorite .CHZ Domain

    You can choose a relevant .CHZ domain name and integrate it into your wallet to give it a unique, concise and memorable identity. Instead of the long string address, a wallet with a unique name is far easier to remember, helping other users to locate you easily.  

    Use It as Your Main Digital Identity

    You can integrate a single .CHZ domain to multiple digital identities, including NFTs, Smart Contracts, Tokens and Metaverse real estate. Not only will it help you manage your portfolio, but also maximize your assets’ security.

    Send and Receive Crypto Payments

    Your .CHZ domain can also serve you in sending and receiving crypto payments without intermediaries. In addition to the robust security powered by PoSA mechanism, you get a high level of privacy provided by your .CHZ domain.

    Set Custom Records for Multi-chain Compatibility

    Your .CHZ domains are capable of storing any form of digital assets, be it coins, tokens, or NFTs. Moreover, these domains offer multi-chain compatibility, enabling you to set custom records across different blockchains.  

    Build and Browse Web3 Websites

    Last but not the least, your .CHZ domain, like other decentralized domains, will serve the basic purpose of building web3 sites. That’s right, you can create a website, online store, or portal similar to the web2 space, allowing visitors to surf through your content and buy your products or services. 

    Buy Your .CHZ Domain Now!

    By integrating the leading sport-focused blockchain into its portfolio, Freename offers you a lucrative opportunity to connect with millions of sports fans. Whether you’re a developer, data analyst, designer or a die-hard sports fan, you can get access to the blockchain ecosystem using your .CHZ domain. Join the web3 bandwagon today and Buy Your Web3 Domain!

    Disclaimer: The information provided in this press release is not a solicitation for investment, nor is it intended as investment advice, financial advice, or trading advice. It is strongly recommended you practice due diligence, including consultation with a professional financial advisor, before investing in or trading cryptocurrency and securities.

    The MIL Network

  • MIL-OSI Europe: Firearms play a central role in domestic homicides

    Source: Switzerland – Department of Foreign Affairs in English

    A study by the Federal Office for Gender Equality (FOGE) sheds light on the role played by firearms in domestic homicides in Switzerland. The Federal Council was informed of the results at its meeting on 26 February 2025. The research shows that the perpetrators are almost exclusively men, the majority of whom are Swiss citizens over the age of 60. Swiss women in the same age group are particularly at risk. The study also shows that information on the legality and origin of the firearms is often unavailable.

    MIL OSI Europe News

  • MIL-OSI Europe: REPORT on the implementation of the common foreign and security policy – 2024 annual report – A10-0010/2025

    Source: European Parliament

    MOTION FOR A EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT RESOLUTION

    on the implementation of the common foreign and security policy – 2024 annual report

    (2024/2080(INI))

    The European Parliament,

     having regard to the Treaty on European Union (TEU), in particular Articles 14, 16, 21, 24, 36 and 41 thereof,

     having regard to the Interinstitutional Agreement of 16 December 2020 between the European Parliament, the Council of the European Union and the European Commission on budgetary discipline, on cooperation in budgetary matters and on sound financial management, as well as on new own resources, including a roadmap towards the introduction of new own resources[1],

     having regard to the report of 20 June 2024 by the Vice-President of the Commission / High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy (VP/HR) entitled ‘Common Foreign and Security Policy Report – Our Priorities in 2024’,

     having regard to the ‘Strategic Compass for Security and Defence – For a European Union that protects its citizens, values and interests and contributes to international peace and security’, endorsed by the European Council on 21 March 2022,

     having regard to NATO’s 2022 Strategic Concept, adopted on 29 June 2022,

     having regard to the European Council conclusions of 22 March 2024, 18 April 2024, 27 June 2024 and 19 December 2024,

     having regard to the Foreign Affairs Council conclusions of 18 March 2024, 22 April 2024, 24 May 2024, 24 June 2024, 22 July 2024, 14 October 2024, 18 November 2024 and 16 December 2024,

     having regard to the declaration of the Summit between the EU and the Community of Latin American and Caribbean States (CELAC) adopted on 18 July 2023,

     having regard to Council Decision (CFSP) 2021/509 of 22 March 2021 establishing a European Peace Facility, and repealing Decision (CFSP) 2015/528[2],

     having regard to the Political Guidelines of the Commission President for 2024-2029,

     having regard to the 2024 enlargement reports presented by the Commission on 30 October 2024,

     having regard to the Commission communication of 30 October 2024 entitled ‘2024 Communication on EU enlargement policy’ (COM(2024)0690),

     having regard to Regulation (EU) 2024/1449 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 14 May 2024 on establishing the Reform and Growth Facility for the Western Balkans[3],

     having regard to Sauli Niinistö’s report of 30 October 2024 on strengthening Europe’s civil and military preparedness and readiness,

     having regard to the EU Guidelines on Human Rights Defenders, adopted in 2004, updated in 2008 and further supplemented in 2020 with a guidance note on the Guidelines’ implementation,

     having regard to its resolutions on breaches of human rights, democracy and the rule of law, adopted in accordance with Rule 150 of its Rules of Procedure,

     having regard to the joint communication from the Commission and the High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy of 20 June 2023 on European Economic Security Strategy (JOIN(2023)0020),

     having regard to the joint communication from the Commission and the High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy of 16 December 2020 entitled ‘The EU’s Cybersecurity Strategy for the Digital Decade’ (JOIN(2020)0018),

     having in regard to the Commission Recommendation of 3 October 2023 on critical technology areas for the EU’s economic security for further risk assessment with Member States (C(2023)6689),

     having regard to Council Decision (CFSP) 2019/797 of 17 May 2019 concerning restrictive measures against cyber-attacks threatening the Union or its Member States[4],

     having regard to its resolution of 1 June 2023 on foreign interference in all democratic processes in the European Union, including disinformation[5],

     having regard to its resolution of 9 October 2024 on strengthening Moldova’s resilience against Russian interference ahead of the upcoming presidential elections and a constitutional referendum on EU integration[6],

     having regard to its resolution of 24 October 2024 on the misinterpretation of UN resolution 2758 by the People’s Republic of China and its continuous military provocations around Taiwan[7],

     having regard to its resolution of 17 January 2024 on the security and defence implications of China’s influence on critical infrastructure in the European Union[8],

     having regard to its resolutions of 24 October 2024 on the situation in Azerbaijan, violation of human rights and international law and relations with Armenia[9] and of 5 October 2023 on the situation in Nagorno-Karabakh after Azerbaijan’s attack and the continuing threats against Armenia[10],

     having regard to its resolutions on historical remembrance, including its resolutions of 2 April 2009 on European conscience and totalitarianism[11], of 19 September 2019 on the importance of European remembrance for the future of Europe[12], of 15 December 2022 on 90 years after the Holodomor: recognising the mass killing through starvation as genocide[13] and of 17 January 2024 on European historical consciousness[14],

     having regard to the report of 9 May 2022 on the final outcome of the Conference on the Future of Europe,

     having regard to the EU Action Plan on Gender Equality and Women’s Empowerment in External Action 2021-2025 (GAP III),

     having regard to the Council of Europe Convention on preventing and combating violence against women and domestic violence (the Istanbul Convention), which entered into force in the EU on 1 October 2023,

     having regard to the UN resolution adopted by the UN General Assembly on 25 September 2015 at the UN Sustainable Development Summit in New York entitled ‘Transforming our World: the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development’ (Agenda 2030), which established the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs),

     having regard to the UN resolution adopted by the UN General Assembly on 8 December 1949 on assistance to Palestine refugees,

     having regard to the UN Security Council resolution of 22 November 1967 on a peaceful and accepted settlement of the Middle East situation,

     having regard to the UN Security Council resolution of 11 August 2006on the situation in the Middle East,

     having regard to the United Nations Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide of 1948 and the UN Human Rights Council resolution of 22 June 2020 on the prevention of genocide,

     having regard to the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court (ICC),

     having regard to the agreement between the International Criminal Court and the European Union of 28 April 2006 on cooperation and assistance[15],

     having regard to the advisory opinion requested from the International Court of Justice by the UN General Assembly in its resolution of 30 December 2022 on Israeli practices affecting the human rights of the Palestinian people in the Occupied Palestinian Territory, including East Jerusalem,

     having regard to the order of the International Court of Justice concerning South Africa’s request for the indication of provisional measures,

     having regard to Rule 55 of its Rules of Procedure,

     having regard to the report of the Committee on Foreign Affairs (A10-0010/2025),

    A. whereas the world faces rapid geopolitical shifts, with autocratic powers, both individually and in coordinated efforts, actively challenging the international rules-based order and its multilateral institutions, international law, democratic institutions and societies, as well as our alliances; whereas all EU leverage should be assessed in order to dissuade countries from supporting Russia’s aggression;  

    B. whereas the BRICS summit held in Kazan, Russia, from 22 to 24 October 2024 underscores how Putin leverages international platforms to counteract isolation and build alliances; whereas a unified and strategic EU response is required to uphold the principles of the rules-based international order;

    C. whereas the EU and its Member States should review development assistance to governments of countries that openly support Russia’s war of aggression against Ukraine and monitor their votes on relevant UN resolutions;

    D. whereas the geopolitical confrontation between democracies and authoritarian and dictatorial regimes is growing, conflicts are multiplying, and the use of force is increasingly treated as a standard tool for pursuing political aims; whereas force is wielded not only by states but also by an expanding array of non-state actors; whereas the EU needs to reinforce transatlantic relations and build constructive partnerships with like-minded partners in the Global South;

    E. whereas the geopolitical context in which the EU is operating has accentuated the need for more ambitious, credible, decisive and unified EU action and a fully fledged European foreign policy on the world stage and has highlighted the necessity for Member States to demonstrate the required political will to rebuild their defence capabilities, while strengthening the EU’s transatlantic bonds and partnerships with like-minded countries; whereas the common foreign and security policy (CFSP) needs to become a fully fledged EU policy through which the EU can address the key geopolitical challenges; whereas the EU should be guided in its external action by the values and principles enshrined in Article 2, Article 3(5) and Article 21 TEU, which have inspired the EU’s own creation, development and enlargement; whereas it is in the EU’s interest to stand up accordingly for universal values, norms and principles such as freedom and democratic standards, as well as human rights, the rule of law, international justice and the Helsinki Final Act, in particular as regards the non-violation of international borders;

    F. whereas the EU is faced with the rapid rise of new threats at its borders and on its territory, which are destabilising the EU’s functioning, in particular targeted disinformation, cyber and hybrid attacks, the instrumentalisation of migratory flows, in addition to international terrorism and religious radicalism;

    G. whereas strategic autonomy requires the EU to act independently on the global stage when needed, particularly in foreign and security policy; whereas the EU has recognised the need to reduce undue reliance on external actors for safeguarding its interests in an unpredictable and multipolar world;

    H. whereas the EU needs to develop an independent and autonomous European diplomacy, including public and cultural, economic, climate, digital and cyber diplomacy, led by an EU diplomatic service which is driven by a common diplomatic culture;

    I. whereas the Russian war of aggression against Ukraine violates the rules-based international order, fundamental principles of international law as enshrined in the UN Charter and key conventions and resolutions, the Helsinki Final Act and the European Convention on Human Rights;

    J. whereas the Russian violations of the Geneva Convention on Prisoners of War comprise executions of prisoners and the denial of access to humanitarian organisations and medical treatment for prisoners;

    K. whereas the ICC has issued an arrest warrant for Vladimir Putin and the Russian High Commissioner for Children, Maria Lvova-Belova, for their involvement in the abduction of Ukrainian children to Russia; whereas Russia, assisted by the Belarusian regime, is undertaking to re-educate Ukrainian hildren and erase their Ukrainian identity; whereas Aliaksandr Lukashenka’s regime in Belarus has to be held fully accountable for its complicity in the war of aggression against Ukraine and war crimes such as the abduction of thousands of Ukrainian children;

    L. whereas the ICC has additionally issued arrest warrants for Russian military leaders Sergei Shoigu, Valery Gerasimov, Viktor Sokolov and Sergei Kobylash, accused of directing attacks on civilian targets;

    M whereas the Hungarian Government is blocking the newly established EUR 5 billion Ukraine Assistance Fund set up in March 2024 within the European Peace Facility (EPF); whereas the Hungarian Government is blocking the eighth tranche of EPF reimbursements for Member States that have delivered military aid to Ukraine for more than 18 months;

    N. whereas Russian shadow fleet tankers pose a considerable risk to maritime and environmental security by turning off or manipulating their automatic identification systems; whereas these tankers provide an estimated USD 12 billion to Russia’s war budget each month, thereby directly funding its aggressive military operations;

    O. whereas Vladimir Putin’s regime has instrumentalised history in an attempt to secure the loyalty of the Russian population by creating nostalgia for the supposed greatness of the Soviet Empire, falsifying the history of Russia and Ukraine, rejecting Nikita Khrushchev’s policy to acknowledge and condemn Stalinist crimes, reneging on Mikhail Gorbachev’s recognition and condemnation of the Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact, and declaring the collapse of the Soviet Union as the greatest tragedy of the previous century;

    P. whereas Russia and other malign actors in its neighbouring countries promote anti-Western and divisive rhetoric and exploit ethnic tensions in the Western Balkans in order to inflame conflict and divide communities, including through the instrumentalisation of the Serbian Orthodox Church;

    Q. whereas 2024 marked the 20th anniversary of the ‘big bang’ enlargement when 10 countries joined the EU; whereas enlargement is of the utmost strategic importance for the EU, as it represents a geostrategic investment in long-term peace, democracy, stability, security, climate protection and prosperity across the continent, and in particular in the face of the Russian war of aggression against Ukraine; whereas the preparation for enlargement requires reforms in the EU and whereas the EU should conduct the enlargement process in parallel with the institutional and decision-making reforms necessary to safeguard the EU’s integration capacity;

    R. whereas the EU must maintain the momentum for the acceleration of its enlargement policy while accession countries continue to reform and achieve the required benchmarks related to the EU acquis; whereas consistent messages and a clear path towards integration for candidate countries are vital for keeping the pro-European perspective alive;

    S. whereas the future of the Balkans and the countries in the Eastern Neighbourhood lies in the EU;

    T. whereas the Union is founded on the values of democracy, the rule of law and respect for human rights, which are part of the Copenhagen criteria, which are the key set of criteria for EU membership; whereas the accession process is a merit-based and reversible process;

    U. whereas joining the EU requires foreign policy alignment, including on the votes on United Nations General Assembly resolutions, support for Ukraine and alignment with sanctions against Russia; whereas most of the countries of the Western Balkans have reached high levels of alignment with the CFSP, a notable exception being Serbia;

    V. whereas North Macedonia concluded the Prespa Agreement with Greece and the Treaty of friendship, good-neighbourliness and cooperation with Bulgaria;

    W. whereas the citizens of Georgia have demonstrated their commitment to democratic values and to their country making progress with EU integration; whereas the democratic backsliding in Georgia needs to be reversed; whereas the Georgian authorities should heed the will of the Georgian people to join the EU and should ensure free and fair elections, stop democratic backsliding, abandon the laws that jeopardise Georgia’s European future and pursue pro-European democratic reforms; whereas Georgia should align with the EU’s CFSP, including the sanctions adopted unanimously against Russia;

    X. whereas any partnership agreement between the EU and Azerbaijan – including on energy – must have strong conditions attached on the respect of international law, fundamental rights and international obligations and, in particular, on Azerbaijan making substantial progress towards a comprehensive and sustainable peace agreement with Armenia;

    Y. whereas the Mediterranean is of great importance to the EU, both historically and geographically; whereas the countries of the Southern Neighbourhood play an important role in ensuring that irregular migration flows are managed on the basis of the principles of solidarity, balance, shared responsibility and in full compliance with applicable EU and international law and, in particular, human rights and humanitarian law;

    Z. whereas strategic partnerships and agreements between the EU and countries of origin and transit, such those between EU and Mauritania, are proving to be a successful model for the prevention of irregular migration and the fight against migrant smugglers;

    AA. whereas the supply of thousands of Shahed drones from the Islamic Republic of Iran to Russia has further cemented Iran’s role as a pariah state; whereas North Korea and China further demonstrate their unwavering disregard to international laws and norms;

    AB. whereas on 28 May 2024, Norway, Ireland and Spain recognised the State of Palestine, followed on 4 June 2024 by a decision of Slovenia’s parliament to do the same;

    AC. whereas China defines itself as a ‘near-Arctic state’ and endeavours to develop, in close partnership with Russia, a Polar Silk Road;

    AD. whereas the Belt and Road Initiative, known in China as the One Belt One Road, is a threat to the EU’s interests and undermines the CFSP;

    AE. whereas on 14 October 2024 the High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy and the British Foreign Secretary agreed to launch strategic consultations on issues such as the Russian war of aggression against Ukraine, the Indo-Pacific, the Western Balkans and hybrid threats;

    AF. whereas all UN agencies embody the rules-based international order as they uphold and implement both the letter and the spirit of the UN Charter, to which all UN Member States must abide;

    AG. whereas the EU’s credibility and coherence is a paramount requirement for the correct implementation of its external action, as this reinforces trust in the EU among various actors and non-EU countries; whereas the efficiency of the EU’s actions worldwide is contingent on ensuring the highest level of coordination and coherence in the EU’s external action; whereas coordination between the Commission and the European External Action Service (EEAS) should be strengthened, particularly due to the insufficient operational budget of the EEAS;

    AH. whereas the implementation of gender equality and the WPS agenda requires initiatives that promote gender-responsive leadership, protect women’s rights and combat sexual and gender-based violence in conflict and post-conflict settings; whereas the funding of these initiatives is essential for supporting local civil society organisations and providing survivor-centred support;

    AI. whereas human rights defenders (HRDs) are the EU’s main allies in defending and promoting human rights abroad; whereas HRDs are increasingly at risk of attacks and threats from state and non-state actors; whereas Parliament has consistently called for the proper and coordinated implementation of the EU Guidelines on Human Rights Defenders (2008); whereas the Member States, alongside the EU institutions, should implement these Guidelines, which include a range of specific commitments, such as regular reporting, coordination and action in support of HRDs;

    AJ. whereas the consequences of climate change will have an ever-increasing effect on various spheres of human life, including geopolitical order and global stability; whereas it is of crucial importance that fighting climate change, necessitating climate action, and aiding those who are hardest hit by its repercussions, becomes a cornerstone of the CFSP; underlines the fundamental role which the Commission and the Member States, in a joint approach, must play in the advancement of climate diplomacy globally;

    AK. whereas the report entitled ‘Safer Together – Strengthening Europe’s Civilian and Military Preparedness and Readiness’, presented by Sauli Niinistö, Special Adviser to the President of the European Commission, provides strategic recommendations for enhancing Europe’s civilian and military preparedness in the light of escalating and complex security threats;

    AL. whereas this report first reviews the VP/HR’s annual CFSP report and subsequently complements it with Parliament’s positions on the CFSP objectives in 2025; whereas in so doing, the report expands particularly on (1) the global consequences of Russia’s war of aggression against Ukraine, (2) conflict and peace in the Middle East, (3) cooperation with like-minded partners and (4) the general visibility and influence of EU action abroad; whereas Parliament’s forward-looking CFSP position is ultimately underlined by key demands concerning the next multiannual financial framework (MFF) and the parliamentary oversight of the MFF; whereas there is a need to defend and strengthen the rules-based international order, the universal norms, values and principles of the UN Charter such as human rights and international justice, multilateralism, and the Helsinki Final Act, in particular as regards the non-violation of international borders;

    1. Underscores that its resolutions on the implementation of the CFSP are a key component of its contribution to EU foreign policymaking; underlines that these resolutions manifest the practical implication of the strengthened right of scrutiny in the area of foreign policy conferred on Parliament by the Treaty of Lisbon; recalls that the 2024 resolution is the first of this nature in this legislative term and aims to serve as a guide for the EU executive when setting foreign policy priorities for this term; highlights the fact that in an ever volatile international environment, the EU needs to simultaneously tackle numerous foreign policy challenges affecting it directly or indirectly, such as the ongoing Russian war of aggression against Ukraine, the conflicts in the Middle East, increasing great power competition, constant attempts to undermine the multilateral rules-based international order and an increased nexus of foreign and internal crises; strongly believes that in order to stay relevant on the international stage, the EU needs to pursue a determined, disciplined and assertive foreign policy that fulfils the EU’s own strategic objectives and continues defining, asserting and defending its interests in the world; recalls that the EU should be guided in its external action by the values and principles enshrined in Article 2, Article 3(5) and Article 21 TEU, which have inspired the EU’s own creation, development and enlargement, including democracy, the rule of law, the universality and indivisibility of human rights and fundamental freedoms, respect for human dignity, and the principles of equality and solidarity; further believes that the CFSP should ensure the implementation of the UN’s 2030 Agenda and the SDGs;

    I. The VP/HR’s 2024 annual report

    2. Notes that the report was submitted to the European Parliament on 20 June 2024; recalls that the report should be forward-looking in nature; comments hereinafter on several developments emphasised by the VP/HR in his report;

    3. Welcomes in particular:

     the local, vibrant civil societies in the enlargement countries that play a constructive role in the EU integration processes, while underlining that civil society is vital in fostering democracy and pluralism and promoting good governance as well as social progress and that the enlargement countries should provide an enabling space and an appropriate framework for cooperation to ensure their meaningful involvement;

     the successful finalisation of the screening process for Albania at the end of 2023 and the opening of the first cluster of negotiating chapters on external relations (Cluster 6); welcomes Albania’s ambition of closing accession negotiations swiftly; highlights the need to further intensify reforms to address deficiencies that persist regarding the ‘fundamentals’, in particular concerning the rule of law, fighting corruption and organised crime; cautions against undermining the work of independent institutions such as the Special Anti-Corruption and Organised Crime Structure (SPAK); underscores the importance of a viable political pluralism and a competitive opposition and calls for dialogue and constructive engagement between the majority and the opposition to overcome the strong political polarisation in the country and to foster inclusive democratic processes that respects all parties, including the Greek, Roma and Egyptian minorities in the country; commends the country’s consistent, full alignment with the EU’s foreign and security policy, including with the EU’s restrictive measures against Russia and Belarus;

     the decision on the opening of accession negotiations with Bosnia and Herzegovina; encourages the authorities to take all of the relevant steps set out in the Commission’s recommendation of 12 October 2022; urges the country’s political leaders to implement a substantial set of reforms, including electoral reforms, in accordance with the decisions of domestic and international courts, in order to ensure the principles of equality and non-discrimination for all citizens and constituent peoples, as enshrined in its constitution and in full respect of the judgments of domestic and international courts, including all rulings of the European Court of Human Rights regarding Bosnia and Herzegovina; denounces the recurring inflammatory rhetoric and secessionist laws and policies of the leadership of the entity ‘Republika Srpska’ (RS), including the celebration of the unconstitutional ‘RS Day’ on 9 January 2025; calls on the Member States and representatives of the international community in Bosnia and Herzegovina to promote and support the implementation of these judgments; reiterates its call for targeted sanctions against destabilising actors within Bosnia and Herzegovina, notably Milorad Dodik, as well as other high-ranking officials of RS and Serbian officials providing political and material support for secessionist policies; calls on all Member States to ensure that such sanctions can be adopted by the Council and to impose them bilaterally or in concert with other Member States if their adoption in the Council is not possible; welcomes the agreement reached to extend the mandate of the EU forces in Bosnia and Herzegovina’s Operation Althea until November 2025 and recalls that this mission still plays a pivotal role in the security and stability of Bosnia and Herzegovina; urges the EU’s military mission to actively prevent unlawful parades and other provocations as well as threats against all people working to help the victims of genocide and investing in inter-ethnic reconciliation and a peaceful future for the country;

     the progress in the Belgrade-Pristina Dialogue, especially in the areas of freedom of movement and energy; calls on Kosovo and Serbia to continuously engage in this dialogue in good faith and in the spirit of compromise to achieve a comprehensive, legally binding agreement on the normalisation of their relations, based on mutual recognition, in accordance with international law and without further delay; regrets, in this context, the lack of progress in the implementation of the path to normalisation and calls for efforts to be made and capacity to be dedicated to the EU-facilitated dialogue; commits, hence, to work closely with the outgoing as well as the incoming EU Special Representative for the Belgrade-Pristina Dialogue and other Western Balkan regional issues; calls on the VP/HR to take advantage of the new term of the Commission to overcome the stalemate and give a new impetus to the dialogue and to come up with a new, innovative and balanced approach to the mediation;

     the 2024 Enlargement Report on Serbia, presented by the Commission on 31 October 2024; reiterates its position that accession negotiations with Serbia should advance only if the country aligns with EU sanctions against Russia and makes significant progress on its EU-related reforms, in particular in the area of the ‘fundamentals’; reminds the Serbian authorities that the proper functioning of democratic institutions is at the core of Serbia’s EU accession process and the EU accession methodology; recalls in this context its position that the Serbian parliamentary and local elections held on 17 December 2023 deviated from international standards and Serbia’s commitments to free and fair elections; reiterates its serious concerns over these irregularities and the overall election environment, which fell below the standards expected of an EU candidate country; urges Serbia’s political leadership to ensure constructive, inclusive dialogue across the political spectrum and to deliver on the necessary reforms for Serbia to progress on the path to EU accession; regrets the biased approach of the EU towards Serbia despite its year-long roll-back on the rule of law, democracy and fundamental rights, as well as its destabilising influence on the whole region;

     Kosovo’s application for EU membership and the Kosovo Report 2024 and asks the Commission to respond to it; recalls that Kosovo’s bid to be considered a candidate country will be assessed on the basis of its own merits and of its success in meeting the Copenhagen criteria for EU membership; welcomes, however, the lifting of visa requirements for Kosovo citizens; regrets the restrictive measures imposed by the Council against Kosovo and calls for their immediate lifting, as proposed by the VP/HR;

     the progress made by Montenegro in meeting the interim benchmarks for Chapters 23 and 24 of the EU acquis; encourages the country to continue to make progress on and implement EU-related reforms swiftly; expresses, nonetheless, its concerns over controversial ideas for legislative proposals on citizenship and foreign agents floated in public; stresses the importance of the new government being able and committed to take forward the EU-related reforms and keep Montenegro firmly on the EU strategic path; expects the country to start closing chapters in the accession negotiations and to be ready to join the EU within the next couple of years;

     the successful finalisation of the screening process for North Macedonia at the end of 2023; urges the government of North Macedonia to achieve tangible results in fulfilling its obligation under the EU negotiating framework, including relevant constitutional changes, in line with the country’s commitments;

     the successful resumption of the CFSP dialogue between the EU and its partners in the Western Balkans and the importance of these partnerships for peace and security; recalls that EU enlargement is a geostrategic investment, which requires commitment from both the EU and the enlargement countries on their pathways to accession; recalls in this context the continued need for reforms regarding the rule of law, fundamental rights and public administration, and for alignment with the CFSP, including on sanctions and on the EU’s visa policy; highlights, additionally, the threats posed by malign foreign interference in the region and underlines the importance of combating disinformation to contain anti-Western and divisive rhetoric which seeks to exploit and exacerbate ethnic tensions in the region; cautions against engagement with the EU’s systemic rivals, which could undermine the prosperous, sustainable and secure future that EU accession offers; recalls, in this context, the added value of the investments made by the EU under the Instrument for Pre-accession Assistance III, the newly established Reform and Growth Facility for the Western Balkans, and the Western Balkans Investment Framework; calls on the Western Balkan countries to use all the resources made available to support their alignment with the EU acquis; calls upon the Commissioner for Enlargement to increase the visibility of EU action in the Balkans;

     the decision to open accession negotiations with Ukraine and Moldova; commends the fact that the CFSP alignment rate of Moldova has substantially increased from 54 % in 2022 to 86 % in 2024 and encourages Ukraine and Moldova to continue this positive trend towards full alignment; calls for the acceleration of the screening process and the timely organisation of the subsequent intergovernmental conferences;

     Armenia’s decision to suspend its participation in the Collective Security Treaty Organization and cease all payments to its budget in 2024, following Russia’s failure to assist Armenia against Azerbaijan’s military aggression, and to seek a more reliable security architecture; supports Armenia’s official request for the Russian Federation to withdraw its Federal Security Service border guards from its international airport and the Armenia-Iran border; welcomes the regular meetings under the EU-Armenia Political and Security Dialogue format and the EU-Armenia Partnership Council and commends the decision to adopt the assistance measures under the EPF in support Armenian armed forces on 13 June and 22 July 2024 respectively;

     the ongoing attempts by Armenia and Azerbaijan to normalise their relations, such as through the Armenia-Azerbaijan joint statement of 7 December 2023 on confidence-building measures, as well as the progress made in the framework of the Armenia-Azerbaijan border delimitation process, which has led to an agreement on several sections of the border; encourages both parties to sign a comprehensive and fair peace agreement without delay; calls on Azerbaijan to demonstrate genuine efforts to this end; reaffirms its support for the sovereignty and territorial integrity of both Armenia and Azerbaijan and strongly supports the normalisation of their relations based on the principles of the mutual recognition of territorial integrity and the inviolability of borders, in accordance with the 1991 Alma-Ata Declaration; reiterates its demand for the withdrawal of Azerbaijan’s troops from the entirety of Armenia’s sovereign territory and the release of the 23 remaining Armenian hostages;

     the activities of the civilian European Union Mission in Armenia (EUMA) under the common security and defence policy (CSDP), which contributes to security in the region by substantially decreasing the number of incidents in conflict-affected and border areas, and reduces the level of risks for the population living in such areas; welcomes Armenia’s assistance with the activities of the EUMA on its territory; commends the Council for the decision to increase the number of deployed observers as well as the mission’s capacity and to extend its deployment timeframe; calls for further expansion and presence in the region; calls on the Commission to provide support for Armenia for de-mining;

     the continued work of the EEAS on addressing and countering foreign information manipulation and interference (FIMI) through the EU FIMI Toolbox, the setting up of a STRATCOM taskforce, and through close cooperation with Member States, international partners, civil society and other relevant stakeholders; reiterates its call to promote the continuous flow of intelligence from Member States to the EEAS on foreign and security issues occurring outside the EU; calls, in this regard, for strengthening the EU INTCEN, the EEAS Crisis Response Centre and the EU Satellite Centre by enhancing its staff, financial resources and capabilities; 

     the proposal of the VP/HR for an anti-corruption sanctions regime, which would allow the EU to target serious acts of corruption worldwide; calls for its swift adoption by the Council;

    4. Condemns in particular:

     the ongoing illegal and unjustifiable Russian war of aggression against Ukraine and the increasing Russian attacks against civilian targets and civilian infrastructure within Ukraine; demands that Russia and its proxy forces cease all military action and that the Russian Federation immediately and unconditionally withdraw its troops and equipment from Ukraine and any other country whose territory, or parts thereof, it unlawfully occupies; condemns any hybrid attacks executed by Russia in Ukraine and strongly denounces the spread of Russia’s propaganda about its war in Ukraine;

     the role of the illegitimate regime of Aliaksandr Lukashenka in allowing the country to serve as a Russian military base, effectively surrendering national sovereignty to the Kremlin in order to maintain its grip on Belarus, while brutally oppressing the Belarusian people in order to stay in power; deplores the Lukashenka regime’s instrumentalisation of migration, particularly in the light of the influx of thousands of migrants into Poland, which Belarus orchestrates to force their passage into the European Union;

     the illegal North Korean involvement in the Russian war of aggression against Ukraine by its sending of military equipment and ammunition to Russia, as well as by its sending of thousands of soldiers to wage war against Ukraine;

     North Korea’s continued weapons testing and development of its nuclear programme, in violation of the UN resolution, further escalating tensions in the Indo-Pacific region; demands that North Korea abandon its weapons of mass destruction and ballistic missile programmes in a complete, verifiable and irreversible manner; urges the North Korea authorities to cease their ongoing crimes against humanity and to undertake a process of reform whereby all human rights are respected and protected;

     the increasing malicious activities, interference and hybrid warfare deployed by the Russian Federation, its institutions and proxies in undermining and subverting the democratic stability and sovereignty of Georgia and the Republic of Moldova and in particular the recent interference in the constitutional referendum on EU accession and the presidential elections;

     the attack on Kosovan police officers by well-organised Serbian paramilitaries in Banjska/Banjskë in the north of Kosovo on 24 September 2023 which resulted in the death of the Kosovan police officer Afrim Bunjaku and the injuring of two more Kosovan police officers; condemns the hideous terrorist attack on critical infrastructure near Zubin Potok; stresses that the perpetrators of these deplorable attacks must be held accountable and face justice without delay;

     the brutal and indiscriminate terrorist attacks committed by Hamas across Israel on 7 October 2023, which triggered a disproportionate Israeli military response and a conflict in Gaza that has a devastating effect on civilians and caused a catastrophic humanitarian situation;

     the fact that Hamas has taken and is still holding innocent people, including women and children, hostages, and calls for the unconditional and immediate release of hostages;

     the deliberate and malignant fuelling of an exceptionally tense situation, through repeated attacks targeting Israel since 7 October 2023, by state and non-state actors in the region with Iran being the main instigator, as well as the Houthis in Yemen and Hezbollah in Lebanon acting as some of its proxies;

     Iran’s persistent non-compliance with its legal safeguard obligations under its Comprehensive Safeguards Agreement and with its commitments under the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) condemns, further, the advancement of its nuclear programme beyond all credible civilian justification and the destabilisation of the Middle East this causes, including through proxies, such as attacks on Israel and sponsoring terrorism and civil conflicts; the attacks perpetrated or attempted within the EU by terrorist organisations and networks affiliated to Iran;

     the wrongful detention of European citizens in Iran, the execution of the European citizen of dual German-Iranian nationality Jamshid Sharmahd on 29 October 2024, and the brutal oppression of the people of Iran, in particular the women; reiterates its unwavering support for the women of Iran, who are still subjected to gross violations of their fundamental rights two years after the Women, Life, Freedom movement was brutally repressed; urges the VP/HR to do the utmost to free these citizens and to put an end to the practice of Iranian hostage diplomacy, through which it detains foreign civilians and dual nationals;

     the growing military cooperation between Iran and Russia, in particular the intention to sign a treaty on a comprehensive strategic partnership and Iran’s provision of drones and ballistic missiles to Russia for use against Ukraine and its people;

     the recent adoption of the law on the ‘promotion of virtue and prevention of vice’ in Afghanistan, as well as the systematic violation of human rights and fundamental freedoms, in particular the extreme interpretation of sharia which erases women from public life, bars them from working, hinders their access to all public places without being chaperoned by a male relative and to education beyond the sixth grade, amounting to gender apartheid; demands from the de facto authorities of Afghanistan that all gender-based restrictions on women be lifted and stresses that this must be a key condition for any engagement of the international community with the Taliban; insists on maintaining strict, conditional engagement with the Taliban based on the five benchmarks set by the Council for engaging with the de facto authorities and by holding the perpetrators of these grave violations of girls’ and women’s rights accountable, including through restrictive measures;

     the increasing breadth and intensity of operations, including cyberattacks and foreign information manipulation by the Chinese Government, as well as vessels and aircraft attempting to intimidate China’s neighbours, which violate peace and stability in the Taiwan Strait and surrounding international waters and impede the freedom of navigation rights of all other parties; strongly condemns statements by the Chinese President that the People’s Republic of China will never renounce the right to use force with respect to Taiwan, and insists that the use of coercive measures to achieve unification contradicts international law;

     the government-led system of forced labour and the persistent violations of human rights, in particular the systematic repression of Uyghurs in Xinjiang Province; observes with concern the intense crackdown on ethnic minorities in Tibet, Hong Kong and Macau and the transnational repression of Chinese dissidents, as well as the persistent presence of Chinese police officers on EU territory; has taken note of and deplores the People’s Republic of China (PRC) for not implementing the recommendations of the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR); calls on the PRC to allow the OHCHR independent access to the Xinjiang Uygur Autonomous Region and invites the OHCHR to issue a comprehensive situational update and an action plan for holding the PRC accountable;

     the deterioration of stability in the Sahel, exacerbated by the numerous military coups in the region in recent years; recalls that stability in the Sahel has direct repercussions for the security of European external borders and the management of irregular migration flows from the African continent; emphasises that the EU should urgently review its regional strategy for the Sahel;

     the coups in Burkina Faso and in Niger, with President Bazoum being detained and the constitution suspended; is increasingly concerned by the decision of the central Sahel military regimes in Burkina Faso, Mali and Niger to leave the Economic Community of West African States (ECOWAS), thus plunging ECOWAS into a deep political crisis; condemns additionally the physical attack on 29 September 2024 on an ECOWAS Member of Parliament and other participants of an officially declared opposition rally in Lomé; calls on the Togolese authorities to ensure the promotion and protection of the fundamental principles of human and peoples’ rights enshrined in Article 4 of the revised ECOWAS Treaty, such as the rights of peaceful assembly, freedom of association, belief and expression; calls on the ECOWAS authorities and its member states to support the efforts needed to safeguard the principles of the African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights throughout the subregion; takes note of the closure of the European Union Military Partnership Mission in Niger (EUMPM Niger) and of the Capacity Building Mission in Niger (EUCAP Sahel Niger) and the non-renewal of the European Union Training Mission in Mali (EUTM); observes with concern how Russia has intensified the development of state-to-state relationships and cooperation initiatives with African states through military cooperation and a commitment to cooperate on the development of nuclear energy; condemns the rise of terrorist attacks and heavy civilian losses in the Sahel, as well as the presence and predation activities of Russian paramilitaries, which have led to the population being displaced and an influx of refugees, also caused by the instability in the region; deplores the fact that the void UN peacekeepers have left has effectively been filled by Wagner Group mercenaries and Russian and Turkish military, whose industries supply arms to Sahelian capitals;

     the civil war in Sudan, the devastating consequences for the civil population, the atrocities committed against them and, in particular, the despicable large-scale use of rape as a weapon of war;

     the last minute tactical and technical constraints imposed by the authorities of the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC), which prevented the EU Election Observation Mission from monitoring the presidential elections; condemns the violence committed by the Rwanda-backed M23 rebel movement destabilising the eastern DRC; calls for a review of the EU strategy for the Great Lakes region;

     the authoritarian regime of Daniel Ortega and Rosario Murillo, who are systematically undermining Nicaragua’s democratic structures; recalls that the regime in Nicaragua maintains strong ties with other autocracies, such as those in Iran, Venezuela and Cuba; condemns the systematic human rights violations and abuses perpetrated by the Cuban regime; strongly condemns and fully rejects the electoral fraud orchestrated by the regime in Venezuela and demands that the Maduro government cease its policy of repression and attacks on civil society and the opposition; recalls that on 19 September 2024, Parliament recognised Edmundo González Urrutia as the legitimate and democratically elected President of Venezuela and María Corina Machado as the leader of the democratic forces in Venezuela; highlights the fact that various democratic states in the region and throughout the world have recognised González as president-elect; recalls that he should have been sworn in on 10 January 2025; expresses satisfaction that on 17 December 2024, Parliament awarded the 2024 Sakharov Prize for Freedom of Thought to María Corina Machado, as the leader of the democratic forces in Venezuela, and to president-elect Edmundo González Urrutia, representing all Venezuelans inside and outside the country fighting for the reinstitution of freedom and democracy;

     the employment of the ‘Cuban medical brigade’ in some European countries as a form of infringement of fundamental rights and freedoms and of slavery and forced labour;

     the risk of collapse of the state structures and difficult humanitarian situation in Haiti due to rampant gang violence;

     the fact that the PRC, Russia, Iran and other totalitarian or authoritarian regimes use information manipulation and malign interference as integral instruments to exert pressure on multilateral institutions and democratic values and norms, to abuse power, to increase the incidence and severity of human rights violations, to constrict spaces for civil society, independent media and democratic opposition movements, to spread anti-Western disinformation and to use various forms of transnational repression to intimidate and constrict spaces for civil society, independent media and democratic opposition movements in the diaspora;

     the increasing attacks, harassment, arbitrary detention, torture and killings of HRDs worldwide, especially those advocating for environmental, indigenous, women’s, LGBTQI+ and anti-corruption rights; further notes the increasingly sophisticated tactics used by state and non-state actors, including digital surveillance and smear campaigns, aimed at silencing HRDs; stresses the urgent need to protect HRDs, who also play a critical role in upholding democracy and the rule of law globally; calls for enhanced support and protection mechanisms for HRDs facing threats, harassment and violence, especially those in high-risk areas or working on sensitive issues such as environmental, indigenous and women’s rights;

     attempts to circumvent EU and international sanctions, which it sees as strategies posing direct threats to the international rules-based order;

     the failure by Azerbaijan to comply with the order of 17 November 2023, issued by the International Court of Justice, indicating provisional measures regarding the safe, unimpeded and expeditious return of the 100 000 ethnic Armenians who fled Nagorno-Karabakh after the September 2023 pre-planned, unjustified military attack by Azerbaijan, as well as the refusal of Azerbaijani authorities to release all 23 Armenian prisoners of war it currently detains; stresses the need to support all initiatives and activities that could lead to the establishment of peace between Armenia and Azerbaijan and the signing of a long-awaited peace agreement; calls, further, on Azerbaijan to demonstrate genuine efforts to this end; warns Azerbaijan that any military action against Armenia would be unacceptable and would have serious consequences for the partnership between Azerbaijan and the EU; highlights the fact that Azerbaijan’s connectivity issues with its exclave Nakhchivan should be resolved with full respect for the sovereignty and territorial integrity of Armenia; reiterates its position that the EU should be ready to impose sanctions on any individuals and entities that threaten the sovereignty, independence and territorial integrity of Armenia; stresses that Parliament’s multiple warnings on the situation have not led to any change in the EU’s stance towards Azerbaijan; calls for the EU to end its reliance on gas exports from Azerbaijan; calls on the Commission to suspend the 2022 memorandum of understanding on the strategic partnership in the field of energy and to act accordingly; condemns the Russian ‘gas laundering’ through Azerbaijan and the Azerbaijani authorities’ facilitation of Russia’s circumvention of EU sanctions; calls for the EU to cease all technical and financial assistance to Azerbaijan that might contribute to strengthening its military or security capabilities; calls on the Member States to freeze exports of all military and security equipment to Azerbaijan; condemns Azerbaijan’s repeated attempts to denigrate and destabilise Member States, including through the so-called Baku Initiative Group; condemns the ongoing deterioration of the human rights situation in the country;

    5. Concurs with:

     the need to improve relations with Türkiye; welcomes the partial de-escalation of tensions in the east Mediterranean and the Aegean but reiterates its concern that Türkiye’s foreign policy continues to be at odds with EU priorities under the CFSP; recalls, in this context, the signature and the evocation of the memorandum of understanding between Türkiye and Libya on comprehensive security and military cooperation and on the delimitation of maritime zones;

     the call on Türkiye to work on a constructive, and not assertive nor aggressive, approach in its neighbourhood, including the Southern Caucasus; regrets that Türkiye continues to dispute the sovereignty and sovereign rights of an EU Member State; recalls that Türkiye’s accession process is contingent on its full compliance with the Copenhagen criteria and on its normalisation of relations with all EU Member States, including the Republic of Cyprus; calls for the status of the buffer zone and the mandate of the UN Peacekeeping Force in Cyprus to be respected; urges Türkiye and the Turkish Cypriot leadership to cease and reverse all such unilateral activities and refrain from any further actions and provocations; calls for engagement in peaceful UN-led negotiations and for real progress to be made in the Cyprus settlement talks;

     the assessment that,  in the absence of a drastic change of course by the Turkish Government, Türkiye’s EU accession process cannot be resumed;

     the urgent need for the EU and the Turkish Government to move forward toward a mutual reflection process, including a modernised association agreement, which would lead to a mutually beneficial, more dynamic and strategic partnership, with strict conditionality on the respect of rule of law, fundamental rights, international law, including the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea, and good neighbourly relations, considering the key role played by Türkiye, for example, in the Black Sea region and its significance as a NATO ally;

     the fact that Türkiye is making an inadequate effort in aligning with the EU’s CFSP, including on sanctions and the anti-circumvention of sanctions, as well as with the need for Türkiye to cooperate closely with the EU’s Sanctions Envoy; deplores the unacceptable nature of the solidarity and support that the President of Türkiye has publicly provided to the terrorist organisation Hamas; reiterates its concerns about the ongoing deterioration of democratic standards in Türkiye; recalls that Türkiye also targets the EU with foreign information manipulation and interference and that its government is considering introducing a Russian-style foreign agents law; underlines the incompatibility between Türkiye’s candidacy for BRICS+ and the EU’s CFSP;

     the concern over democratic backsliding in Georgia, manifested by the fact that the parliamentary elections held on 26 October 2024 did not respect international standards for democratic elections or its commitments as a member of the OSCE to carry out free and fair elections; emphasises that violations of electoral integrity are incompatible with the standards expected from an EU candidate country; considers that the reported electoral fraud undermines the integrity of the election process, the legitimacy of the results and the public’s trust in the government and that the results do not serve as a reliable representation of the will of the Georgian people; considers that, with the legitimacy of the vote severely undermined by the magnitude of the violations, the international community should not recognise the election results; rejects, therefore, any recognition of the parliamentary elections and does not recognise any decisions taken by the body that has taken control of the country; calls urgently for early elections conducted in an improved election environment, managed by an independent and impartial election administration with widespread international observation, to ensure a genuinely free, fair and transparent process that would represent the will of the people of Georgia; concurs with the European Council’s conclusions of 27 June 2024 that a failure to reverse the current course of action, including the law on ‘transparency of foreign influence’, the law on ‘family values and protection of minors’, as well as the changes to the Electoral Code, jeopardises Georgia’s EU path, de facto leading to a halt of the accession process; appreciates, at the same time, the efforts made by Georgian President Salome Zourabichvili to steer the country back towards a democratic and European path of development; considers that President Salome Zourabichvili is currently the only clearly legitimate representative of the will of the Georgian people; reiterates its unwavering support for the Georgian people’s legitimate European aspirations, which are being betrayed by the Georgian Government; demands the immediate release of all people detained for peacefully protesting against the recent decisions by Georgia concerning a suspension of EU integration; calls on the Commission to use the frozen EUR 120 million originally intended as support for the Georgian authorities to enhance the EU’s support for Georgia’s civil society, in particular the non-governmental sector and independent media, which are increasingly coming under undue pressure from the ruling political party and the authorities, as well as to support programmes supporting democratic resilience and electoral integrity; strongly encourages the EU and its Member States to introduce personal sanctions against all those who are responsible for the democratic backsliding, in particular Bidzina Ivanishvili and Irakli Kobakhidze; encourages individual Member States and relevant regional organisations to avoid actively legitimising the self-appointed Georgian Dream authorities and call, in this regard, for suspending the EU Georgia Association Council;

     the observation that Russia and China have become significant players in the Southern Neighbourhood, especially North Africa, while Türkiye and the Gulf states, chief among them the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, Qatar and the United Arab Emirates, have risen as regional forces; argues that the idea of a single ‘neighbourhood’ for both Eastern and Southern Europe overlooks their distinct challenges; concurs further with the strategic relevance of the Southern Neighbourhood, its stability, economic development and prosperity; recalls that instability and insecurity in the Southern Neighbourhood remains an ongoing challenge for European external border management; underlines the interference of strategic competitors in the region and calls strongly for the EU to send a solid and clear political message in favour of renewed cooperation with countries of the Southern Neighbourhood; calls on the VP/HR and the Commission to release, as an urgent matter, the new pact for the Mediterranean and to secure adequate resources for its timely and effective implementation; reiterates that a dynamic network of strategic partnerships tailored to the specific needs and aspirations of each country in our Southern Neighbourhood should be at the centre of the new pact; believes, in this context, that the EU should conduct a thorough review of the current incentive structure that combines the promise of financial assistance and trade benefits in exchange for political and economic reforms and ensure that it aligns with broader EU objectives, including the promotion of human rights and democratic values; stresses that besides prioritising bilateral cooperation, the EU should also continue to foster regional cooperation through existing frameworks such as the Union for the Mediterranean, which offers a valuable platform for promoting dialogue and joint action on issues of common concern;

     the concern about Russian and Chinese pressure exerted in Central Asia and stresses the need to scale up the EU’s presence in the region in response, given its geostrategic importance; highlights the hesitation of Central Asian states to lend support to Russia’s war of aggression given the effect the war is having on the region; underlines the EU’s interest in increasing economic relations and intensifying political ties with the countries of Central Asia, in part to address the circumvention of sanctions against Russia and Belarus; calls on the authorities of the Central Asian states, particularly Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan and Uzbekistan, to cooperate closely with the EU, in particular with its Sanctions Envoy; encourages the Commission and the Member States to continue promoting political and economic reforms that strengthen the rule of law, democracy, good governance and respect for human rights;

     the fact that the Arctic is of geostrategic importance as regards the expansion of potential maritime routes, access to natural resources, climate conservation and territorial claims; stresses that this importance is heightened not only by Russian military expansion in the High North but also by China’s increasing presence and interest in the region, and its self-proclamation as a ‘near-Arctic state’; underscores the need for ensuring freedom and safety of navigation amid these two states’ growing influence and militarisation; underlines the importance of preserving security, stability and cooperation in the Arctic; stresses that the region must remain free from military tensions and natural resource exploitation, while respecting the rights of indigenous peoples; reiterates the need to include the EU’s Arctic policy in the CFSP and engage in effective cooperation with NATO; calls for the Arctic to be addressed regularly within the Political and Security Committee and Council meetings;

     the strategic importance of the Taiwan Strait and the Indo-Pacific in the face of increasing Chinese intimidation in the region, including through military and hybrid means, and stresses the need to scale up the EU’s presence in the regions in response; underlines the EU’s interest in increasing economic relations and intensifying substantial ties with like-minded partners in the region, including Taiwan;

     the effectiveness of the implementation of a Gulf strategy, advancing in a strategic partnership with each of the Gulf countries and working together to promote global and regional security and prosperity;

     the focus on achieving accountability in the cyberspace, through the operationalisation of the EU digital diplomacy toolbox and the attention given to strengthening global cyber resilience; calls for an increased focus on building the cyber resilience capacity of developing democracies faced with hybrid challenges to their electoral systems; calls for increasing joint cyber defence exercises between the EU and NATO in order to improve interoperability and readiness to counter hybrid threats;

     the commitment to place democracy promotion at the forefront of the CFSP and to ensure the EU’s proactive role in this regard, building on lessons learned from previous democracy support actions, in particular in support of civil society, HRDs, critical voices, democratic opposition and media;

     the need to fight impunity and strengthen accountability efforts globally, including through the ICC, and to stand up for international law and international humanitarian law; remains deeply concerned about the trend of state officials undermining decisions of international institutions and their employees; regrets the failure of some ICC member states to execute ICC arrest warrants, thereby undermining the ICC’s work;

     the urgent and ongoing need to promote gender equality and women’s empowerment through all EU external action a foreign policy that takes into account gender mainstreaming in line with the 2021-2025 Gender Action Plan, especially in light of the current global rollback of women’s rights; emphasises that at the current rate of progress, achieving gender equality worldwide will take another 131 years, underscoring the critical importance of accelerating efforts to safeguard and advance women’s rights and opportunities;

    II. CFSP objectives in 2025

    6. Identifies, in the following section, Parliament’s CFSP objectives in 2025, thus complementing the views expressed in the VP/HR’s annual CFSP report;

    Addressing the global consequences of the Russian war of aggression against Ukraine

    7. Emphasises that Russia’s war of aggression against Ukraine and its consequences, including economic uncertainty, food insecurity and high energy prices, in combination with the revisionist behaviour of the Russian Federation against a number of states neighbouring the Black Sea, destabilises and threatens the Eastern Neighbourhood and the Western Balkans, which in turn erodes the European security architecture; underlines, in this context, the need for reinforcing the EU’s capacities to support democratic institutions in our immediate neighbourhood;

    8. Notes that the EU’s response to the Russian war of aggression against Ukraine is being closely watched by autocratic actors around the world and will have a decisive influence in shaping their behaviour on the international stage; is concerned by the growing cooperation and coordination among autocratic regimes, including through their material or other support for Russia’s aggression against Ukraine; urges the Council to impose restrictive measures against countries that deliver military goods, such as unmanned aerial vehicles and surface-to-surface missiles, to the Russian Federation for use against civilian targets; recalls that the use of such military goods against civilian targets is a war crime; notes, with grave concern, the increasing cooperation between the Russian Federation and the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea (DPRK), and underscores that the employment of North Korean troops by Russia is widening the scale of the conflict; emphasises, equally, the urgent need for further sanctions against Belarus, mirroring all sanctions against Russia;

    9. Calls for the EU and its Member States to meaningfully increase and speed up humanitarian assistance, military support, economic and financial aid and political support in every possible way until Ukraine’s victory, in order to ultimately stop Russia’s war of aggression and allow Ukraine to liberate all its people and re-establish full control within its internationally recognised borders; welcomes the rapid creation and successful implementation of the European Union Military Assistance Mission in support of Ukraine and suggests that the EU consider strengthening it; underlines, in particular, the urgent need to provide Ukraine with increased air defence and surface-to-surface capacities to defend its critical energy infrastructure, and calls on the Member States to immediately lift restrictions on the use of Western weapons systems, such as long-range Taurus missiles, delivered to Ukraine, against legitimate military targets on Russian territory, which would be fully in line with Ukraine’s right to self-defence according to the UN Charter;

    10. Calls for the EU and the Member States to reinforce the effectiveness of its 15 sanction packages adopted so far and to agree on new ones as soon as the need arises; recalls that the strict implementation and uniform application of restrictive measures in all Member States is a precondition for the credibility and effectiveness of the EU’s external action; underscores, thus, the importance of ending all EU imports of Russian energy; calls on the Commission to impose penalties on all European companies that continue to engage in business with the Russian Federation, as well as to further assess and combat sanction circumvention;

    11. Appeals for proactive diplomacy with non-EU countries in order to minimise the circumvention of these sanctions; calls on the Commission to critically assess EU assistance to non-EU countries that actively support Russia’s aggression against Ukraine and urges the Council to impose restrictive measures on non-EU countries enabling Russia’s war of aggression, whether through the facilitation of sanction circumvention or through the provision of direct military assistance, such as in the case of Iran or North Korea; calls on all countries to fully align with all EU sanctions packages;

    12. Deplores the ‘no limits’ partnership between Russia and China, in particular the renewed commitment to strengthen their military ties; welcomes the Council’s decision to impose sanctions on Chinese companies for their support of Russia’s war in Ukraine;

    13. Expresses its most serious concerns over Russia’s and China’s surveillance and sabotage of critical maritime infrastructures, such as seabed communication cables and offshore energy facilities; expresses in particular its strong concern about the damage to two subsea communications cables, one linking Finland and Germany and the other connecting Sweden to Lithuania, within less than 24 hours on 17 and 18 November 2024, and about the damaging by a tanker of the Russian shadow fleet of the EstLink2 power cable, linking Estonia and Finland, on 25 December 2024; calls on the EU to put in place effective monitoring and surveillance systems and regional coastguard cooperation to ensure the prevention and rapid detection of attacks against such infrastructures; welcomes in that regard, the launch of the operation ‘Baltic Sentry’ by NATO, with the participation of several Member States, to improve the security of critical undersea infrastructures in the Baltic Sea; calls on Member States to fully abide by the commitments of the New York joint statement on the security and resilience of undersea cables,

    14. Calls for the EU and its Member States to exercise strict control over, prevent and limit the activities of Russia’s shadow fleets which, in addition to violating EU and G7 sanctions, poses an immense ecological threat to ecosystems as a result of its technical deficiencies and frequent breakdowns; urges the Commission to take swift action, within the framework of the EU’s cooperation with the International Maritime Organization, and to design more targeted sanctions against the shadow fleet in the next sanctions package against Russia; specifies that such sanctions should designate all possible individual shadow fleet vessels, as well as their owners, operators, managers, etc.; recommends banning tanker sales to countries facilitating trade with Russia; notes that the flag states contributing to the Russian shadow fleet are thereby also helping the Russian war effort;

    15. Reiterates its call for the necessary measures to be taken to return forcibly deported and illegally adopted Ukrainian children from Russia or occupied Ukrainian territory;

    16. Calls on the Commission and the Council to designate the Russian state-funded private military Wagner Group as a terrorist organisation; draws attention to the so-called ‘Africa Corps’ that was created following the death of the Wagner Group’s former leader Yevgeny Prigozhin, in August 2023, and placed directly under the control of the Russian Ministry of Defence, in an effort to regroup Wagner elements under government control;

    17. Expresses its unwavering support for the 10-point peace formula  put forward by Ukraine’s President Volodymyr Zelenskyy and recalls that any initiative, in particular diplomatic solutions, aimed at ending the Russian war of aggression and achieving a just and lasting peace needs to be based on terms and input provided by Ukraine and ultimately accepted by the Ukrainian people; encourages the Commission and the VP/HR, as well as the Member States, to mobilise international support for the peace formula and the victory plan presented by Ukraine and to engage in security commitments towards Ukraine as recommended in the Kyiv Security Compact;

    18. Reiterates that Ukraine, as a victim of aggression, has the legitimate right to self-defence in line with Article 51 of the UN Charter; calls on the VP/HR, the Commission the Council and the Member States concerned to enable effective Ukrainian countermeasures against Russia; recalls that Russia has violated international law and that the full seizure of the frozen Russian assets is an appropriate step towards enforcing Russia’s obligation to abide by international law, and to compensate Ukraine and other injured parties for the losses caused by Russia’s war of aggression; calls on the Commission to establish a sound legal regime for the confiscation of Russian state assets frozen by the EU; reminds the Commission that any such proposal does not take away the need for continued financial, political, military and humanitarian support; calls for the inclusion of all assets of the Russian state, Russian local authorities, Russian state-owned companies, and of individuals on the EU sanctions list, and for those assets to be used to compensate Ukraine  for the damage caused by this war;

    19. Commends the Commission’s proposal to establish the Ukraine Loan Cooperation Mechanism, worth an estimated EUR 35 billion, which responds to Parliament’s call and builds upon the decision of the Council to direct extraordinary revenues stemming from immobilised Russian state assets to the Ukraine Assistance Fund and the Ukraine Facility, as well as upon the G7’s decision to offer Ukraine a USD 50 billion loan secured through immobilised Russian state assets; expresses its conviction that the new Ukraine Loan Cooperation Mechanism is a substantive step towards making Russia financially compensate for the massive damage it continues to cause in Ukraine;

    20. Denounces the abusive use by the Hungarian Government of its veto power to delay or effectively block EU essential aid from being granted to Ukraine; condemns the misuse of the position of the EU Presidency by Viktor Orban, in pursuing his so-called peace-mission to the Russian Federation on 5 July 2024, which was an attempt to undermine the unified EU position on Ukraine, and stresses that he did not to any degree or in any capacity represent the EU;

    21. Urges the VP/HR and the other Member States to overcome the blockade by the Hungarian Government of the EPF’s funding and disbursement decision and to guarantee that the EU’s only instrument in support of military aid to Ukraine becomes fully functional again; calls on the VP/HR to advance proposals to prevent such blockades in the future or to find an alternative mechanism that is fully reliable;

    22. Underscores the urgent need for the EU and its Member States to push for the creation of a special international tribunal to prosecute the crime of aggression committed against Ukraine by the political and military leadership of the Russian Federation and its allies; expresses support for all the activities of the ICC and International Court of Justice in prosecuting the crimes committed on Ukrainian territory;

    23. Commends Ukraine for its progress in the EU accession screening process and calls on Ukraine to continue its progress towards EU membership using all the resources made available to it under the Ukraine Facility and to ensure the meaningful involvement of its civil society in the implementation and monitoring phases thereof; recalls that EU accession is a strictly merit-based process that requires the fulfilment of the Copenhagen criteria for EU membership, including those concerning democracy, the rule of law, and fundamental values and the fight against corruption;

    24. Believes that both Ukraine’s and Moldova’s accession to the EU would be a mutually beneficial investment in a united and strong Europe; stresses that the newly proposed growth plan for the Republic of Moldova serves the purpose of accelerating EU-related reforms; calls on all co-legislators to advance the relevant legislative acts as soon as possible; encourages the VP/HR to additionally enhance the CFSP partnership with Ukraine and Moldova and in this context welcomes the signature of the security and defence partnership between the EU and Moldova in May 2024; recalls the fact that the security of the Republic of Moldova is inextricably linked to the security of Ukraine; underscores, hence, the need to increase financial contributions from the EPF to further enhance Moldova’s defence capabilities;

    25. Praises the Moldova for running the presidential election and the referendum professionally and with an extraordinary sense of duty and dedication, despite the continued massive interference from Russia and its proxies; welcomes the outcome of the 2024 Moldovan European Union membership referendum which enshrined the commitment to joining the EU in the country’s constitution; expresses its support to Moldova in defending its democracy; strongly condemns such constant and coordinated attempts by the Russian Federation, pro-Russian oligarchs and Russian-sponsored local proxies to destabilise the Republic of Moldova, sow divisions within Moldovan society and derail the country’s pro-European direction through hybrid attacks, the weaponisation of energy supplies, disinformation campaigns, bomb threats and staged protests as well as the threat or use of violence; commends the establishment and operations of the EU Partnership Mission in Moldova which have enhanced the Moldovan authorities’ capabilities to address Russian interference; calls on the Council, the Commission and the EEAS to provide the additional resources, including human and financial resources, equipment and civilian experts, necessary to continue implementing the mission’s mandate beyond May 2025;

    26. Stresses the importance of the EPF for enhancing the EU’s ability to prevent conflicts, build peace and strengthen international security;

    27. Welcomes the launch of the Belarus-EU consultative group to enable continuous dialogue between the EU and the Belarusian democratic forces; reiterates its support for the release of all political prisoners and the brave activists and journalists in Belarus who continue to resist the regime of the illegitimate leader in spite of ongoing crackdowns, notably the refusal to renew the passports of Belarussians abroad, and who have expressed their desire for democratic development in Belarus and for membership of the EU, including at the New Belarus Conference held in Warsaw in August 2023; underlines that such efforts demonstrate the fundamental role of civil society in strengthening democracy;

    Resolving conflict and supporting peace in the Middle East

    28. Affirms the right of Israel to defend itself as enshrined in and constrained by international law; recalls that Israel has the obligation to address the risk of mass starvation and the outbreak of disease epidemics in Gaza; recalls that Israel also has the obligation to protect the civilian population and that military operations must be proportionate and in line with international humanitarian law; expresses in the strongest terms its concern about the disproportionate military action by the Israeli Defence Forces in the Gaza Strip and in the West Bank and in Lebanon; calls for an immediate and permanent ceasefire including the unconditional release of all hostages;

    29. Reiterates its unwavering support for a negotiated two-state solution on the basis of the 1967 borders, with two sovereign, democratic states as peaceful neighbours and with Jerusalem as their shared capital, which remains the most viable path to lasting peace and security for both Israelis and Palestinians; calls for the VP/HR to support all efforts to this end, and in particular the Global Alliance for the Implementation of the two-State Solution; calls on all parties to renew efforts to remove the obstacles to this solution and to engage in dialogue aimed at achieving mutual understanding and respect; regrets the fact that the Palestinian Authority has not held elections since 2005, which hampers its credibility, and expects elections to be held soon; is convinced that there can be no prospect for peace, security, stability and prosperity for Gaza as well as for reconciliation between the Israeli and Palestinian populations as long as Hamas and other terrorist groups play a role in the Gaza Strip; calls, therefore, on the EU Special Representative for the Middle East Peace Process to support efforts to counteract the further radicalisation of young people in the region; condemns the acceleration of the illegal Israeli settlement of Palestinian territory, which violates international law, undermines efforts towards achieving a two-state solution, and poses a significant obstacle to lasting peace; reiterates in this context the important role of the Abraham Accords as a framework for achieving durable peace, stability and prosperity in the Middle East; expresses concern over the rising violence committed by Israeli forces and extremist settlers in the West Bank and East Jerusalem and welcomes sanctions adopted against extremist Israeli settlers; supports President Biden’s three-phase peace plan and regrets the lack of will on both sides to ensure its implementation; regrets, further, that the latest rounds of peace talks did not bring any tangible results; is aware of the fact that international stakeholders, including the US, the UN, the EU and Arab states, need to complement each other’s efforts in order for negotiations to resume and to be constructive; is committed to the future normalisation efforts between Israel and Arab states in the region;

    30. Supports a just and viable solution to the question of Palestinian refugees; underscores that the United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East (UNRWA) plays an important role in providing humanitarian aid and essential services which in the present circumstances must not be interrupted, and considers that all UN agencies active in the region must be supported in their efforts; recalls, however, its concern regarding serious allegations made against staff members of UNRWA which suggest that UNRWA has employed members of the terrorist organisation Hamas; welcomes the actions taken by the UN following the allegations regarding the Agency’s staff and welcomes UNRWA’s full commitment to implement the recommendations stemming from the ‘Colonna report’; echoes the European Council conclusions of 17 October 2024 which condemn any attempt to abrogate the 1967 agreement between Israel and UNRWA; insists that the Commission ensure that no funds from the EU budget finance, contribute to or support the activities of Hamas or Hezbollah; stresses that additional measures may be needed in the future to strive for even more transparency and accountability;

    31. Welcomes the recent ceasefire in Gaza and the progress made towards the phased release of hostages; emphasises that this represents a significant step towards relieving the immense suffering endured by civilians on both sides over the past months; praises the commitment of mediators, including the US, Egypt and Qatar, whose efforts were pivotal in achieving this breakthrough; considers that it is crucial that all obligations made under the deal are upheld, ensuring the release of all hostages and establishing a lasting cessation of violence, as well as allowing unrestrained access for humanitarian and medical assistance into the Gaza Strip; calls for all parties to fully commit to their obligations and to prioritise the protection of civilians; urges all European and international actors to actively oversee the implementation of the ceasefire and hold accountable those who fail to comply;

    32. Expresses concern about rising tensions in the Middle East and urges all involved parties to uphold international humanitarian law, to show maximum restraint and to commit to de-escalation, as a regional conflict must be avoided at all costs; deplores the loss of thousands of civilian lives; urges the disarmament of Hezbollah as part of broader measures to reduce hostilities and ensure regional stability; calls on the VP/HR to come forward with a comprehensive EU Middle East strategy, to increase the EU’s effective presence in the region, to promotes long-term stability and peace in the region and to strengthen partnerships with key regional stakeholders; stresses that the strategy must be fleshed out within the first months of the new Commission’s mandate and should be reflected in the forthcoming MFF for it to have any tangible impact on a rapidly deteriorating situation; underscores the need for Member States to step up their diplomatic efforts with international partners, including with the Gulf countries, in order to encourage urgent de-escalation and meaningful dialogue; underlines the need to prioritise and strengthen civil society organisations in the region, particularly organisations working on the protection of human rights and peacebuilding;

    33. Strongly condemns the destabilising role that the Iranian regime and its network of non-state actors play in the region; recalls that Iran has stepped out of the shadow of its proxies and condemns Iran’s two direct and open attacks on Israel’s territory in 2024, to which Israel retaliated both times, representing an unprecedented scaling up of the conflict; strongly condemns Hezbollah’s attacks against Israel which led to an Israeli ground invasion in Lebanon causing a high number of civilian casualties, forced displacement and escalating violence in Lebanon; takes note of the ceasefire between Israel and Hezbollah, agreed on 27 November 2024 for a period of 60 days; urges Israel to withdraw from southern Lebanon in line with UN Security Council Resolution 1701; recalls the need for a permanent cessation of hostilities as soon as possible to create space for a diplomatic solution along the Blue Line; demands the implementation of UN Security Council Resolution 1701 in its entirety, as the only path to de-escalate tensions and stabilise the Israel-Lebanon border in a durable manner and fully restore the sovereignty, territorial integrity and stability of Lebanon;

    34. Calls on the Council and the VP/HR to add Hezbollah in its entirety to the EU list of terrorist organisations;

    35. Takes note of the arrest warrant issued by the ICC on 21 November 2024;

    36. Highlights the need for the EU to follow up on its election observation and assist in finding solutions to electoral crises such as the one in Lebanon;

    37. Strongly condemns recent attacks against the UN Interim Force in Lebanon (UNIFIL) by the Israeli Defence Forces and Hezbollah; reiterates the inviolability of all UN personnel and premises and reaffirms the essential stabilising role played by UNIFIL in southern Lebanon, to which 16 Member States contribute, and calls for an immediate end to these attacks;

    38. Welcomes the EU’s decision to renew sanctions against Iran until July 2025, including by sanctioning Iran’s production of unmanned drones and missiles and its supply thereof to Russia and the wider Middle Eastern region; highlights the strong links between Iran and the Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC), its proxies such as the Houthis and militias operating in Iraq and Syria; strongly condemns the high number of terrorist and assassination attacks, or attempted attacks, perpetrated by the IRGC all over the world, including on European soil, over the past few decades; reiterates its call for the IRGC to be added to the EU list of terrorist organisations; points out that the sanctioning options that have not yet been exhausted include a much more restrictive approach to technology transfers through exports of products that are not categorised as ‘dual-use’;

    39. Strongly condemns the destabilising Houthi attacks against commercial vessels transiting the Red Sea; stresses that these have caused significant disruption to global trade as shipping companies are forced to reroute much of the Red Sea’s traffic around the southern tip of Africa; calls for collective action and encourages enhanced EU engagement and international cooperation, and strongly urges for continued action to ensure the freedom of navigation in one of the world’s most critical waterways; calls for the immediate cessation of these illegal attacks;

    40. Shares the objective of preventing Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons at all costs; points, however, to the fact that the regime in Tehran has clearly rejected a revival of the JCPOA and has refused to cooperate in its ongoing dispute with the International Atomic Energy Agency; highlights that, at the same time, Iran has increased its nuclear weapons capability; regrets the fact that there is currently no strategy in place to persuade Iran to refrain from building military nuclear capacity, nor a plan of action for the event that Iran does cross the nuclear threshold; calls upon the VP/HR to put forward a revised strategy towards Iran that prepares for all events;

    41. Expresses concern regarding the inflammatory rhetoric, fuelled by mis- and disinformation, that surrounds this conflict, and its instrumentalisation by malicious actors to sow distrust and hatred including within European societies, as illustrated notably, but not solely, by the worrying rise of antisemitism; warns that it should be a primary focus of the EU fight against disinformation and calls for a coordinated approach by the Commission, taking into account the external and internal dimensions of its policies, including but not limited to the forthcoming strategic communication plan to promote the EU’s role in the Southern Neighbourhood;

    42. Welcomes the historic fall of the Assad regime in Syria; recalls that it only survived so long thanks the support of its Russian and Iranian allies and that its collapse shows they are weakened; welcomes the nomination of a new Chargé d’Affaires of the EU Delegation to Syria, who made early contact with the transition authorities; reiterates its unwavering support for the people in Syria and highlights the need to urgently step up humanitarian aid and protection for the 16.7 million people in need; calls on all parties to contribute to a peaceful and Syrian-led transition towards an inclusive, democratic governance model that ensures the representation, participation and equal rights of women, minorities and all members of Syrian society regardless of ethnicity or religion and that puts the good functioning of the state institutions and the wellbeing of the Syrian people at the heart of their actions; calls on the Commission and the VP/HR to swiftly organise the ninth Brussels Conference on Syria without delay and come up with a comprehensive plan for EU support for the reconstruction of Syria, taking into account the lessons learned from Iraq and Libya, among others; urges the VP/HR to urgently present to the Council an action plan towards the swift yet reversible easing of sanctions that are not linked to the previous regime, with a review process conditional on the progress of the political transition; stresses that the fight against impunity in Syria is a moral and political imperative for Europe and the international community; calls on the EU and its Member States to support the work of the International, Impartial and Independent Mechanism to Assist in the Investigation and Prosecution of Persons Responsible for the Most Serious Crimes under International Law Committed in the Syrian Arab Republic since March 2011; calls on the EU and its Member States to consider the establishment of a special mission, in cooperation with international partners, to help document cases of serious crimes by the Assad regime, as well as by all other factions; stresses the importance of preserving the territorial integrity of Syria, also to help preserve stability in the region; calls on the VP/HR and the Member States to take immediate steps to prevent any re-establishment or reinforcement of Russian forces, paramilitaries or intelligence in the country;

    Incentivising cooperation with like-minded partners

    43. Acknowledges that the requirement for unanimity forces the Member States to work relentlessly to achieve compromise and unity, which is the source of the EU’s political leverage on the world stage; points out, however, that the trade-off between the ideal of unity and the high costs of unanimity in terms of credibility on the global stage should be assessed critically, particularly bearing in mind the effective functioning of an enlarged EU;

    44. Regrets, in this context, the fact that individual Member States have used their veto right to water down agreements, delay decision-making or thwart a common policy altogether; regrets that the potential for fast, efficient and effective foreign, security and defence action, as provided for, inter alia, by the passerelle clauses of the TEU, has never been used;

    45. Reiterates its call for the Council to gradually switch to qualified majority voting for decisions in areas of the CFSP that do not have military or defence implications; acknowledges the concerns of some Member States, which fear a decreased ability to influence foreign and security policy at EU level; encourages, pending the full application of qualified majority voting to decisions without military or defence implications, the full use of all currently existing possibilities to enhance decisiveness in this regard, including the use of constructive abstention in line with Article 31(1) TEU; recognises that progress towards the application of qualified majority voting can only be gradual, building on the formation of a European strategic culture;

    46. Highlights that the world is becoming more multipolar and less multilateral; emphasises that multilateral forums, chief among them the UN and its agencies, should be considered the EU’s format of cooperation of choice; calls on the Member States to reinforce inclusive forms of multilateral governance and encourages, in this context, the Commission, the EEAS and the Council to step up interinstitutional cooperation with multilateral organisations that are integral to the international rules-based order and thereby protect the UN and the multilateral system as a whole; expresses concern, in this respect, about the increasing relevance of exclusive formats of cooperation, which experience increasing competition; expresses concern at the growing membership of the BRICS group, which currently includes 45 % of the world’s population; stresses that such cooperation provides Russia with the means to circumvent measures intended to politically isolate the country and enables China to further extend its influence through its modus operandi of financing infrastructure projects; observes, at the same time, that international institutions and norms are increasingly being instrumentalised and undermined by autocratic regimes; stresses that this trend puts the EU in a delicate position, having to balance the need to appeal for a broad and inclusive concept of multilateralism while reinforcing cooperation with selected, like-minded partners;

    47. Stresses, in this context, that the geopolitical context in which the EU is operating remains marked by radical uncertainty and a shift from cooperation to competition; observes with concern how all types of interaction are being weaponised and notes that this trend impairs international cooperation at a time when global transitions need to accelerate in order to effectively address global challenges; recalls that the EU cannot afford to turn inwards and must remain open and engaged in the world to defend its values and its interests; underlines that, in light of intensified efforts by third countries to destabilise the international order and undermine multilateralism through the spread of disinformation, enhanced cooperation and coordination with like-minded partners is essential;

    48. Calls for the EU institutions and the Member States to actively support a comprehensive institutional reform of multilateral institutions, first and foremost the UN system and particularly the UN Security Council, which should include measures aimed at limiting the use of veto powers, boosting regional representation, making the executive body accountable to the assembly that elects it and redefining the composition to better reflect geopolitical reality, including by establishing a permanent seat for the EU; stresses that such reforms are essential to strengthen multilateralism, improve global governance and values-based decision-making, and address international challenges more inclusively and responsively;

    49. Recalls the importance of a strong and constructive partnership with the UK; welcomes the renewed impetus from the new UK Government to reflect with the EU on possibilities for closer and more permanent foreign policy and security cooperation, underpinned by concrete actions and building on the good cooperation at UN level as well as the effective coordination between the EU and the UK on the adoption and monitoring of the implementation of sanctions against Russia; believes that such coordination is of added value for both the EU and the UK and hence welcomes the agreement to work towards the creation of an EU-UK security partnership based on shared interest and collective responsibility; believes that in the scope of such a partnership, topics such as maritime security should be consulted on; demands that Parliament be duly involved and informed in such reflections;

    50. Takes note of the result of the presidential and congressional elections in the United States; recalls that the transatlantic relationship remains one of the most important and strategic relationship for the EU and its Member States, which has been emphasised by the unity and strength of the partnership demonstrated following Russia’s invasion of Ukraine; underlines that a strong transatlantic relationship remains indispensable for the security of the partners on both sides of the Atlantic; calls on the Commission to foster closer ties with key partners in both the US and Canada in order to counter global challenges that affect our shared values, interests, security and prosperity; in this context reiterates its call for EU-US summits to be held on a regular basis to provide top-level impetus to the future cooperation; fully supports the deepening of cooperation in the framework of the EU-US transatlantic dialogue, such as through transatlantic parliamentary diplomacy; calls for stronger transatlantic cooperation on trade, on foreign and security policy and on combatting challenges caused by rapid technological changes and growing cyber threats; welcomes in that regard the work of the Transatlantic Trade and Technology Council;

    51. Reiterates, irrespectively, the need for Member States to fully operationalise the concept of EU strategic autonomy and defence readiness and to this end make collective and well-coordinated investments in their security and defence with the objective of achieving a genuine European Defence Union that is interoperable and complementary with the NATO alliance and can act independently when needed;

    52. Encourages close relations with western European non-EU countries, in particular cooperation in certain areas of EU external action; welcomes in this context the conclusion of negotiations on a broad package of measures for future EU-Switzerland relations, which mark a significant milestone in advancing and deepening the already close relationship; calls on the Commission to modernise and deepen bilateral relations between the EU and Switzerland; stresses the importance of promoting stronger relations with Norway, particularly in the scope of the security and defence partnership as well as the cooperative management of shared stocks and the continuation of long-standing fishing activities; calls for the swift signing of the association agreement between the EU and Andorra and San Marino;

    53. Welcomes the new momentum in bilateral relations between the EU and Armenia, which is strongly supported by the authorities in Yerevan; calls on the Commission and the Council to actively support Armenia’s desire for increased cooperation with the EU; expresses full support for the newly launched work on the EU-Armenia Partnership Agenda, establishing more ambitious joint priorities for cooperation across all dimensions;

    54. Expresses its strong support for the activities of the European Union Mission in Armenia (EUMA) and underscores the important role it plays; calls on EUMA to continue to closely monitor the evolving security situation on the ground, provide transparent reporting to Parliament and actively contribute to conflict resolution efforts; calls for the EU and its Member States to strengthen EUMA’s mandate, increase its size and extend its duration; calls on the Azerbaijani authorities to agree to have such a civilian mission on their side of the border as well;

    55. Is of the view that the centre of gravity in the global order is shifting towards the Indo-Pacific and that the EU must strengthen its active role and presence in this region to safeguard its interests, promote stability and uphold a rules-based international order; reiterates that a peaceful, free, stable and rules-based Indo-Pacific region is of vital European interest; is concerned that great power competition in the region is imposing parameters on the EU’s ability to promote multilateralism in the region; points out, in this context, that the Asia-Europe Meeting is still hamstrung because of the geopolitical tensions with Russia; calls, in this context for enhanced foreign, security and defence policy ties with like-minded partners in the region in line with the EU strategy for cooperation in the Indo-Pacific; encourages the VP/HR to promote the visibility and impact of the EU’s external action together with our Indo-Pacific partners, particularly Australia, India, New Zealand, South Korea, Japan and Taiwan;

    56. Recalls, in this context, the strategic partnership the EU enjoys with Japan, which should serve as a role model for a fruitful bilateral partnership that allows effective policy-shaping in multilateral contexts; notes that the EU and Japan are celebrating 50 years of their respective diplomatic missions in 2024 and strongly emphasises the EU’s interest in deepening and broadening this partnership bilaterally in the 50 years to come; welcomes, to this end, the EU-Japan Economic Partnership Agreement and the EU-Japan Strategic Partnership Agreement (SPA), the latter of which provides for, among other things, consultations on the development of respective defence initiatives including exchange of information on defence industry-related matters, as well as the exploration of possible mutual involvement in respective defence initiatives;

    57. Notes that geopolitical challenges have strengthened the shared interest of the EU and India in ensuring security, prosperity and sustainable development; calls for an India-EU summit to keep bilateral relations high on the agenda; identifies climate change and green growth, digitalisation and new technologies, research and development, connectivity, trade and investment, foreign, security and defence policy as the key areas of cooperation; calls, in this respect, for stronger buy-in from Member States; calls, equally, on the Member States to expand and broaden the India-EU cooperation on maritime security in response to China’s evolving presence in the Indo-Pacific; highlights the need to engage with India on its heavy military dependency on Russia as well as its supply of restricted critical technologies to Russia; urges India to condemn Russia’s illegal war of aggression against Ukraine and to join the EU sanctions policy towards Russia;

    58. Considers India an important democratic partner and encourages the EU to strictly engage with the Indian Government on the respect of human rights and rule of law, both internally and worldwide; calls for the full implementation of the EU Strategy on India of 2018 and the EU-India Roadmap to 2025 in close coordination with Member States’ own actions; stresses in particular the need to promote greater synergies in foreign and security policy through existing dialogue mechanisms and other forums set up under the EU-India Roadmap to 2025;  welcomes the announcement of a forthcoming strategic EU-India agenda;

    59. Recalls the EU’s commitment to its ‘One China’ policy as one of the principles of EU-China relations; underscores that Taiwan is a key democratic partner for the EU in the Indo-Pacific region; recognises the importance of Taiwan in securing global supply chains, especially in the high-tech sector, and urges the EU and its Member States to engage in closer cooperation with Taiwan in order to further boost economic, trade and investment ties; encourages the Commission to launch, without delay, preparatory measures for negotiations on an investment agreement with Taiwan; emphasises that any attempt from authoritarian regimes to restrict the benign development of EU-Taiwan relations is not acceptable;

    60. Strongly condemns China’s continued military provocations against Taiwan and reiterates its firm rejection of any unilateral change to the status quo in the Taiwan Strait; calls for the EU and its Member States to ensure, through clear and consistent signalling, that any attempt to unilaterally change the status quo in the Taiwan Strait, particularly by means of force or coercion, cannot be accepted and will have high costs; highlights that China’s territorial claims have no basis in international law and that only Taiwan’s democratically elected government can represent the Taiwanese people; denounces, furthermore, China’s blocking of Taiwan’s meaningful participation in multilateral organisations, such as the WHO, the International Civil Aviation Organization and the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change, by its continuous distortion of UN General Assembly Resolution 2758; calls, accordingly, for the EU and its Member States to support Taiwan’s meaningful participation in relevant international organisations;

    61. Expresses deep concern about the latest shifts in China’s domestic and military posture since the 20th national congress of the Chinese Communist Party; holds the view that China demonstrates that it has both the intent and increasingly the economic, diplomatic, technological and military power to redefine the global order; underscores that the military-civil fusion strategy is a testament to such means; stresses, in this context, that the EU needs to be more assertive and unified in its approach to China and therefore calls on the VP/HR and the Member States to review the strategy towards China that takes full account of the increasingly oppressive domestic policies, the assertive foreign policy as well as the use of economic coercion as a means by which China aims to reach its objectives; considers that the challenges stemming from the rise of China as a global actor require a balanced multi-dimensional response along the principle of ‘cooperate where possible, compete where needed and confront where necessary’, through which the EU maintains its selective engagement with China as a permanent member of the UN Security Council on a number of key issues;

    62. Highlights that the PRC’s increasingly aggressive posture poses a threat to the freedom of navigation and jeopardises the stability which is vital for global trade; emphasises that this situation is being watched with concern by a growing number of like-minded partners committed to peace and stability in the region; underlines the need to shore up deterrence against destabilising behaviour, including through regular operations to assert freedom of navigation over the PRC’s attempts to impose control over international waters and airspace;

    63. Holds the view that China, through the continued growth of the Sino-Russian strategic partnership, including in the areas of technology and military capability transfers, (indirectly) enables the Russian war of aggression against Ukraine;

    64. Reiterates its condemnation of China’s violation of its international commitments, its breaches of the Sino-British and Sino-Portuguese Joint Declarations, the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, the ‘one country, two systems’ principle and the Hong Kong Basic Law as well as the crackdown on the special administrative region’s autonomy and opposition figures, including members of civil society and their family members; calls on the Commission to assess the autonomous status of Hong Kong and Macao in the light of China’s breaches of the Sino-British and Sino-Portuguese Joint Declarations and the crackdown on Hong Kong’s autonomy;

    65. Is concerned about the growing economic penetration of Chinese companies within the EU, including in strategic sectors such as battery manufacturing; stresses the urgent need to continue the policy of de-risking by continuing to reduce economic dependence in critical sectors, in line with the EU’s economic security strategy;

    66. Reiterates that the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) is a crucial partner in reinforcing rules-based multilateralism; supports ASEAN’s efforts to finalise negotiations with China on an effective and substantive code of conduct in the South China Sea; encourages enhanced EU engagement and cooperation with ASEAN and efforts towards a comprehensive strategic partnership, building on economic ties and sustainable growth, and in particular on political cooperation with regard to human rights and democracy; calls for increased support for Myanmar’s national unity government and for greater pressure to be applied to ASEAN countries to align on international sanctions against Myanmar’s military junta;

    67. Urges the VP/HR and the Member States to focus on bilateral relations with partners in Africa, among others Ghana, Morocco, Kenya, Senegal and Mauretania, taking into account mutual needs and interests in order to foster real and balanced partnerships; believes that the ‘more for more’ principle should be integrated fully into relations with non-EU countries, whereby the EU develops stronger partnerships with those countries that uphold the principles of the CFSP and the common security and defence policy (CSDP), and the fundamental values of the EU; is of the belief that the EU needs to maintain a continued focus on Africa, which is already a strategic continent and will become an increasingly important player in the future;

    68. Calls for the EU to suspend both its Memorandum of Understanding on raw materials and all military cooperation with Rwanda, including through the EPF and any other mechanisms, until Rwanda ends its illegal support for armed groups and fully respects the sovereignty and territorial integrity of the Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC); condemns the breaches of the sovereignty and territorial integrity of the eastern DRC by the rebels of M23; is deeply concerned about the humanitarian situation of thousands of displaced persons in the area; urges the VP/HR to engage in clear actions in line with the EU’s Great Lakes strategy in order to restore stability and to cooperate with the UN Stabilization Mission in the Democratic Republic of the Congo (MONUSCO) for the protection of civilians in the eastern DRC;

    69. Underlines that the recent developments in Tunisia have raised concerns about human rights and democratic standards, with reports indicating limited transparency, restricted opposition participation and reduced political competition in the presidential election; underlines the EU’s continued commitment to and support for Tunisia during this politically and socio-economically sensitive period, through maintaining contact at various levels;

    70. Underscores that the EU has a direct and vital interest in the stability, security and economic growth of the Mediterranean basin as well as the wider Southern Neighbourhood; recalls that the European neighbourhood policy was launched with the laudable goals of fostering stability, prosperity and good governance in the southern Mediterranean; acknowledges, however, that it is evident today that its instruments, objectives and principles are no longer aligned with the region’s current realities; regrets that, almost 30 years after the launch of the so-called Barcelona Process, the creation of an area of shared prosperity, stability and freedom with the Mediterranean countries of the Southern Neighbourhood has not been achieved; calls on the Commission to present a new pact for the Mediterranean; believes that the EU and the countries of the Southern Neighbourhood should conclude memorandums of understanding aimed at promoting stability, prosperity and the defence of human rights, conditional on cooperating on migration; recalls that instability and insecurity in the Southern Neighbourhood remains an ongoing challenge for European external border management; argues that, while prioritising bilateral relations with countries in the region, the EU should also continue to foster regional cooperation through existing frameworks such as the Union for the Mediterranean; welcomes the appointment of a Commissioner in charge of the Mediterranean;

    71. Stresses the need for the EU to strengthen and deepen its cooperation with Arab countries and the Gulf, in response to the pressing geopolitical, social, and economic challenges facing the region; emphasises that enhanced collaboration should prioritise key areas such as migration, digital transformation, security, the green transition and cultural exchange to build a resilient partnership; calls for a strategic approach that tailors engagement with each country to foster sustainable development and mutual understanding;

    72. Welcomes the successful conclusion of the first EU-Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) Summit and believes this summit to have marked a pivotal moment in the relationship between the EU and its partners from the GCC, stressing mutual commitment to strengthening ties across key strategic, economic, and cultural areas;

    73. Underlines the importance of upholding and promoting democratic values in the region; condemns the rise of hate speech, including against the European institutions, and attacks on individual freedoms and the international order, both within Member States and abroad;

    74. Emphasises that the countries of the EU, Latin American and the Caribbean are like-minded and share values, languages, history, culture and religion, which should make them natural partners in today’s geopolitical context; notes that the EU’s engagement in the region has dwindled in recent decades, which has created a vacuum for the growing influence of China and Russia; urges countries across Latin America to adopt a firmer attitude of condemnation of Russia’s aggression against Ukraine; calls on the Member States and the EEAS to pursue proactive diplomacy in the region, with a strong emphasis on defending the multilateral global order, international law and respect for democracy and human rights; urges for multilateral initiatives to address political instability in the most volatile countries in the region, for instance in Haiti;

    75. Welcomes the signing of the EU-Chile Advanced Framework Agreement and calls for its swift and full ratification; calls for progress to be made towards the signing and ratification of the EU-Mexico Global Agreement;

    76. Welcomes the conclusion of the agreement with Mercosur; underlines that Parliament will examine whether the provisions on sustainability meet the highest levels of ambition;

    77. Welcomes the EU-Community of Latin American and Caribbean States (CELAC) informal meeting and the implementation of initiatives under the EU-CELAC Roadmap 2023-2025 and, in this regard, underlines the need to adopt a new and ambitious roadmap at the 2025 summit, that keeps strengthening the partnership and takes into account best practices accomplished so far;

    78. Underlines the need for a tougher approach to address violence against environmental defenders and to step up the EU’s efforts to assist in the preservation of biodiversity and in adaptation to the climate emergency; suggests further strengthening cooperation against organised crime and drug trafficking which also has an impact on the EU; calls for a substantial increase in bi-regional cooperation in the fight against this phenomenon;

    79. Calls on the VP/HR to make the work with like-minded democracies a priority of her term and to systematise cooperation and consultation with democratic like-minded partners in order to promote democracy and improve common preparedness and access to crisis response resources; reiterates, in this context, the recommendation to deepen ties with regional organisations such as ASEAN and the African Union to enhance cooperative security frameworks;

    80. Reiterates its support for the European Political Community as a platform for discussion, dialogue and cooperation with European partners on the foreign policy and security challenges we are facing, with the aim of strengthening security and stability in Europe and pursuing political and security cooperation based on shared interests; calls for the close involvement of Parliament in the clarification of the scope and the future work of this community; underlines that, for the future success and coherence of this format, some level of alignment on democratic values and principles is essential; reiterates that the European Political Community may under no circumstances become a pretext for delays to the EU accession of enlargement countries;

    81. Believes also in the significance of building new alliances, inter alia with the countries in our neighbourhood as well as in the Global South, taking into account mutual needs and interests in order to foster real, balanced and equal partnerships; stresses the importance of establishing these political agreements with third countries, based on common European values and fundamental rights; calls for the EU to respond to partner countries’ expectations and to deliver quickly on political agreements with them in order to show that the EU is a reliable and strategic partner and demonstrate that the international rules-based system can meet contemporary challenges; calls, in this context, for collaborative initiatives between the EU and Global South countries to assess and tackle the debt crisis; notes that agreements with the Global South, especially on raw materials, should contribute to local economic development rather than deepening dependence and excessive resource exploitation;

    Fostering EU action abroad

    82. Highlights the role of the VP/HR as a bridge-builder between the CFSP and EU external relations to ensure the highest level of coordination and coherence in EU external action; stresses the need for the EU to foster the visibility and effectiveness of its external action and development cooperation efforts, regrets, nonetheless, that in some cases there is a lack of clarity in the external representation of the EU, hindering the EU’s strategic communication abroad; stresses the need to clearly define the competences of the VP/HR, the President of the Commission and the President of the European Council with regard to the EU’s external action and representation so that the EU’s voice is coherent and perceived as such by its partners; calls on the Commission to strengthen its coordination with the EEAS in external action, including by ensuring full compliance with Articles 3.2 and 9 of the EEAS Decision[16], which may need to be updated;

    83. Calls for the EEAS – both its headquarters and EU delegations – to be strengthened through the provision of the appropriate financial and human resources so that the EU can be better prepared for current and emerging global challenges; calls for the EEAS to be able to select and recruit its permanent EU diplomatic staff and to ensure a fair gender and geographical balance among Member States across all levels within the EEAS; calls on the VP/HR to swiftly come up with proposals for the future operational structure of the EU’s external action and to that end to fully take into account Parliament’s recommendation of 15 March 2023 taking stock of the functioning of the EEAS and for a stronger EU in the world[17]; stresses the need to strengthen strategic communication and the EU’s work on countering disinformation via dedicated resources and offices in strategically relevant regions and countries;

    84. Recalls that the EU has a strategic interest in advancing sustainable development, poverty reduction and equality globally, as these efforts contribute to long-term global peace and security; calls on the Commission to effectively and swiftly use the Global Gateway Initiative as a sustainable alternative to China’s Belt and Road Initiative and as an instrument to increase the EU’s presence and visibility worldwide; recalls that the Global Gateway Initiative is to be understood as a strategic concept integrating foreign, economic and development policy, including the climate and digital transitions, as well as infrastructure investment in order to strengthen close partnership based on mutual benefits, economic development and resilient supply chains; stresses, in this context, that coordination with international financial institutions, well-defined private-sector involvement and tailored strategic communications, including in the recipient countries, are essential in order for the instrument to reach the desired scale; is concerned by reports that a number of Global Gateway projects are being implemented by Chinese companies in direct violation of the initiative’s aims and objectives, which includes the strengthening of the EU’s economic security and fostering economic development and mutually beneficial partnerships with third countries; calls, therefore, for an immediate investigation and the removal of all Chinese companies involved in Global Gateway; stresses that the EU’s support should complement other initiatives such as the Partnership for Global Infrastructure and Investment, the India–Middle East–Europe Economic Corridor and the Lobito Corridor, and should in particular aim at achieving the Sustainable Development Goals;

    85. Reiterates that Parliament plays an integral role in the CFSP and makes a specific contribution thereto by virtue of its parliamentary diplomacy and its distinct instruments, channels and contacts, including its democracy support programmes, the Foreign Affairs Committee, regular parliamentary dialogues and official delegations; emphasises that parliamentary diplomacy has a great potential to engage key political stakeholders and facilitate democratic governance; stresses, in particular, the added value of parliamentary diplomacy during the Russian war of aggression against Ukraine and highlights, in this context, the valuable cooperation at political and technical level between the Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine and the European Parliament;

    86. Firmly believes that diplomacy is a significant part of EU action; calls, in this light, for the further development of the EU’s preventive diplomacy as a proactive external policy tool to pre-empt, mediate and peacefully resolve conflict between parties, calls on the EEAS to integrate the EU’s preventive diplomacy tools within structural prevention mechanisms and actions, such as political agreements among different actors involved in conflicts, national dialogues for reconciliation, peacebuilding and transitional justice, as well as truth and reconciliation commissions; urges the EEAS to conduct ‘lessons learnt’ exercises to assess diplomatic efforts, identify areas for improvement and integrate best practice into future initiatives; calls for the EEAS’ capacities in those regards to be increased, in particular in the relevant crisis preparedness and response divisions; stresses the urgent need to double the relevant EU budget within the Neighbourhood, Development and International Cooperation Instrument and strongly increase EU action on mediation, dialogue and reconciliation;

    87. Reaffirms the role of the EU special representatives (EUSRs), who promote the EU’s policies and interests in specific regions and countries and play an important role in the development of a stronger and more effective CFSP by providing the EU with an active political presence in key countries and regions, acting as a ‘voice’ and ‘face’ for the EU and its policies; emphasises the importance of equipping EUSRs with sufficient resources enabling them to effectively implement those tasks; stresses the importance for EUSRs of having a broad, flexible mandate, capable of adapting to evolving geopolitical circumstances in order to promote the EU’s policies and interests in specific regions and countries and play an active role in preventive diplomacy efforts; insists that the appointment of new EUSRs should take place only after a hearing in Parliament;

    88. Underlines the EU’s missions and operations abroad for promoting peace, security and progress in Europe and in the world; calls on the VP/HR:

     to prepare the proposals for the necessary CFSP missions to be launched in 2025, using the EU’s Rapid Deployment Capacity (RDC) as preventive military reinforcement; recalls that the administrative expenditure for these measures, including the RDC’s standby expenditure, should be charged to the EU budget;

     to work with Cyprus, Türkiye, the UK and the UN to implement concrete measures for a demilitarisation of the buffer zone in Cyprus, and to improve security on the island, both of the Greek Cypriot community and of the Turkish Cypriot community;

     to support an increased role of the two EU civilian CSDP missions, EUPOL COPPS and EUBAM Rafah, in line with European Council conclusions of 21 and 22 March 2024, recalling they can play an important role based on the principle of the two-state solution and the viability of a future Palestinian state, and to participate in the facilitation of the delivery of humanitarian assistance to the Gaza Strip, to improve the efficiency of the Palestinian Authority in the West Bank, and to prepare for its return to the Gaza Strip;

     to create the necessary conditions for the full reactivation of EUBAM Rafah to allow it to act as a neutral third party at the Rafah crossing point, in coordination with the Palestinian Authority as well as the Israeli and Egyptian authorities; expects the reinforcement of the scope and mandates of EUPOL COPPS and EUBAM Rafah on the ground to be included as key priorities of the forthcoming EU-Middle East strategy;

     to further increase the number of observers deployed as part of the EU civilian mission in Armenia on the Armenian side of the international border with Azerbaijan and reiterate calls for Azerbaijan to cooperate with the mission and cease its smear campaign against it;

     to work with Australia, New Zealand, the Republic of Korea, Japan, Taiwan and ASEAN member states to facilitate the peace and security of the Indo-Pacific and south-east Asian regions;

     to develop strategies to counter hybrid attacks on the EU’s eastern border, particularly those involving instrumentalising migration as a tactic to destabilise Member States and exert political pressure;

    89. Calls on the VP/HR to follow up on the examples of the successful evacuation actions in Sudan and of the stepped-up consular protection, and to work towards a comprehensive system of protection for EU citizens abroad; stresses that the impact of continuous crises and conflicts worldwide can entail the risk of overloading Member States’ consular protection and/or assistance capacities and calls, in this regard, for the strengthening of the capabilities and resources of the EEAS Crisis Response Centre and the EU Civil Protection Mechanism; recalls its longstanding position of applying a similar level of protection for the local staff in EU delegations and CFSP missions and operations;

    III. The next MFF and its parliamentary oversight

    90. Believes that there is a need for stronger institutionalised parliamentary oversight of the EU’s external action, including regular and timely, yet secure, access to confidential information and briefings in the European Parliament in line with Article 36 TEU; emphasises the need for more feedback from the VP/HR and the EEAS about the actions taken and the effects achieved, in order to fulfil Parliament’s recommendations outlined in the resolutions on foreign affairs matters;

    91. Underlines that in the CFSP, which comprises the CSDP, the European Parliament exercises its budgetary function jointly with the Council; recalls that the European Parliament also exercises the function of political control and consultation over those policies as referred to in Article 36 TEU; 

    92. Recalls that in line with Article 41 TEU, all CFSP and CSDP administrative and operating expenditure should be charged to the EU budget, except for such expenditure arising from operations having military or defence implications;

    93. Underlines that CFSP or CSDP decisions entailing expenditure always constitute basic choices for those policies and must be subject to parliamentary oversight; calls on the VP/HR to consult Parliament before proposing CFSP or CSDP decisions, thereby ensuring transparency and accountability in line with Article 36 TEU;

    94. Recalls that Parliament’s exercise of its budgetary function is inextricably linked to its function of political control and consultation; recalls that Article 36 TEU establishes a specific relationship between the VP/HR and the European Parliament, which is a prerequisite for Parliament to exercise those functions, and that the VP/HR should support Parliament in those regards;

    95. Regrets that the budget for civilian CSDP missions is insufficient; recalls that the number and tasks of such missions have increased, the security environment has become more challenging, and the cost of operations has increased; urges the European Council to provide for a substantive increase in CFSP funding placed under a separate Civilian CFSP and Crisis Management heading; calls for the efficient use of the funds allocated to civilian CSDP missions to be ensured, in order to make sure that these missions are able to respond effectively to crisis situations and unforeseen events; calls on the VP/HR and the Commission to come forward with joint proposals to those ends;

    96. Is deeply concerned that the EEAS is structurally underfunded and that this already entails serious and far-reaching negative consequences for the EU’s external action and the performance of the EU institutions in this area; underlines that a specific approach to the EEAS’ administrative budget is necessary and recalls that the absence of corrective action risks having a severe impact on the EU’s relations with third countries;

    97. Calls on the Commission to consider in its proposal for the next MFF under the EU external action heading:

     robust capabilities and resources for EU external action that take into account the increasingly challenging international arena, recalling in this regard that it is crucial to further strengthen EU support for human rights, democracy and development in third countries;

     resources for the EU’s digital diplomacy, given the current context of rapid technological advancements and geopolitical competition;

     resources for green diplomacy;

     a dedicated budget for specific EU foreign policy actions on gender equality and the women, peace, and security (WPS) agenda, in order to integrate gender perspectives into EU diplomatic and human security efforts,

     resources for preventive scrutiny of potential beneficiaries to ensure that EU funds under no circumstance directly or indirectly support activities, projects or literature that incite violence and hatred, including antisemitism, and to ensure that all recipients of EU funding are monitored accordingly; 

    98. Calls on the Commission to present its proposals for the next MFF in the first semester of 2025 to allow for sufficient time to negotiate the programmes; underlines the need for a more detailed budgetary nomenclature in the Neighbourhood, Development and International Cooperation Instrument, the Instrument for Pre-accession Assistance and the CFSP budget, which allow the budgetary authority to set policy and geographic priorities in the framework of the annual budgetary procedure;

    99. Underlines that each matter raised above requires an appropriate response by the executive; calls on the VP/HR to respond to Parliament’s calls, requests and concerns swiftly and in writing; considers that oral statements in committee or plenary can only constitute a sufficient response in exceptional or urgent cases; stresses that in the current challenging geopolitical context, close cooperation and partnership between the European Parliament and the VP/HR are of strategic importance; expects more systematic exchanges prior to the adoption of mandates and CFSP strategies and an improved flow of information on negotiations and the implementation of international agreements, as well as memoranda of understanding; expects, in addition, Parliament to be effectively incorporated throughout EU external policies and action, thereby mobilising parliamentary diplomacy in support of the VP/HR’s efforts;

    °

    ° °

    100. Instructs its President to forward this resolution to the European Council, the Council, the Commission, the Vice-President of the Commission / High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy and the governments and parliaments of the Member States.

    MIL OSI Europe News